Printed Textiles: Artist Craftswomen 1919-1939

Hazel Clark

In the Spring of 1929 there was an exhibition of "Hand made Textiles and Pots" at Heal's Mansard Gallery in London. 1 Included in the show were hand block printed textiles by Phyllis Barren and Dorothy Larcher, Enid Marx, Footprints and Modern Textiles. These were individuals and groups of women who reawakened the traditional craft of hand block printing in the years between the two world wars.

Having attended art school to study the fine arts, these middle class women combined their creative and entrepreneurial skills to set up print workshops in London where they experimented with design, techniques and dyestuffs. Their products were sold in small shops and galleries run by themselves or other women committed to retailing good qual­ ity crafts. The customers were chiefly fashionable people looking for alternatives to the predictable florals and prevailing modernist trends prevalent in dress and furnishing fabrics.

As the artist Paul Nash noted in 1932 when writing of modern Eng­ lish textiles; alongside mass-production:

". . . there is another industry of a different sort, one of far longer standing and, from a purist standpoint, of a more thorough character. This represents the work of a group of artists, all of them women, who design and engrave their own blocks and dye and print the material themselves." 2

It is to Phyllis Barren and Dorothy Larcher, Enid Marx, Elspeth Anne Little and her shop Modern Textiles, Joyce Clissold and Foot­ prints, that Nash refers. Their activities were evidence of the post-First World War interest in the crafts and can be seen as an, as yet unacknowl­ edged, manifestation of the revival of wood engraving which was at its height in the 1920s and 30s.

ARS TEXTRINA 10 (1988), pp. 53-70

The first, and oldest, of this losely knit group of women who turned her creative talents to block printing, was Phyllis Barron. Barren's in­ terest was stimulated by the discovery of some old wood blocks around 1905 when she was a teenager on a painting holiday in France. She was unable to discover "how they worked"3 and had to put them aside until later.

Barron subsequently went to study painting at London's Slade School of Art around 1908. The Slade's curriculum was essentially fine art based and thus provided no opportunity to leam about textile printing. In fact at that time there was no formal training for textile production in the art schools, only "drawing for textile reproduction". Even that activity, which was linked with trade rather than art, was considered too lowly for the Slade. As Barron pointed out: "if I had made any sugges­ tions of anything like textile printing I think I should have been turned out at once."4

It was not until she discovered Edward Bancroft's late eighteenth century manual entitled Experimental Researches Concerning the Phi­ losophy of Permanent Colours and the best way of printing them on cal­ ico 5 , that she was saved from, previously disasterous, experimentation. Her practical researches had to take place in her first floor Hampstead flat in London and were often at odds with domestic activities. Barron told the story of rushing out to buy some bread for a friend who was coming to tea, only to return to find that the urine, which she had left warming on the kitchen stove for an indigo vat, had overflowed and was running down the communal staircase.6

The domestic environment was of key significance to all of the women under consideration who worked either from home or in small studios. This had an influence on their designs and techniques. Bar­ ron, for example, experimented creatively with wood and lino blocks and other materials which included rubber matting. Household items, such as the pastry cutter used for one print, proved effective, if unlikely, accoutrements. [Figure 1]

At first Barron worked alone but in 1923 she was joined by Dorothy Larcher who became her partner and life long friend. [Figure 2] Two years later, when they were pretty firmly established as textile printers, Barron and Larcher took on Enid Marx as an apprentice. Miss Marx studied at the Central School of Arts and Crafts between 1920 and 1921

54

and then at the Royal College of Art.7During her period as a student both of those institutions were expe­

riencing what she has called a "burst of activity in all the arts"8 which followed the First World War. At the Central School she was introduced to drawing, pottery, and design for printed textiles. She enrolled in the Painting School at the Royal College, but still managed to develop her interest in textiles as well as becoming adept at a new skill, that of wood engraving.

The Central School placed particular emphasis on the crafts accord­ ing to the educational philosophy instituted in 1896 by its first principal, the architect William Richard Lethaby, who was a committed adher­ ent of the Arts and Crafts movement. The school had a significant part to play in the post-war interest in handicrafts. The influence of Noel Rooke, who was instrumental in the revival of wood engraving, was of particular significance.9 The Royal College likewise attracted tutors, such as the young Paul Nash, who proved inspirational for students. 10

It was contacts made at art school that led Enid Marx to Barren and Larcher's workshop to learn the skills which were to provide her with an occupation deemed acceptable for a young middle class woman.

