Community and Identity in The Indie Craft Movement - Emily Stimmel - April 2009

Community and Identity in the Indie Craft Movement 1
Crafting a Community: The Use of Social Bricolage in the Construction of Community and
Identity in the Indie Craft Movement
Emily Elisabeth Stimmel
Chatham University
Introduction: The Rise of the Indie Craft Movement
In the first decade of the twenty-first century, crafts – once considered the realm of
grandmothers, housewives and children – have undergone a resurgence of popularity among
young, predominantly female, adults in urban communities. In her article, ―Cutting Edge
Crafters‖, Minneapolis Star Tribune reporter Kim Palmer (2006) describes this contemporary
craft renaissance as ―…fresh, edgy and even political, thanks to a new generation of
freewheeling, enthusiastic practitioners‖ (Palmer, 2006).
This new craft movement – alternately described as the ―indie craft‖ movement – has arisen from
a combination of social, political and technological factors and draws influence from a variety of
historical and current movements and subcultures, including third-wave feminism, the Arts and
Crafts movement, punk and anti-consumption.
In an interview with Jennifer Sabella (2008) in The Columbia Chronicle, Betsy Greer of
Craftivism.com expresses her belief that feminist ideology and contemporary technology have
equally contributed to the resurgence of craft. ―I think that the combination of events on the
feminist timeline and the conception of the Internet have allowed craft to flourish‖ (Greer, qtd. in
Sabella, 2008, p. 2). Faythe Levine, the co-author and filmmaker behind Handmade Nation: The
Rise of DIY, Art, Craft and Design, also sees connections between indie craft, politics and
feminism. In an interview published in The Storque on Etsy.com, Levine (2008) tells Vanessa
Bertozzi, ―The new wave of craft is influenced by the history and techniques of traditional
handiwork, modern aesthetics, politics, feminism and art‖ (Levine, qtd. in Bertozzi, 2008). In her
recent book about the American knitting subculture, The Close-Knit Circle: American Knitters
Today, Kerry Wills (2007) notes the relationship, stating, ―Many [knitters] also claim alliance to
one or both of two modern movements: the do-it-yourself (DIY) movement and third-wave
feminism‖ (Wills, 2007, p. 30).
Though indie craft is a distinctly modern phenomenon, it also has roots planted firmly in a rich
history. In ―Die-hard DIY Divas‖, Sherry Stripling (2005) of the Seattle Times parallels the indie
craft movement of today with the Arts and Crafts movement that straddled the late nineteenth
century and early twentieth century. ―Just as the Industrial Age spawned the Arts & Crafts
movement, so the Information Age is begetting the Creative movement, in which individuals
take charge of their own lives‖ (Stripling, 2005). The guerilla knitting group Knitta, profiled in
the Handmade Nation book, creates a sort of knit graffiti, tagging urban areas with hand-knit
pieces in an attempt at beautification. Knitta member Purl Nekklas (2008), describing the
group‘s activism, brings to mind the Arts and Crafts philosophy of rebellion against soulless
industrial aesthetics (Arts and Crafts Movement, n.d., Origins and key principles section, para.
1):
I like to feel like we are wrapping things with love. It‘s humanizing. We‘re adding a
human element so you are not so disconnected with your everyday environment.
Industrialization is everywhere in urban areas, and pinks and reds are a lot prettier than
grays (Purl Nekklas, qtd. in Levine & Heimerl, 2008, p. 100).
However, whereas the Arts and Crafts movement emerged out of sharply defined opposition to
the Industrial Revolution, today‘s indie craft movement shares a more complex, nuanced
relationship with contemporary technology. The Internet has played a key role in connecting
crafters and creating virtual communities, allowing the movement to grow and thrive. Through
web sites like Etsy.com, an e-commerce hub of handmade and vintage items, it has also
presented a means for crafters to sell their wares. Ironically though, for a movement that relies so
heavily on modern technology, indie crafting, in large part, has gained popularity due to a
growing desire for its participants to return to simplicity – often as a form of resistance to mass-
production and conspicuous consumption, stemming from concern for the environment and
distrust of large corporate entities (Wills, 2008). This yearning for simplicity is also evident in
romanticized notions of mid-twentieth century iconography. Symbols of the economically
prosperous, yet socially stifling, 1950s have become prevalent within indie craft; retro imagery
and vintage materials are popular among indie crafters, who endow these icons with nostalgia
and a thick layer of irony.
Through their micro-businesses, crafters have revived an old-fashioned form of commerce that
fosters personalized relationships between makers and consumers. These relationships provide
opportunities for co-creation: a phenomenon that engages the customer at every stage of the
process, from the conception and design of a product to its consumption (Payne, et. al., 2009).
Furthermore, by tightening the loop between producers and consumers, crafters assuage the guilt
and anxiety many modern consumers feel about product safety, environmental concerns and
labor practices: products made locally, by hand, in small batches evoke more consumer
confidence than items mass-produced in overseas sweatshops or pollution-spewing factories.
Many members of the indie craft community have engaged in other DIY activities at various
stages of their lives, like writing and publishing fanzines (―zines‖ for short) or performing music
in punk rock bands. Indeed, indie craft seems to flow seamlessly and organically from these
movements as well as from third-wave feminism – particularly the Riot Grrrl movement and the
―girlie‖ third-wave feminist subset that both emerged in the United States in the early 1990s.
Like punk and Riot Grrrl, indie craft features elements of art and commerce, but it is not a purely
aesthetic or commercial movement. As Ednie Kaeh Garrison (2000) notes in ―U.S. Feminism—
Grrrl Style! Youth (Sub)cultures and the Technologics of the Third Wave‖, it is a mistake to
―disregard apparently ‗aesthetic‘ movements as nonpolitical‖ (Garrison, 2000, p. 164). Indeed,
these movements do not exist solely to create and sell products; they also share a political
philosophy with key tenets that include democratizing art, minimizing consumption and
conveying political messages through their products.
The ability to record one‘s music, to type, print, format, and copy one‘s zine, to make
one‘s video documentaries on a camcorder, to design and post one‘s website, without
ever having to go through corporate, mainstream, commercial, official – and even adult –
channels, makes a difference. Access to ‗democratized technologies‘ can enable a shift in
the locus of political activism, as well as a change in who can produce cultural-
technological objects (Garrison, 2000, p. 163).
Many participants in the indie craft movement use craft, not only as a visual medium, but also as
a vehicle for political conversation. In fact, a new subcultural niche is emerging at the
intersection of political discourse and indie craft in the form of a movement called ―craftivism‖.
A portmanteau of ―crafts‖ and ―activism‖ coined by Betsy Greer, craftivism in its most literal
sense is the concept of using craft – both the creative act and the resulting products – to initiate
social change (Greer, n.d.). According to Greer, ―…each time you participate in crafting you are
making a difference, whether it's fighting against useless materialism or making items for charity
or something betwixt and between‖ (Greer, n.d.). She elaborates:
We are moving from our teens, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s and beyond and we are realizing that
the act (and art) of crafting is more than a passing fad or childs' [sic] play… Craft is a
way of rejoicing, passing time, meditating, harnessing power, sharing and keeping
creative forces in motion. Because it is possible to go beyond banners, email petitions and
chants as ways of fighting for a cause you believe in. You could have a knit-in, papier-
mache puppets, teach a crafty class for kids - all ways of turning that energy into a more
positive, more useful, force (Greer, n.d.).
In addition to the examples Greer outlines above, craftivism is evident in the simple act of a
group collectively producing a quilt, square by square, to donate to charity; and, on a more
complex level, in the use of traditional handicraft techniques like knitting to initiate dialogues
about sexism, classism and sweatshop labor. The latter form of craftivism has been employed by
Knitta and by Cat Matta, founder of microRevolt (Wills, 2007, p. 37). [M]icroRevolt draws
inspiration from the tradition in textiles of embedding images in fabric; Matta appropriates this
history to critique the significance of logos and brands in modern society, even offering open
source software that allows users to upload images of popular brand logos to be converted into
knitting patterns (Wills, 2007, p. 37). The name microRevolt derives from the concept that
―small acts of resistance, rather than major movements, can result in social change‖ (Wills, 2007,
p. 39).
Through craftivism in particular, the indie craft movement manifests its relationship with
feminism, anti-consumption and DIY values, which will be described in detail throughout this
paper. Aspects of each ideology inform indie craft and craftivism; however, these movements are
not plotted side-by-side on a linear continuum. Appropriately, craft processes and forms stand in
as apt metaphors to describe the ways in which the indie craft community draws influence from
other movements. Indie craft gathers inspiration and influence from the aspects of
feminism, anti-consumption and DIY philosophy that are most appealing, piecing them together
in a method akin to making a collage or constructing a patchwork quilt. Interestingly, this
practice itself is gleaned from third-wave feminism and punk culture, which both re-appropriate
visual symbols and language to convey new – often subversive – messages. In Subculture: The
Meaning of Style, Dick Hebdige (2001) describes this use of available resources to create new
meanings as bricolage (Hebdige, 2001, p. ). In Waste and Want: A Social History of Trash,
Susan Strasser (1999) elaborates:
The anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss describes the French bricoleur, an odd-job man
who works with his hands, employing the bricoles, the scraps or odds and ends. …He
collects tools and materials because they might come in handy. …His first step is always
to consider new projects with respect to what he has on hand (Strasser, 1990, p.11).
Indie crafters utilizes bricolage both as an artistic technique in their assembly of bricoles
acquired from diverse sources, including scraps saved from previous projects and re-purposed
items purchased at estate sales and thrift stores; and as a means of assembling a group identity. In
the latter sense, members of the indie craft movement perform a social form of bricolage in their
organizing practices. This conscious construction of community is evident across DIY
subcultures. In ―Anarchy, Order, and the Punk Rock Ethos: Resistance and Compliance as
Organizing Processes,‖ Andrew Herrmann (2007) observes, ―One arena where these polyphonic,
multi-narrated struggles are practiced is in punk culture, with its ethos of ‗Do-it-yourself‘ (DIY),
chaos, resistance, and organizing – all happening concurrently‖ (Herrmann, 2007, p. 3).
Personal Interest
I entered into this project to tease out the threads of interconnection that exist between creative
subcultures, hoping to discover the common values and ethics that motivate indie crafters – as
well as the punk rockers, zine publishers and Riot Grrrls who laid the groundwork for the indie
craft movement to launch. I occupy a dual role as a social anthropologist and an archivist,
observing the details of social life in creative communities and documenting the movements as
they unfold. In some ways, I view this project as an extension of previous research. My
undergraduate Tutorial examined the music subcultures of punk, Riot Grrrl, grunge and emo
through the lens of commodification and marketing. As a communication major, I studied the
ways in which symbols and signifiers of subcultures, including language and clothing, lose
meaning when they are diluted to appeal to a mainstream audience for mass consumption. Now,
as a graduate student completing a degree in Leadership and Organizational Transformation, I
view subculture through a lens informed by sociology, psychology and anthropology, with a
heightened interest in the ways in which groups form and evolve; and the impact of the broader
culture on these systems. Furthermore, my interest in subcultures has remained strong because of
my personal participation in subcultural groups. As a teenager, I was introduced to feminist
concepts through the Riot Grrrl movement of the early nineties; throughout middle school and
high school, I published and circulated zines and listened to music released on independent
(―indie‖) labels. In college, I booked shows for indie bands at the campus music venue. Since
2006, I have actively participated in the indie craft movement, vending at local craft shows like
Handmade Arcade and selling my wares in the virtual marketplace, on e-commerce web sites
like Etsy.com. Through all those shifts in interests, I have discovered common values that stitch
these distinct subcultures together; furthermore, I have observed similar patterns of participation
among my peers – many of the same people who played in bands in college have put down their
guitars and picked up knitting needles in recent years.
For myself and others like me, these interests are not mere hobbies. Though the medium or style
may change, all of these DIY subcultures share common values that have played a significant
role in shaping the identities of committed participants. Members of DIY subcultures often cite
an initial interest in the lifestyle taking shape during adolescence and young adulthood, when
identity formation is at its most potent (Bukatko & Daehler, 1998). Though one may ―outgrow‖
the sound of punk music, an individual may cling to the values and principles that punk
represented to them long after the music and fashions become stale.
I am not alone in recognizing the profound impact of subcultural participation on identity
development. Herrmann (2007) describes his personal participation in punk culture as ―…some
of the most compelling and meaningful experiences of my life‖ (Herrmann, 2007, p. 23). He
elaborates, ―There is something to being punk existing beneath the surface in the various roles I
find myself performing‖ (Herrmann, 2007, p. 23). It is this ―something‖ that is the crux of my
research – the core values that remain when all the external markers of subculture have been
removed. Now a professional in the corporate world that punk so vehemently rejects, Herrmann
nonetheless retains a deep affiliation with the scene: ―Despite my new clothes and my new roles,
I still consider myself punk‖ (Herrmann, 2007, p. 5).
What is the essence of punk that remains at the core of Herrmann‘s ideology, despite his trading
in a spiked collar for a necktie? How do members of DIY subcultures so often follow a similar
trajectory without any explicit knowledge of each other‘s lives? If a shared purpose drives us,
then what are those core values that weave together DIY movements? Is indie craft the next
wave of DIY culture; or is it merely a more mature expression of the DIY values that already
permeate youth subcultures?
Through this literature review, I hope to begin to discover the values systems that connect
members of creative subcultures. In particular, I intend to examine the vibrant indie craft scene
that has flourished in the last decade and investigate the ways in which craft, through craftivism,
is being used as a catalyst for political and social change.
I do not intend to define the indie craft movement in my research – such a task is beyond the
scope of this project, as the movement is a constantly evolving, living system. Instead, I am
interested in capturing a ―snapshot‖ of the movement as it exists in the present and I intend to
provide a context with which to understand the ideology and values that are shaping it.
Methodology
My research took place from December 2008 to April 2009. I drew from a range of sources,
including books, articles from magazines and journals and two surveys that I administered
online. I used the first survey to gather information about respondents‘ participation in DIY
communities, including their motivations and political ideologies. I distributed the second survey
to the participants who provided their email address in the first survey; I used this survey to
collect demographic information that supplemented my findings about the racial, gender and
socio-economic make-up of DIY groups. In addition to the aforementioned sources, I drew upon
my own experiences and observations as a member of the subcultures I studied.
I chose the format of the literature review because, although the subject matter is a valuable
social phenomenon worthy of study, it is still relatively new. Books and articles about knitting
and activism have emerged in recent years, though the political impact of other craft media has
not been as extensively analyzed. I also felt that a literature review would be an appropriate
format to conduct the initial stages of research to determine the feasibility of expanding and
updating my undergraduate work on subcultures. Ultimately, my goal is to synthesize the data

from each project, creating a more thorough analysis of a variety of creative subcultural
communities. As living systems, subcultures resist permanent definitions; my intent is to capture
a glimpse of these subcultures at specific moments in their evolution and to contextualize
contemporary social movements within a broader network of subcultures with shared values,
ideologies and goals.
Structure
Because the indie craft movement is so tightly woven into the fabric of the broader DIY culture,
there is some overlap across the various movements I discuss. This presents some organizational
difficulty. To circumvent this challenge, I present an overview of movements that have
influenced indie craft, providing a historical background when possible and highlighting the
ideologies and values that have provided a foundation for indie craft, with the understanding that
these elements are bricoles, consciously assembled by indie crafters. As previously mentioned,
the order in which the movements are presented should not be perceived as a static timeline.
Some movements, like Riot Grrrl, existed in a definitive era and are no longer active. Others, like
punk and DIY, have a historic context but remain vital and, like indie craft, continue to evolve.
Within the indie craft movement, the creation of culture and community is a craft project writ
large; the creative impulse is present in the purpose of the indie craft movement, but is also
evident in the way the community distinguishes itself within the larger culture. In this way,
again, proponents of the indie craft movement have something in common with members of the
punk scene, who, according to Herrmann (2007), ―…organize their culture by differentiating it
from the mainstream. ‗We DIY, you don‘t‘‖ (Herrmann, 2007, p. 19).
This paper is organized around the political, cultural and social movements that have influenced
the development of indie craft. Beginning with an overview of the DIY ethos, the paper will
explore DIY modes of production; anti-consumption and creative consumption practices; third-
wave feminism, including girlie feminism and the Riot Grrrl movement; and the motivations for
participation in subculture. These movements all overlap and share values with each other and
with indie craft, each contributing to the indie craft movement in unique ways. The results of the
two surveys comprise their own section. The paper concludes with ideas for future research. To
enhance the reader‘s understanding of the unique lexicon of do-it-yourself culture, a glossary of
terms is included, as are two pieces that could loosely be defined as governing documents of
their respective subcultures. Finally, the text is supplemented by charts and graphs highlighting
the key findings of the survey portion of the project.
Defining DIY
Short for ―do-it-yourself‖, the term ―DIY‖ is used by various communities to describe the
creation, repair and repurposing of objects without assistance from experts or professionals (Do
it yourself, n.d., section 1, para. 1). In a Wikipedia entry on the subject, the author elaborates,
―DIY subculture explicitly critiques modern consumer culture, which emphasizes that the
solution to our needs is to purchase things, and instead encourages people to take technologies
into their own hands to solve needs‖ (Do it yourself, n.d., section 1, para. 2). DIY is rooted in
two distinct cultural movements: the Arts and Crafts movement, which was active over a century
ago (Do it yourself, n.d., section 1, para. 2), and the 1970s punk music scene that provided a
platform for bands to record and distribute music independently, without the support of the
mainstream recording industry (Do it yourself, n.d. Subculture section, para. 1). Punk, in
particular, celebrates the amateur, promoting the notion that anyone can create anything
(Spencer, 2008). According to Amy Spencer (2008) in DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture, this is
―…the key ethic that has echoed through underground culture ever since‖ (Spencer, 2008, p.
155). In ―Alt-Craft in Theory and Practice‖, Bruce Metcalf (2008) demonstrates the influence of
this philosophy on indie craft, stating, ―Alt-craft is anti-elitist and democratic, devoted to the
proposition that craft should emerge from ordinary people, not from institutions or a star system
of exalted makers‖ (Metcalf, 2008, p. 18).
Since the punk era, the term DIY has been applied more broadly. ―The DIY punk ethic also
applies to everyday living, such as learning bicycle repair rather than taking a bike to a
mechanic's shop, sewing/repairing/modifying clothing rather than buying new clothes, starting
vegetable gardens, and reclaiming recyclable products by dumpster diving‖ (DIY Ethic, n.d.,
Punk culture section, para. 3). The term is also used in a more mainstream arena, most
commonly in reference to home improvements, even inspiring the name of a popular television
network (Do it yourself, n.d., Home improvement section, para. 5). Though most DIY
movements remain on the periphery of mainstream culture, the examples above demonstrate the
broadening appeal of a DIY approach to everyday life.
The DIY movement, in all its forms, exists to empower the average individual to create and
modify items for everyday use, decreasing consumption and critiquing participation in capitalist
systems. ―In the punk subculture, the DIY ethic is tied to punk ideology and anticonsumerism, as
a rejection of the need to purchase items or use existing systems or processes‖ (DIY ethic, n.d.,
Punk culture section, para. 1). In this way, DIY not only places emphasis on creativity,
resourcefulness and self-sufficiency; it also resists the patterns of consumption that are prevalent
in the dominant culture.
Social relationships also motivate participation in DIY communities. In the ―Do it yourself‖
entry on Wikipedia, the page author states, ―Members of these subcultures strive to blur the lines
between creator and consumer by constructing a social network that ties users and makers closer
together‖ (Do it yourself, n.d., section 1, para. 4).
In The Close Knit Circle, Wills (2007) supports this concept, positing that individuals are
motivated to participate in DIY movements to stimulate meaningful communication and social
interaction (Wills, 2007, p. 45):
The DIY movement is a reaction to the forces of technology, globalization, and