Miss Marx's ability as a wood engraver would have enabled her to cut wood and lino blocks, but most of the textile printing processes had to be learned from basics. She mixed the natural vegetable dyes which were characteristic of Barron and Larcher's prints. Other tasks included mordanting, steaming and washing, and on some occasions collecting dyestuffs, such as walnut husks. This experience proved invaluable to establishing herself as a textile printer. Enid Marx has remarked that:

"/ wasn't allowed to write down any recipes - I used to memorise them and rush home to write them down later. In their workshop I used to hose velvet to get the chalk out, print, stir the gum, wash, rinse, stir again! I didn't do much ironing - Lurcher did that - she was fussy about ironing!" n

She left Barron and Larcher in 1927 to set up her own workshop in Hampstead where she applied the high standards she had acquired. In the following year she moved to St. John's Wood where she had a studio next to the artist Henry Moore and employed a girl to help her.

55

Enid Marx adopted Barren and Larcher's love of natural dyes; her original favourites were indigo, quercitron, madder, walnut, iron black and buff. The complexity of the processes they required led her later to extend her palette with some fast chrome colours which did not need steaming or complicated finishing. Despite Barren and Larcher's strong early influence, Enid Marx developed her own characteristic designs. Technical similarities remain, but Miss Marx's prints are distinctly her own. [Figure 3]

Textile printing was a source of income for Enid Marx who, like Bar- ron and Larcher, had to find appropriate outlets to sell her work. The increasing interest in making and selling handicrafts in the 1920s had resulted in numerous fairs and exhibitions. Some, such as the Manch­ ester based Red Rose Guild of Designer Craftsmen, were well known for the quality of their exhibitions, others were poor by comparison. In the early days Phyllis Barron once exhibited at The English Women's Craft Society in London which she later described as

"a rather terrible sort of Christmas bazaar. . . A lady next to me sold brooches, made of fishbones, and one on the other side decorated jam jars with oil paint." 12

What was needed were outlets which valued and promoted high stan­ dards of craftsmanship to customers willing and able to pay the prices demanded by hand made artefacts. The problem was eased by the estab­ lishment of small shops in London by emancipated middle class women, who had also attended art schools. Enid Marx and Barron and Larcher sold at several of these, including Modern Textiles, a little shop in fash­ ionable Beauchamp Place.

Modern Textiles was opened in 1926 by Elspeth Anne Little, who had studied painting at the Central and Slade Schools. She had become involved with textiles and block printing by being employed in a the­ atrical workshop after leaving college. 13 Encouraged by Paul Nash, she opened a shop to sell a variety of craft made goods.

It was the intention of Modern Textiles to promote superior design and production as an alternative to what were seen as the "hackneyed and exhausted" offerings being mass-produced repetitively by many Eng­ lish manufacturers. This was emphasised in the shop's publicity which stated that:

56

The object of "Modern Textiles" is to sell work of good de­ sign, principally fabrics of various kinds. A few people al­ ready know that well designed materials are being made by one or two artists, but the promoters of "Modern Tex­ tiles" believe a very much larger public than is generally supposed would be eager to buy stuffs of individuality and beauty, whether for dresses or furnishing, if there were bet­ ter opportunity for selection. 14

Elspeth Little sold lengths of fabric, scarves, shawls, cloaks, dress­ ing gowns, velvet jackets and other small ready to wear items, plus some ceramics. Block printed linens and velvets by Phyllis Barron and Enid Marx and batiks by Marion Dorn were offered along side painted and printed fabrics by Miss Little, and artists Paul Nash, Eric Kennington and Norman Wilkinson.

Miss Little had a workroom behind the shop where she printed her own textile designs from lino blocks. [Figure 9] However, the majority of printing for Modern Textiles was carried out by Footprints, a work­ shop established to supply the shop.

Footprints, which was situated on the River Thames on the outskirts of London, was staffed mainly by women. For the major part of its existence, from 1925-39, it was run by Joyce Clissold. Miss Clissold had studied design, lino cutting, hand block printing, wood engraving and lithography at the Central School between 1924 and 1927. Although textile printing was still not taught, she developed an interest in textiles through her activities as a printmaker. 15 This was facilitated by Noel Rooke who allowed herself and a friend to block print textiles in his department in the evening.