stratification of socioeconomic groups. These aspects of modern life have sparked a
desire among some people to reduce their consumption and rely less on the products of
corporations. Another function of DIY culture is to allow adherents to have more intimate
and organic relationships with others. DIYers say they connect more with friends, family,
and charities by giving things made by their own hands. They also interact with like-
minded people by organizing clubs that meet face-to-face and by communicating on the
Internet, through DIY-themed Web sites, and, particularly online journals called blogs
(Wills, 2007, p. 33)
In Handmade Nation, interview subject Jamie Marie Chan underscores the desire to connect
rather than consume:
Indie craft fairs have defined a generation of women and men who value the nature of
handmade and innovative goods. Sure, we‘re a consumer-driven, materialistic, capitalist
society. But these events reflect our ability to value both a handmade creation and the
community that brings it to you. I have never felt more at home than in an indie craft fair.
It‘s a place where our hobbies, our ideas, and our worldviews are packaged up into a
tangible object to share, to be admired, and to start new relationships between people
(Chan, qtd. in Levine & Heimerl, 2008, p. 125).
The products of the indie craft movement, including handmade clothing, jewelry, toiletries and
home goods, are just one facet of DIY production. As I previously mentioned, DIY values are
applied extensively within independent and punk music scenes, from recording and distributing
music to touring. The DIY philosophy also inspires the publication of zines, self-published
magazines that are distributed through networks of likeminded individuals (Do it yourself, n.d.,
Subculture section, para. 1-2). The DIY ethos runs through all aspects of these products, from the
ways in which they are constructed, to distribution channels and even the look and feel of the
items.
Influenced by the Dada art movement (Spencer, 2008, p. 101), appropriation of imagery and
collage techniques permeate the cut-and-paste aesthetics of punk flyers, Riot Grrrl zines and
indie craft products. Throughout DIY subcultures, evidence of the process is not something to
hide, but has become an aesthetic value that denotes authenticity. Hebdige (2001) describes
1970s punk style thusly: ―…T-shirts and trousers told the story of their own construction with
multiple zips and outside seams clearly displayed‖ (Hebdige, 2001, p. 107). Compare this to the
style that predominates in indie craft circles, three decades later. As Stripling (2005) notes,
―Fashion has gone over the top with a handmade look, [Lisa] Shoemaker says. ‗It‘s really big to
have your seams showing and things like raw edges and big chunky stitching instead of nice
French seams‘‖ (Stripling, 2005).
Anti-consumption & Creative Consumption
Many participants in DIY movements place anti-consumption and anti-capitalist ideologies at the
core of their values systems. Though the creative output of DIY communities – craft items,
music and zines – are often sold or exchanged for other goods, money is rarely the exclusive
motivation for participation in the movements. In fact, many participants in these communities
seem to have only reluctantly resigned themselves to taking part in capitalist systems.
Ultimately, the goals of DIY community members are to disseminate information, share common
interests with a network of likeminded individuals and selectively consume in a manner that
aligns with their values. As members of the Church of Craft emphasize in Handmade Nation, the
act of making is more important than the products that result from creative activity (Levine &
Heimerl, 2008 p. 56). In DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture, Ericka Baille of Pander Zine Distro
summarizes the goals of DIY movements, stating, ―…the point is that you want to share, you
want to experience that sense of community, because it‘s comforting and exciting to find like-
minded people who share your passion‖ (Baille, qtd. in Spencer, 2008, p. 37). And Herrmann
(2008) notes that the individuals who staff merchandise tables at punk shows take as much – if
not more – pleasure in sharing information as in selling items. ―The Merch is predominantly
interested in providing a service by exposing audiences to new music, new music labels, and new
bands‖ (Herrmann, 2008, p. 18).
Though the indie craft movement depends on a cycle of production and consumption to sustain
the system, members often have an uneasy relationship with American consumer culture. The act
of creating diminishes some of this tension; making items for oneself instead of purchasing them
reclaims power from faceless corporations and restores it to individuals. As a member of the
Church of Craft summarizes, ―Consumption eats self esteem; creation makes it grow‖ (Levine &
Heimerl, 2008, p. 57).
In the article ―Anti-consumption discourses and consumer-resistant identities‖ in the Journal of

Business Research, Hélène Cherrier (2009) states, ―Creative consumers personalize their
consumption lifestyle so as to express and construct their identity‖ (Cherrier, 2009, p. 188).
Cherrier posits that resistant consumers have developed creative consumption practices to
participate in capitalism on their own terms:
The development of creative consumption proceeds as a reaction against unreachable social

accomplishments. When practicing creative consumption, consumers no longer acquire,
consume and dispose of material objects in response to others‘ expectations. They consume
according to their individual values and concerns (Cherrier, 2009, p. 187).
She adds, ―In sum, the goal of creative consumption is to favor human expression at its most
fundamental level: it is consuming to be rather than to display having‖ (Cherrier, 2009, p. 188.).
To demonstrate creative consumption in action, Cherrier (2009) cites a variety of examples from
personal interviews. One interview subject, Laura, repurposes junk mail to create her own
stationery:
For Laura, writing on the back of carefully chosen junk papers is not only a way to recycle
but also a personalization of her written communication, which adds to ‗the fun of getting a
letter.‘ The creative consumer is an individual who personalizes meanings of consumption.
Here, the individual is not only a consumer but also an active producer, reflecting on a wide
social and cultural sphere (Cherrier, 2009, p.187).
This desire to personalize, rather than passively consume mass-produced items, lies at the core of
the indie craft movement. Not satisfied with the status quo, creative consumers like those in the
indie craft movement take an active role in shaping the culture they desire. This is summarized
succinctly in Cherrier‘s interview with Sarah who states, ―…I change and yet that clothing
doesn‘t, so I make it‖ (Cherrier, 2009, p. 188).
The active creation of culture is an undercurrent that runs through all DIY movements.
Describing the Riot Grrrl community, Garrison (2000) states, ―They adopt punk DIY (Do It
Yourself) philosophy to encourage women and girls to take the initiative to create art and
knowledge, to change their cultural and political landscape, rather than waiting for someone else
to do it for them‖ (Garrison, 2000, p. 154). She adds, ―This movement encouraged young women
to see themselves as producers and creators of knowledge, as verbal and expressive dissenters,
rather than as passive consumers of U.S. culture or of the punk scene and youth subcultures they
helped to define and shape‖ (Garrison, 2000, p. 156).
Third-Wave Feminism, Girlie Feminism and Riot Grrrl
In her article, Knot in Our Name: Activism Beyond the Knitting Circle, published in Bitch
magazine, Wendy Somerson states, ―…many third-wave feminists see the new wave of
homemaking as a reclaiming of women‘s culture‖ (Somerson, 2007, p. 38). In particular, the
―girlie‖ feminist sect that rose to prominence in the 1990s promotes cultural feminism, which
asserts the value of knowledge, skills and practices traditionally associated with women. A
product of third-wave feminism with ties to the girlie subset, Riot Grrrl emerged in the early
1990s in resistance to the sexism prevalent in the punk subculture. Both girlie feminism and the
Riot Grrrl movement have been linked with indie craft through their shared emphasis on
empowerment through activities traditionally associated with women.
In their book Manifesta: Young Women, Feminism, and the Future, Jennifer Baumgardner and
Amy Richards help to explain the distinctions between the third-wave sects of Riot Grrrl and
girlie feminism:
Riot Grrrls, who are mainly women in their teens and early twenties, breathe new life into
feminism by marrying it with their own milieu, the youth movement known as punk rock.
Girlies are girls in their twenties or thirties who are reacting to an antifeminine, antijoy
emphasis that they perceive as the legacy of Second Wave seriousness. Girlies have
reclaimed girl culture, which is made up of such formerly disparaged girl things as
knitting, the color pink, nail polish, and fun (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000, p. 80).
The concept of ―reclaiming girl culture‖ is particularly salient within the indie craft community,
where domestic skills like sewing and knitting have been revived in what feminist indie crafters
claim is an act of resistance to the values of the previous generation:
In the same way that Betty Friedan‘s insistence on professional seriousness was a
response to every woman in an office being called a girl, this generation is predestined to
fight against the equally rigid stereotype of being too serious, too political, and seemingly
asexual (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000, p.137).
In ―Do-It-Yourself Feminism: Feminine Individualism and the Girlie Backlash in the
DIY/Craftivism Movement‖, Laura Portwood-Stacer (2007) critiques this form of resistance for
oversimplifying the complex issues inherent to feminist activism. She believes that girlie
feminists demonstrate ignorance of intersectionality across and among class, race, sex and
gender, paying little attention to the multiple statuses women occupy in their lives.
―Identification with ‗traditional femininity‘ presumes a universal feminine subject, who more
often than not happens to be the most privileged kind of woman‖ (Portwood-Stacer, 2007, p. 5).
Though women may be victimized by sexism, the women associated with ―traditional‖
femininity are typically white and middle class, and thus hold privileged statuses in the
dimensions of race and class (Robinson, 2005, p. 43). For this reason, the Riot Grrrl movement
has faced similar criticism. Amy Spencer (2008) notes:
For many, the position of riot grrrls working within the established DIY community was
one of privilege. It has been criticized not as a movement of feminist pioneers but a group
of predominantly white, straight, middle class girls with access to the ideas and
established resources that enable them to do-it-themselves (Spencer, 2008, p. 257).
In ―Craftivism: Is crafting the new activism?‖ The Columbia Chronicle writer Jennifer Sabella
(2008) also questions the notion that the act of reclaiming stereotypically femininity is inherently
progressive. ―Many women argue that by getting together and taking back crafting as an artistic
act rather than a feminine one, they are making a political statement. But where is the line drawn
between regression to old ways and activism?‖ (Sabella, 2008, p. 1).
Portwood-Stacer (2007) also questions the assumption that girlie feminists successfully
communicate subversive messages to their intended audience. Though fellow feminists – and by
extension, the indie crafters who value reclaiming domesticity – may view their performance of
femininity as an ironic nod to retro gender roles, they‘re in on the joke. Portwood-Stacer (2007)
warns against displays of femininity that lack context. As a cautionary tale, she presents the
following scenario involving Debbie Stoller, Editor-in-Chief and publisher of Bust magazine,
who has played a pivotal role in the craft revival:
For example, Debbie Stoller has suggested that painting one‘s nails during meetings at
work is an act that declares that feminine adornment is just as valuable as masculine
professionalism. It its highly questionable, though, whether anyone would perceive the
nail painter as making a sophisticated critique of gender roles. More likely she would be
dismissed as silly, narcissistic, and not qualified for the world of work. If this is the
general interpretation, little has been accomplished by the performance, other than a
reification of the stereotype that women aren‘t serious enough to hold real jobs
(Portwood-Stacer, 2007, p. 12).
Many young, urban crafters view their involvement in indie craft as a feminist statement. For
them, feminism is not merely about asserting women‘s equality with men; it‘s about choice.
Whereas the previous generation of feminists “…often abandoned or at least hid their interest in
pursuits labeled as feminine‖ (Wills, 2007, p. 24), contemporary feminists, presented with more
opportunities, find empowerment in the act of choosing a lifestyle that feels authentic to them:
Somewhere in the mid- to late nineties, women in their twenties and thirties, busy women
with college educations, stressful careers, and family responsibilities, started to knit.
Despite the many demands on their time, they chose a hobby that is time consuming. In
an era when these women were more able than ever before to pursue historically male
roles—becoming doctors, lawyers, scientists, business executives, professors—they
opted to learn a traditionally female craft (Wills, 2007, p. 30).
It is worth noting that the women who are reclaiming domesticity are cherry-picking the aspects
of domestic life that appeal to them – once again constructing their identities through bricolage.
This postmodern phenomenon allows participants in the indie craft community to enjoy the
privileges afforded by feminism and technology, while simultaneously romanticizing a fantasy
version of the 1950s. When indie crafters speak of reclaiming domesticity to pay homage to a
simpler era, they are using coded language. ―Simplicity‖, to the indie crafter, is not synonymous
with convenience; instead, the term encompasses a slower-paced lifestyle that values personal
contact with the goods we consume and the people who populate our communities. In The Close-
Knit Circle, Wills (2007) quotes Laura Gorman, who states, ―We‘ve lost a lot of that sense of
home and the basics… People don‘t even cook anymore. Our lives have become so much easier,
but we don‘t have contact‖ (Gorman, qtd. in Wills, 2007, p. 43).
When speaking of a return to simplicity, indie crafters establish a paradox in which engaging in
nearly obsolete practices reads as a simplification of modern life, when, in fact, it adds a layer of
complexity to a contemporary culture that values quick and easy solutions. It is far simpler – and
less expensive – to purchase clothing from big-box retail outlets than to purchase yarn and
needles and invest the time in knitting a sweater from scratch, but, as Wills (2007) notes, ―The
very fact that knitting is unnecessary and even indulgent enhances its allure‖ (Wills, 2007, p. 77).
Portwood-Stacer (2007) finds this attitude problematic and inherently classist, stating:
[T]he craftivism movement takes for granted a certain privileged class position of its
participants. Like other ‗back to basics‘ movements, craft culture actually requires a bit
of economic capital. Yarn and other supplies are relatively expensive, and the time
investment required by knitting assumes a fair amount of personal leisure time
(Portwood-Stacer, 2007, p. 15).
Furthermore, Portwood-Stacer (2007) is not convinced that crafting can be used as a mode of
feminist activism because it does not make ―a direct political intervention in systems of power‖
(Portwood-Stacer, 2007, p. 2):
The idea that taking up leisure activities that have, at times, been denigrated because of
their association with women and domesticity, is political in and of itself holds appeal for
the young activist who‘d like to imagine she can make a difference in the world. But
saying that something is subversive does not make it so (Portwood-Stacer, 2007, p. 2).
According to Lauraine LeBlanc (1999) in Pretty in Punk: Girls’ Gender Resistance in a Boys’
Subculture, to be politically effective, individuals who demonstrate resistance ―must do so
consciously and be able to relate that consciousness and intent‖ (LeBlanc, 1999, p. 18). This
communication of intent is often absent from the rhetoric of girlie feminism and in discussions
that highlight indie crafters‘ re-appropriation of domesticity.
Garrison (2000) defines Riot Grrrl as ―…a recent young feminist (sub)cultural movement that
combines feminist consciousness with punk aesthetics, politics, and style‖ (Garrison, 2000, p.
142). As Spirit, a teenage girl describing her experiences with the movement in 1995 writes,
―Riot Grrrl—the idea, the movement, the non localized group, whatever—inspired literally
hundreds of girls to do zines, start bands, collectives, distributions, have meetings etc.‖ (Spirit,
qtd. in Garrison, 2000, p. 153).
In recent years, this inspiration has taken on a new form in the shape of indie craft. Though
written over a decade apart, the ―Riot Grrrl Manifesto‖, written by musician, artist and activist
Kathleen Hanna in 1991, and the ―Craftifesto‖, written by Cinnamon Cooper and Amy Carlton in
the early part of the twenty-first century, share remarkable similarities that illustrate the links
between the movements.
Where Riot Grrrls stated: ―BECAUSE we know that life is much more than physical survival
and are patently aware that the punk rock ‗you can do anything‘ idea is crucial…‖(Hanna, 1991,
section 9), indie crafters respond: ―Craft is Possible – Everyone can create something!!‖(Carlton
& Cooper, n.d., section 4). Riot Grrrls ―…hate capitalism in all its forms and see our main goal
as sharing information and staying alive, instead of making profits or being cool according to
traditional standards‖ (Hanna, 1991, section 13) and crafters believe ―Craft is Political – We‘re
trying to change the world. We want everyone to rethink corporate culture & consumerism‖
(Carlton & Cooper, n.d., section 3). Furthermore, both movements place emphasis on
community, relationships and sharing, as exemplified in the following excerpts from the Riot
Grrrl Manifesto:
BECAUSE we wanna make it easier for girls to see/hear each other‘s work so that we can
share strategies and criticize-applaud each other…. BECAUSE we must take over the
means of production in order to create our own moanings…. BECAUSE we are
interested in creating non-heirarchical [sic] ways of being AND making music, friends,
and scenes based on communication + understanding, instead of competition + good/bad
categorizations (Hanna, 1991, sections 2-3, 10).
The following passages from the Craftifesto underscore these statements:
Craft is Powerful – We want to show the breadth of the crafting world. Anything you
want you can probably get from a person in your own community…. Craft is Personal –
To know that something is made by hand, by someone who cares that you like it, makes
that object much more enjoyable (Carlton & Cooper, n.d., sections 1-2) .
In an entry posted in June of 2008 on the blog ―History is Made at Night‖ (2008), blogger
Transpontine points out an important distinction between the Riot Grrrl movement and those that
have come since: ―Riot Grrrl was… one of the final pre-internet movements‖ (Revolution Grrrl
Style Now!, para. 6, line 1, 2008). The free-flowing exchange of information was an essential
element of the Riot Grrrl philosophy, carried out through writing letters, making and sharing mix
tapes and publishing zines for trade. The blogger points out that in the Internet age, such
dissemination of information and shared interests is much more efficient – and often taken for
granted – but this trade-off has negative consequences. Though we gain ease of communication,
we ultimately sacrifice authenticity: ―Internet communication is much quicker and broader – I
know that within minutes of writing this somebody on the other side of the world will be reading
it. But arguably communication is often shallower than the exchange of gifts implied by sending
tapes, zines and letters to kindred spirits‖ (Revolution Grrrl Style Now!, para. 7, lines 1-3 2008).
The notion of exchanging gifts that Transpontine describes is particularly intriguing. In this
passage, s/he brings to mind both tangible gift items – tapes, zines, letters and handmade objects
– but also recalls an essential piece of community-building that Peter Block (2008) describes in
his book, Community: The Structure of Belonging. Block posits that community-building is
dependent on ―conversations‖ that connect people (Block, 2008). One of those conversations
relates to gifts – the unique skills and attributes that each community member brings: ―We are
not defined by deficiencies or what is missing. We are defined by our gifts and what is present‖
(Block, 2008, p. 184). In his/her statement, Transpontine seems to be describing ―gifts‖ in both
senses: as an exchange of physical objects and the act of sharing skills and talents to further the
mission of the community.
Block emphasizes the potential of communities, stating, ―The communal possibility is that space
or porous container where a collective exists for the realization of all the possibilities of its
members‖ (Block, 2008, p. 126). In this ―communal space‖ lies the paradox of DIY culture: that
a philosophy so reliant on the strengths of individuals manifests in cooperation and spontaneous,
collaborative organizing (Herrmann, 2007, pp. 19-20). This brings to mind the four conditions of
―jamming‖ – an organizational process whereby communities are created – that Herrmann
describes (Herrmann, 2007, p. 21). Members of a community need skills to participate and a
context in which to engage (comprised of time, place, rules and roles). The last condition is the
ability to surrender control, which creates an ―opportunity for the co-creation of community‖
(Herrmann, 2007, p. 21). Indie crafters surrender control by working as bricoleurs, assembling
their products and lifestyles from available resources. Furthermore, they surrender control in
their culture of skill-sharing – though most indie crafters‘ individual cottage industries compete
with each other for customers, money and success, community members still work toward the
common goals of the community, not only to further their own agendas.
Survey Results
In March of 2009, I conducted two brief surveys using the online survey tool Survey Monkey. I
distributed the first survey online to members of various DIY communities through my personal
social and craft networks as well as social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter.
Additionally, acquaintances in the local and statewide craft communities (the Pittsburgh Craft
Collective and Handmade in PA, respectively) helped me distribute the survey through their
groups‘ blogs. The first survey consisted of nine questions that addressed the values, ideologies
and political belief systems that drive participation in DIY communities (Various, Identity
Formation & Values in DIY Communities, 2009). I also used this survey to capture email
addresses of participants for a follow-up survey; of 102 participants, 66 individuals shared their
email addresses. I sent a second survey to these participants to capture demographic information
through seven questions (Various, Identity Formation & DIY Communities Part 2, 2009). The
second survey had 51 total respondents. In both surveys, response rates varied from question to
question. Since no questions were deemed mandatory, some were skipped. Where the response
rate is not 100 percent, I have indicated the number of responses I received in the analysis of the
survey results.
The first survey presented questions about the respondents‘ participation in DIY communities,
which I divided into four over-arching categories: crafts; independent publishing and zines;
music; and ―other‖. Questions were presented in a variety of formats, including multiple choice,
short answer and Likert scale. Participants were permitted to choose more than one response for
the multiple-choice questions; because my research and personal observations have demonstrated
that individuals who participate in the indie craft movement also take part in other DIY
communities, I felt that limiting their responses to the multiple choice questions would result in
inaccurate data.
Of the 102 participants who took part in the first survey, 90 of them (88 percent) currently
participate in crafts communities. By contrast, 17 currently take part in independent publishing
and zine communities and 18 are involved in some way with music. Additionally, 18 respondents
self-reported participation in other types of DIY communities. To simplify data analysis, I
divided the ―other‖ responses into sub-categories. Since ―other‖ responses were self-reported, 18
individuals provided 18 different responses; however, these responses could all be defined by the
over-arching categories to which they belonged. For example, participation in a CSA
(community supported agriculture), veganism, vegetarianism and selling homemade candy