Having worked at Footprints whilst a student Joyce Clissold grad­ ually took over the business which continued and flourished in its own right after Modern Textiles closed in Beauchamp Place in 1927. In the early 1930s Miss Clissold moved Footprints from Chiswick to a house in Brentford. This enabled her to live and work on the same premises. [Figure 5]

The domestic and professional environment soon overlapped as the following remembrance indicates,

"There was also a medium sized bathroom obviously equipped

57

with two baths side by side, both apparently needed for the mysterious techniques of washing and fixing the printed cloth. A strong but not unpleasant smell ofdyestuffs hung about the whole house and mingled with the more homely odours from the kitchen." 16

The household and its activities provided inspiration for her designs, as it had done for Barren and Larcher. [Figure 6]

Footprints employed young local girls [Figure 7] whose parents felt them to be safe as part of the predominantly female workforce. They were trained to perform the functions necessitated by block printing. The business flourished during the 1930s and at one time three girls were involved solely in making up the commercial aniline dyes which provided the bright and varied colours.

Joyce Clissold favoured narrative motifs which reflected her lifestyle and interests. The designs were generally less abstract than those pro­ duced by the other women, but they were not untypical of the imagery to be found at the time in book illustrations or as ceramic transfer prints. Clissold's techniques were as empirical as those of her contemporaries. With them she shared her enjoyment of and satisfaction with the very activity of block printing textiles.

It was this total involvement with designing and making which set Footprints and the other workships apart from mass-manufacture. The artist and critic Roger Fry epitomised this in referring to the quality of Barron and Larcher's work as

". . . due in part to the fact that the artists are all the time in such close contact with the changes which the ma­ terial undergoes. This is not, of course, the case in ordinary commercial manufacture. There the artists's design is often handed over to a special draughtsman who prepares it for the craftsmen who will cut the blocks or etch the rollers for printing." 11

In the mid 1930s, Footprints opened two small shops in London. The first was in Knightsbridge and the second in New Bond Street where its neighbours were furriers, milliners and gown makers. Customers in­ cluded the actresses Grade Fields and Yvonne Arnaud. They might buy

58

lengths of fabric but were more likely to choose patterns which would be cut out and printed for making up by the firm's dressmaker. This facility enabled customers to purchase items which were sure to be unique.

Selling also entailed trips around Britain. The exclusive nature of the wares attracted expensive, fasionable stores such as Marshall and Snelgrove in Harrogate, Yorkshire, and small craft shops which might take just a few scarves.

Footprints, in common with the other workshops, was forced to close after the outbreak of the Second World War. Materials were in short supply as were customers. Phyllis Barren, who had by then moved out of London to the Cotswolds, noted,

When we had to stop because of the war it was at first a relief. It had been such a struggle. When things began to slump we sold so little and still had wages and all the expenses going on as well as feeling that people were no longer interested. 1 *

Their contributions did not go without notice at the time. The fabrics were illustrated in journals and drew favourable comment from those whose opinions were considered worthy of attention. The fact that their activities coincided with the revival of wood engraving was acknowl­ edged by Paul Nash. 19

Nash remained one of their greatest champions. To him their work represented a renaissance in British textile production. However, he was quick to point out the significance of their art school education and the fact that they were working both as designers and makers. He believed:

"to a great extent it is a re-birth of something which in spirit has actually perished. But the interesting fact is that the new life has come from the artists and not from crafts­ men. What is needed is a better understanding between the two,™"

He went on to say that:

"The ideal, of course, is the designer-craftsman or woman who makes only one bite at the cherry. In Miss Phyllis Bar- ron we have such an ideal worker." 21

59

Despite this recognition Barren and her contemporaries have not been properly considered or exhibited together since the 1930s. Iron­ ically, just as the end of the First World War had provided an impetus for the re-establishment of the crafts in Britain, the Second World War brought this intense period of creative activity to an abrupt end.

During the 1920s and 30s, the artist craftswomen who have been the subject of this paper were able to reconcile art and technique in the spirit of the Arts and Crafts movement. In perpetuating the craft of hand block printing they proved themselves exponents of WR Lethaby's maxim for students:

"Out of the critical use of past traditions, they must build up a tradition of their own." 22

Endnotes

1 The Mansard Gallery was located in Real's, the high class furnishing store at 196 Tottenham Court Road. In the 1920s and 30s, the Mansard Gallery featured regular exhibitions of contemporary art and design.