through Etsy.com all fall under the umbrella of ―food‖ and were categorized as such. Additional
―other‖ sub-categories included home improvement and remodeling; car mechanics; repurposing
materials to demonstrate ecological responsibility; fine arts; and performance, which ranged
from comedy, theater and dance to burlesque shows and puppetry.
Because the indie craft movement has some roots in Riot Grrrl and punk subcultures, I was
interested not only in participants‘ current involvement in DIY communities, but in their past
participation in these movements. So that I could maximize response to the question, I decided to
ask respondents about their participation in DIY communities within the past 10 years. My
hunch (which was later confirmed by the results of my follow-up survey) was that many
participants in the indie craft community are relatively young; therefore, to extend the question
to the past 20 or 30 years would have precluded participation from the younger survey
respondents – who were, in fact, the majority.
Of the 102 individuals polled, 101 responded to a question about participation in DIY
communities over the past 10 years. Again, the majority of respondents (92) had participated in
crafts communities. Interestingly, however, more participants were involved in other DIY
communities over the past decade than at present. Thirty respondents had participated in
independent publishing and zines, while 33 were involved in music communities. Fifteen
respondents were also involved in other forms of DIY participation, which included the same
sub-categories that respondents self-reported in the preceding question.
For the most part, individual respondents reported participation in similar types of DIY
communities over the past decade and at present. Through these questions, two noteworthy
phenomena were brought to light. First, because participation in crafts communities remained
steady over the past decade within the sample, the group exhibits a level of commitment that is
consistent with a strong affinity for the movement, as opposed to fleeting participation in a trend.
Secondly, the ascent of the Internet and advancing technologies could at least partially account
for a decrease in participation in independent publishing and zines, which have traditionally been
circulated through the mail and in person in printed form. With additional time and resources to
explore this subject further, I would be interested in gathering information about former zinesters
transitioning to the ―blogosphere‖ as they adapt to contemporary technologies. I would also like
to survey a larger sample with more age diversity, so I could contextualize participant
involvement over the past decade with their involvement over a longer span of time.
In addition to learning about types of DIY communities, I was interested in capturing
information about the ways in which respondents participate in DIY communities. I categorized
involvement in DIY communities as a ―producer‖ who contributes to the cultural output of a
DIY community by creating handmade items, performing music or writing zines; and as a
―consumer‖ – someone who participates in the community by watching, listening to, reading or
purchasing the cultural products that the community creates. Respondents were also permitted to
select ―both producer and consumer‖.
Seventy-eight of the 102 participants identified as ―both producer and consumer‖ of crafts,
compared to 15 participants who both produce and consume zines, 15 participants who produce
and consume music and 11 participants who identified another DIY community in which they
occupy roles as producer and consumer. Across all categories, the lowest number of respondents
identified as a producer exclusively. Most participants who identified as a consumer exclusively
did so in the music category, with 43 individuals self-reporting that style of participation.
The next question asked participants whether they identified with any of three political
ideologies: anti-consumption, craftivism and feminism. As with other multiple-choice questions,
respondents were permitted to select as many or as few of the categories as applied to them. I
also provided an ―other‖ category, in which respondents were encouraged to self-report any
political beliefs that did not fit the categories provided. Of the 68 participants who responded to
the question, 40 reported a feminist identity. Thirty-eight respondents identified with the
ideology of craftivism, while 37 reported an anti-consumption ideology. Twenty-six participants
reported other political beliefs, which included environmentalism and sustainability; animal
rights; and social justice, broadly defined. Interestingly, some of the political ideologies
described in the ―other‖ category were merely modifications to the presented categories, not
distinct ideologies unto themselves. For instance, one participant wrote: ―I‘m slightly a feminist,
slightly anti-consumption, but they are not part of my identity‖ (Carrie H., Identity Formation &
Values in DIY Communities, 2009). Others described their beliefs as ―anti big business‖
(Jennifer A., Identity Formation & Values in DIY Communities, 2009) and ―moving away from
commercial saturation‖ (J.M., Identity Formation & Values in DIY Communities, 2009) – which
both appear to be alternate ways of discussing anti-consumption values and practices.
Of those 68 participants, 56 responded to a follow-up question asking them to describe, in their
own words, the relationship between their own political beliefs and their participation in DIY
communities. An anonymous participant says, ―I think it's important to reuse, and limit trash,
which I like seeing in crafting communities. I also like how crafty skills that are traditional have
been reappropriated [sic] by the art community, giving people have a new appreciation for so
called ‗women's work‘ of the past‖ (Anonymous, Identity Formation & Values in DIY
Communities, 2009). This statement demonstrates the relationships among environmentalism,
feminism and indie craft. Ricki‘s response links feminist ideology with the indie craft emphasis
on processes: ―My involvement in DIY communities and my political ideologies are in
alignment with each other. My belief in feminism and empowering women gives me the
confidence to create things on my own as a marketable product. And even if my product wasn't
marketable, I wouldn't care. Creation itself is fun‖ (Ricki, Identity Formation & Values in DIY
Communities, 2009).
Eighty-four participants responded to a question about their motivation to participate in DIY
communities. Respondents supplied short answers in their own words, citing a range of
motivating factors that sparked their initial interest in DIY culture, including the simple joy of
creating; feelings of interconnectedness with a larger community; and self-sufficiency. These
themes are intertwined in the following response: ―I enjoy what I do and will do so regardless of
‗success‘. If this means recording my own record, packaging it myself, and hand delivering it to
a community, then so be it‖ (J.M., Identity Formation & Values in DIY Communities, 2009).
Participants also indicated an appreciation of the humanizing aspects of participation in DIY
communities: ―I like how handmade items (whether made by me, or someone else) are personal,
and unique. I‘m not anti-consumerist, but I connect with something much more when it‘s made
with love, rather than mass-produced‖ (Lisa M., Identity Formation & Values in DIY
Communities, 2009).
The final question of the survey asked participants to rank five statements about participation in
DIY communities on a Likert scale. Available ratings were ―strongly agree‖, ―agree‖, ―neither
agree nor disagree‖, ―disagree‖ and ―strongly disagree‖. All 102 participants recorded a response
to this question. Unsurprisingly, considering the cultural output of DIY communities, the
majority (83) strongly agreed with the statement, ―I participate in DIY communities as a creative
outlet‖. Learning and building skills were also cited as key priorities for participants in DIY
communities, with 50 participants selecting ―strongly agree‖ in response to the statement and 40
selecting ―agree‖. Interestingly, of the options presenting, socializing ranked lowest, with the
majority of participants selecting ―agree‖ rather than ―strongly agree‖ in response to the
statement, ―to make friends‖. This may be attributed to the fact that the social benefit of indie
craft primarily comes from restoring the relationships between producers and consumers; though
these relationships are indeed friendly, the desire to form them may have more to do with
reducing dependence on large corporations than on forming one-on-one friendships.
As previously mentioned, the second survey captured demographic information about the
participants. I was interested in gathering this data to demonstrate the homogeneity of the indie
craft subculture and to underscore the fact that the group I polled was especially homogenous,
due to limitations on time and resources. Any future expansion of this research will include a
broader sample of participants, which may result in a more diverse range of responses.
Of the 51 participants in the second survey, all responded to a question about gender identity. I
deliberately framed the question in terms of gender identification, recognizing the fluidity of
gender and its distinction from biological sex. Forty-eight (94 percent) identified as female and
three were male. A ―transgender‖ option was also provided, but no participants self-identified in
this manner.
Fifty participants responded to a question regarding race; one respondent skipped this question,
which asked participants to describe their racial and ethnic identity. Because this project deals so
explicitly with identity, I felt that this question should provide an opportunity for participants to
describe their identity in their own terms, rather than choosing from a pre-determined set of
racial descriptions. Even so, the results were remarkably homogenous. Of the 50 respondents, 42
identified as white or Caucasian exclusively; this represents 86 percent of the sample. Five
participants (10 percent) identified as a mixture of racial backgrounds; notably, three of these
participants included white in their descriptions. The remaining two participants identified
exclusively as non-white – Asian and black, specifically. In summary, 96 percent of the
participants identified as partially or exclusively white, while only four percent identified
exclusively with a non-white racial identity.
All 51 participants disclosed their age. The average age of the participants was 31.5, with
20 being the lowest age and 56 being the highest age. The median age was 30 years old. The
majority of participants fell into the youngest age ranges, with 22 participants between the ages
of 20 and 29, and 22 additional participants between the ages of 30 and 39. Five participants
were in their forties and two respondents were in their fifties.

I also polled survey participants about their physical communities, since the resurgence in craft
has been repeatedly described as an urban phenomenon. The results of my survey support this
argument, indicating that half (25) of the respondents consider their communities ―urban‖.
Twenty participants live in suburban neighborhoods; five live in rural areas and one participant
selected ―other‖, describing her community as an Army post (―Dragon‖, Identity Formation &
DIY Communities Part 2, 2009).
Participants in the survey were a fairly well educated group. Twenty-two of the 52 respondents
cite a Bachelor‘s degree or four-year college as their highest level of education. Thirteen
participants have completed a Master‘s degree. Respondents were distributed across all available
categories, including high school diploma or GED; and Associate‘s degree or two-year college;
however, significantly fewer participants appeared in these categories than in the higher
education levels.
I also asked participants their major area(s) of study and their current occupations. Responses –
which were self-reported – were diverse, from fine arts students whose art training informs their
craft to stay-at-home mothers who view the indie craft movement as a social outlet and a source
of income while the raise their children. No particular pattern emerged – degrees and
occupations were not consistently in creative fields, or any specific category, for that matter.
However, combining the data about race, gender and education levels, the specifics of
occupation and areas of study become less relevant. I included all these questions to capture a
glimpse of the socio-economic structure of the indie craft movement. My results indicate that
indie craft is aligned with other DIY movements – particularly Riot Grrrl – in the privileged
status of its members. The indie craft culture is comprised of a pool of individuals who are
predominantly educated, white, female, urban and middle-class.
Next Steps & Further Research
Throughout the process of assembling this literature review, I developed a stronger
understanding of the values that link the contemporary indie craft movement to other DIY
philosophies. However, as I made strides toward answering any one question, several more
questions inevitable sprouted to take its place. Within the scope of this research, I was unable to
touch upon some topics of interest – in some cases, because the topics shared only an indirect
relationship with the specific focus of this project; and in others, due to time constraints. For
instance, except where they appeared to be a direct influence on indie craft, I did not describe the
long history of handicraft movements; nor did I expand my scope beyond Western cultures.
Days before completing the project, I discovered a concept that summarizes one of my key
findings about indie craft. The concept of ―high tech/high touch‖ – introduced by John Naisbitt
in his 1982 book, Megatrends and described in greater depth in his 2001 follow up High Tech/
High Touch: Technology and Our Search for Meaning – shows a positive correlation between
advances in technology and the human desire to establish connection on a more intimate level.
Indie craft gained popularity within the past decade – a period of time that saw great strides in
technology. Though the DIY philosophy applies to a range of movements and media, the return
to craft – which conjures associations of comfort, home and domesticity – may be partly
attributed to the technology that has risen on a parallel track during its ascent. Unfortunately, I
was unable to procure this book in time to include it in my review of literature, but any future
research on this topic will utilize this concept.
Also at the end of the research period, I came across a blog article describing the phenomenon of
individuals, dissatisfied with contemporary society, who engage in an ongoing performance of
cultural mores, fashion and lifestyle choices from bygone eras. A blog entry posted by Sadie on
Jezebel.com, dated April 27, 2009, critiqued the lack of historical context in these movements.
Describing women who have constructed a lifestyle based on an idealized notion of the 1950s,
Sadie states, ―…these women are drawn to the rigidity of the era's roles and mores, but don't
seem to recognize that choosing these same roles is totally antithetical to the spirit of the age
they idealize‖ (Sadie, 2009). Choice – and the implication that by choosing, we are also not
choosing the aspects that hold less appeal – is the pivot point on which the appropriation of retro
objects and values shifts from nostalgia to post-modern bricolage. With more time to develop an
analysis of this piece, I would incorporate this article into a revised literature review.
With additional time and resources, I would also be interested in further exploring the ways in
which the concepts of jamming (Herrmann, 2007) and co-creation of community (Block, 2008)
apply to indie craft. Clearly, the indie craft community utilizes spontaneous, grassroots
organizing practices to unify a decentralized group; with more resources to build upon the
observations Herrmann and Block have made, I could construct a more thorough model of the
indie craft movement‘s organizing processes.