2 Paul Nash, Modern English Textiles -1, "The Listener", London, April 1932, p. 607.

3 Phyllis Barren lecture, Darlington Hall, Devon, 1964.

4 Phyllis Barren lecture, ibid.

5 Edward Bancroft, "Experimental Researches Concerning the Philos­ ophy of Permanent Colours and the best way of printing them on calico", London 1794, Revised 1813. Barron consulted both edi­ tions but found the revised version of most value.

6 Phyllis Barron, op. cit.

7 It was noted in "The Visual Arts: an enquiry", Political and Economic Planning, Oxford University Press, 1946, p. 86-87, that the Cen­ tral School had successfully trained designers for industry during the last fifteen years or so, and in that sense its training was more

60

realistic than the Royal College of Art. For that reason, Royal College students had often taken part-time courses at the Central.

8 Enid Marx quoted in A Portrait of Enid Marx. "Crafts", October 1979, p. 18.

9 Noel Rooke's innovation was to work directly onto the block, rather than using the technique mechanically as a reproductive tool; this resulted in a fashion for white line engraving.

10 Nash taught in the School of Design for one and a half days a week between 1922 and 1923. The "Paul Nash day" is referred to as a high spot of the student week by Christopher Frayling, "The Royal College of Art: On Hundred and Fifty Years of Art and Design", Barrie & Jenkins Ltd., London, 1987, p. 101.

11 Ann Sutton quoting Enid Marx, "Enid Marx", catalogue of a retro­ spective exhibition, Camden Arts Centre, London, 1979, p. 6.

12 Phyllis Barron, Darlington lecture, op. cit.

13 Elspeth Little was taken on in 1923 as an apprentice at Fraser, Trel- evan and Wilkinson, the theatrical workshop run by Grace Lovat Fraser, widow of the designer Claude Lovat Fraser. The pressure of work meant that Elspeth Little soon became an employee, not a trainee, and as such she was involved in printing fabrics for the­ atre sets and costumes.

14 From an original publicity leaflet for Modern Textiles.

15 The speed of change was such that in 1936 Joyce Clissold was in­ vited back to the Central School to teach a half day class in "Fab­ ric Printing with Dyes and Inks" in the School of Textiles; she continued to run the class until 1940.

16 Stephen Clissold, "Jo", a memoir, Central School of Art and Design, Department of Textiles.

17 Roger Fry, Handprinted stuff by Phyllis Barron and Dorothy Larcher, "Vogue", April 1926, p. 96.

61

18 P. Barren, op. cit.

19 Paul Nash, English Textiles, "Art Work", June 1926, p. 84.

20 Paul Nash, Modern English Textiles, "Artwork", June 1926, p. 83.

21 Op. cit., p. 83.

22 WR Lethaby, speaking of the training of architects, quoted in "The Builder", Vol. 69, 9 November 1895, p. 334.

62

Figure 1Unnamed block printed in rust on buff coloured velvet, over­ printed in black with Fishbone and a pastry cutter (for the wavy lines). Photo courtesy of Crafts Study Centre, Bath.

63

Figure 2Basket, Dorothy Larcher's third block which was used well into the 1930s, printed in ungalled iron on natural linen. The "mottled" effect, created by printing with unflocked lino blocks, was exploited to good effect by Barren and Larcher. Photo courtesy of Crafts Study Centre, Bath.

64

Figure 3Enid Marx, Cornucopia, furnishing fabric printed on cot­ ton, also on linen, 1938.

65

f*Bfa\-£~~~"""*

""••••M^hjmS^gmi \timS?r~ "' ii MiiilK^^^-^I^ffll^p*'^^^^r^^ iB^J^^jQioT ̂ g.«i-» i»*r*<l>1lpl'^^P

Figure 4/«g designed and block printed by Elspeth Anne Little,

late 1920s.

66

Figu

re 5

Foot

prin

ts w

orks

hop,

sho

win

g bl

ocks

and

prin

ting

equi

p­

men

t, 19

82.

Figure 6Joyce Clissold, Housemaid, design on paper, 1930s

68

Figu

re 7

Fo

otpr

ints

Stud

io, B

rent

ford

, 193

4-35