As I stated in the introduction to this paper, my interest in subculture stems from a long-term
affiliation with underground and counter-cultural ideals. At the core of my identity is a desire to
remain conscious of my choices and to align my cultural participation with my values systems.
As an individual who values creativity, relationships, social responsibility and collaboration –
and who enjoys the process of creation as much as the outcome – I have found a niche in the
indie craft movement.
As someone who has been involved with subcultural movements for nearly half of my life, I feel
that my perspective is a valid and unique one, stitching aspects of social anthropology,
(sub)cultural studies, developmental psychology and feminist theory into a detailed analysis of a
post-modern phenomenon. With this in mind, I am interested in continuing to develop my
research in this arena, paying particular attention to the ways in which bricolage manifests as a
unifying theme across creative subcultures.
Though indie craft as we currently understand it may be a trend, its core values will remain an
undercurrent of DIY philosophy. Indie craft is just one of many modes of DIY production; trends
may shift and participation from specific individuals may drop off, but participants, ever the
bricoleurs, will sift through the odds and ends of indie craft to assemble something vibrant and
new in the next phase of DIY culture.

Appendix A – Glossary of Terms
Arts and Crafts movement – An aesthetic movement that spanned the late nineteenth century
and early twentieth century in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. The
movement drew inspiration from ―a romantic idealization of a craftsperson taking pride in their
personal handiwork‖ (Arts and Crafts movement, n.d., section 1, para. 1). The Arts and Crafts
movement attempted to restore the relationship between craftspeople and their products in a
rejection of the ―soulless‖ machine-based production methods of the Industrial Revolution (Arts
and Crafts Movement, n.d., Origins and key principles section, para. 1).
Blog – Short for ―weblog‖, a blog is a type of online journal that rose to popularity in the first
decade of the twenty-first century. Contrasted with traditional web pages built by designers and
software developers with specialized skills, blogs have democratized technology (Garrison,
2000) by providing simple templates that allow users to publish instantly without extensive
knowledge of HTML code. The highly personal nature of many blogs is parallel to the subject
matter of zines. Due to the combined factors of advancing technology and the increasing
popularity of paperless modes of communication (due, in part, to a renewed environmental
consciousness), blogs, in some ways, have replaced zines as a means to establish and
communicate with networks of likeminded individuals.
Bricolage – A term used within the disciplines of art and cultural studies to describe ―the
construction or creation of a work from a diverse range of things which happen to be available‖
or ―a work created by such a process‖ (Bricolage, section 1, para. 1). The term highlights the
―processes by which people acquire objects from across social divisions to create new cultural
identities. In particular, it is a feature of subcultures such as, for example, the punk movement.
Here, objects that possess one meaning (or no meaning) in the dominant culture are acquired and
given a new, often subversive meaning‖ (Bricolage, Cultural studies section, para. 1).
Craftivism – A portmanteau of the words ―craft‖ and ―activism‖ that describes activity at the
intersection of the two cultural practices. Craftivism occurs when an individual uses the forms,
processes or products of craft to spark discussion about social or political issues (Greer, n.d.).
Craftivism is evident in donating handmade items or proceeds from the sale of said items to
charity. Some argue that the act of crafting in and of itself is a form of activism, as it is an
expression of resistance to socially imposed practices of consumption. If one makes something
for themselves instead of purchasing it ready-made, that individual has disrupted the
consumption cycle that pervades American culture.
Creative consumption – A process whereby individuals personalize their consumption

processes by making or altering items to their own specifications. This practice empowers
consumers to customize their choices, expressing individuality and demonstrating resistance to
widely accepted Western practices of conspicuous consumption and disposability. This form of
consumption is distinct from other modes because it ―is consuming to be rather than to display
having‖ (Cherrier, 2009, p. 188).
Dada – An international movement active between 1915 and 1922 in literature and art that
influenced punk, zine culture, Riot Grrrl and indie craft in its use of collage, appropriation and
detournement, a practice that, like bricolage, subverts established images (Spencer, 2008, p.
101).
Do-it-yourself (DIY) – The do-it-yourself (DIY) philosophy emphasizes self-sufficiency,

empowering individuals to make and repair items that they would otherwise purchase. DIY
values question the concept of ―expertise‖, promoting the idea that anyone can make anything.
The DIY ideology is an undercurrent that runs through such diverse movements as home
improvement, punk and indie craft (Do it yourself, section 1, Subculture section).
Etsy.com – An international e-commerce web site, launched in June 2005 and comprised of over
100,000 shops maintained by individual crafters, artisans and vintage dealers. ―Etsy is an online
marketplace for buying & selling all things handmade. Our mission is to enable people to make a
living making things, and to reconnect makers with buyers. Our vision is to build a new economy
and present a better choice: Buy, Sell, and Live Handmade‖ (Etsy, About section, para. 1-5,
n.d.).
Girlie Feminism – A subset of the 1990s third-wave feminist movement that critiques the social
construct of gender through the performance of traditionally feminine practices. Girlie feminists
believe that reclaiming the domestic sphere is a feminist act in itself, since they are choosing to
participate in stereotypically feminine activities (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000).
Jamming – A process whereby individuals spontaneously organize toward common goals, co-
creating a communal experience. Likely derived from the jazz vernacular of ―jam sessions‖,
jamming is valued for its improvisational nature. Herrmann describes four conditions necessary
for jamming to occur: skills to participate; rules and roles; a setting; and the ability to surrender
control (Herrmann, 2007, p. 21).
Riot Grrrl – An underground movement of the early 1990s that merged the DIY philosophy and
music of punk with feminist concepts. Riot Grrrl is sometimes viewed as the launching point for
third-wave feminism (Riot Grrrl, n.d., section 1, para. 1). Riot Grrrl has been criticized for its
emphasis on a universal female identity (Riot Grrrl, n.d., section 1, para. 1). The Riot Grrrl
subculture produces zines, art and music and was know for its DIY ethic, political action and
activism (Riot Grrrl, n.d., section 1, para. 1).
Social networking – The utilization of new media technologies to connect through web pages
and applications created solely for the purpose of making and fostering social relationships.
Social networking sites include MySpace, Facebook and Twitter. These sites offer a vehicle to
connect with likeminded individuals and are also utilized by indie craft business owners as free
marketing tools.
Third-wave feminism – A feminist movement that emerged in the early 1990s as a response to
the perceived shortcomings of the second-wave feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s.
Third-wave feminism addressed the ways in which gender intersects with other statused
identities, including race, sexual orientation, and socio-economic class (Third-wave feminism,
Overview section).
Zine – Short for ―fanzine‖, a zine is a handmade magazine or pamphlet with limited distribution
(typically under 5,000) (Zine, n.d., section 1, para. 2). Zines played a key role in the Riot Grrrl
movement of the early 1990s, providing a platform for young women to express their feminist
ideals and connect with others.
Appendix B – Craftifesto
Craft is powerful. We want to show the depth and breadth of the crafting world. Anything you
want you can probably get from a person in your own community... (Levine & Heimerl, 2008).
And buying handmade, one-of-a-kind goods from your neighbor kicks the ass of buying mass-
produced, slave-made corporate stuff.
Craft is personal. To know that something was made by hand, by someone who cares that you
like it, makes that object much more enjoyable. And it makes you feel less lonely when you
realize that you know the name of the person who made the bar of soap you use, the earrings you
wore when you met that special someone, or the scarf that kept you from freezing while you
waited for the train.
Craft is political. We're not just trying to sell stuff. We're trying to change the world. We want
everyone to rethink corporate culture and consumerism.
Craft is possible. Everybody can create something—you don't have to be an established

business to make stuff. And we're creating friendships and connections between crafters…
Appendix C – Riot Grrrl Manifesto
BECAUSE us girls crave records and books and fanzines that speak to US that WE feel included
in and can understand in our own ways.
BECAUSE we wanna make it easier for girls to see/hear each other's work so that we can share
strategies and criticize-applaud each other.
BECAUSE we must take over the means of production in order to create our own moanings.
BECAUSE viewing our work as being connected to our girlfriends-politics-real lives is essential
if we are gonna figure out how we are doing impacts, reflects, perpetuates, or DISRUPTS the
status quo.
BECAUSE we recognize fantasies of Instant Macho Gun Revolution as impractical lies meant to
keep us simply dreaming instead of becoming our dreams AND THUS seek to create revolution
in our own lives every single day by envisioning and creating alternatives to the bullshit christian
capitalist way of doing things.
BECAUSE we want and need to encourage and be encouraged in the face of all our own
insecurities, in the face of beergutboyrock that tells us we can't play our instruments, in the face
of "authorities" who say our bands/zines/etc are the worst in the US and
BECAUSE we don't wanna assimilate to someone else's (boy) standards of what is or isn't.
BECAUSE we are unwilling to falter under claims that we are reactionary "reverse sexists" AND
NOT THE TRUEPUNKROCKSOULCRUSADERS THAT WE KNOW we really are.
BECAUSE we know that life is much more than physical survival and are patently aware that the
punk rock "you can do anything" idea is crucial to the coming angry grrrl rock revolution which
seeks to save the psychic and cultural lives of girls and women everywhere, according to their
own terms, not ours.
BECAUSE we are interested in creating non-heirarchical ways of being AND making music,
friends, and scenes based on communication + understanding, instead of competition + good/bad
categorizations.
BECAUSE doing/reading/seeing/hearing cool things that validate and challenge us can help us
gain the strength and sense of community that we need in order to figure out how bullshit like
racism, able-bodieism, ageism, speciesism, classism, thinism, sexism, anti-semitism and
heterosexism figures in our own lives.
BECAUSE we see fostering and supporting girl scenes and girl artists of all kinds as integral to
this process.
BECAUSE we hate capitalism in all its forms and see our main goal as sharing information and
staying alive, instead of making profits of being cool according to traditional standards.
BECAUSE we are angry at a society that tells us Girl = Dumb, Girl = Bad, Girl = Weak.
BECAUSE we are unwilling to let our real and valid anger be diffused and/or turned against us
via the internalization of sexism as witnessed in girl/girl jealousism and self defeating girltype
behaviors.
BECAUSE I believe with my wholeheartmindbody that girls constitute a revolutionary soul

force that can, and will change the world for real.
Current DIY Community Participation by Type

Crafts only Independent Publishing/Zines only
Music only Other only
Mix of categories
22%
4%
2%
2%
70%
Breakdown of Categories for Participants in Multiple

DIY Communities*
* distribution among the 70 participants who cited current involvement in multiple DIY
communities
Crafts Independent Publishing/Zines Music Other
17%
42%
21%
20%
Sub-Categories of "Other" Description

Art
Bicycling/bike activism
Blogging/journaling
Car mechanics
Fashion
Food-related (CSA, veganism, homemade candy)
"Green" movement (river clean-up, "Trashion")
Interior decorating/home improvement
Performance (including dance, theatre, comedy, burlesque and puppetry)
Wedding crafts
6%
11%
17% 5%
5%
5%
17% 6%
17%
11%
Types of Participation in DIY Communities

Producer Consumer Both Producer and Consumer
78
43
27
12 15 15 11
9 7
0 2 2
Crafts Independent Music Other

Publishing/Zines
Reasons for Participation in DIY Communities

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
83
50
44
40 40
36 34 33
30
27
19 21
16
9
4 5 3 5 4
0 1 2 0 2 2
to make friends to learn or build skills as a creative outlet to be environmentally to create or enhance
responsible relationships between
producers and
consumers
Gender Identification of Survey Participants

Female Male Transgender
0%
8%
92%
Geographic Community/Neighborhood Type

Rural Suburban Urban Other
5% 10%
45%
40%
Works Cited
About. (n.d.) Retrieved April 28, 2009, from Etsy: http://www.etsy.com/about.php
Arts and crafts movement. (n.d.) Retrieved March, 11, 2009, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arts_and_Crafts_movement
Baumgardner, J., & Richards, A. (2000). Manifesta: Young women, feminism, and the future. New York:
Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Bertozzi, V. (2008, January 23). Featured buyer: Faythe Levine of Handmade Nation. Retrieved April 8,
2009, from Etsy: http://www.etsy.com/storque/spotlight/featured-buyer-faythe-levine-of-
handmade-nation-1033/
Block, P. (2008). Community: The structure of belonging. San Francisco: Baerrett-Koehler.
Bricolage. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2009, from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricolage#Cultural_studies
Bukatko, D., & Daehler, M. W. (1998). Child development: A thematic approach. Boston, New York:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Cherrier, H. (2009). Anti-consumption discourses and consumer-resistant identities. Journal of Business

Research , 62 (2), 181-190.
Carlton, A., & Cooper, C. (n.d.). Craftifesto. Retrieved March 11, 2009, from The DIY Trunk Show:
http://diytrunkshow.com/about/#craftifesto
DIY ethic. (n.d.). Retrieved March 11, 2009, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIY_ethic
Do it yourself. (n.d.). Retrieved March 11, 2009, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diy
Garrison, E. K. (2000). U.S. feminism--grrrl style! Youth (sub)culture and the technologics of the third
wave. Feminist Studies, 26 (1), 141-170.
Greer, B. (n.d.). What is craftivism, anyway? Retrieved January 7, 2009, from Craftivism:
http://craftivism.com/what.html
Hanna, K. (1991). Riot Grrrl Manifesto. Bikini Kill (2) Retrieved April 8, 2009 from:
http://onewarart.org/riot_grrrl_manifesto.htm
Hebdige, D. (2001). Subculture: The meaning of style (10 ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
Herrmann, A. (2007). Anarchy, order, and the punk rock ethos: Resistance and compliance as
organizing processes. San Francisco.
LeBlanc, L. (1999). Pretty in punk: Girls’ gender resistance in a boys’ subculture.
Levine, F., & Heimerl, C. (2008). Handmade nation: The rise of DIY, Art, Craft, and Design. New
York: Princeton Architectural Press.
Metcalf, B. (2008). Alt-craft in theory and practice. Metalsmith. 28 (1), 18-19.
Palmer, Kim. (2006, November 29). Cutting Edge Crafters. Minneapolis Star Tribune. Retrieved April
20, 2009, from http://www.natescustomsewing.com/pdf/Nate_strib.pdf
Payne, A., Frow, P., Knox, S., & Storbacka, K. (2009). Co-creating brands: Diagnosing and designing
the relationship experience. Journal of Business Research , 62 (3), 379-389.
Portwood-Stacer, L. (2007). Do-it-yourself feminism: Feminine individualism and the girlie backlash in
the "craftivism" movement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International
Communication Association. San Francisco.
Riot Grrrl. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_Grrrl
Robinson, T.L. (2005). The convergence of race, ethnicity, and gender: Multiple identities in counseling.
(2 ed.) New Jersey and Ohio: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Sabella, J. (2008, May 12). Craftivism: Is crafting the new activism? The Columbia Chronicle.
Retrieved April 27, 2009, from http://www.columbiachronicle.com/paper/arts.php?id=2251
Sadie (2009, April 27). You, madam, are no Bettie Page. Retrieved April 27, 2009, from Jezebel:
http://jezebel.com/5229722/you-madam-are-no-bettie-page
Somerson, W. (2007, Winter). Knot in our name: Activism beyond the knitting circle. Bitch Magazine:
Feminist Response to Pop Culture (34), pp. 36-41.
Spencer, A. (2008). DIY: The rise of lo-fi culture. London and New York: Marion Boyers.
Strasser, S. (1999). Waste and want: A social history of trash. New York: Holt.
Stripling, S. (2005, February 7). Die-hard DIY divas. Retrieved April 25, 2009, from
http://www.seattletimes.nwsource.com:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/living/2002169623_crafts06.html
Third-wave feminism. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_wave_feminism
Transpontine. (2008, June 17). Revolution girl style now! Retrieved April 27, 2009, from History is
Made at Night: http://history-is-made-at-night.blogspot.com/2008/06/revolution-grrrl-style-
now.html
Various survey participants. (2009, March). Identity Formation & Values in DIY Communities. (E.
Stimmel, Interviewer)
Various survey participants (2009, March). Identity Formation & DIY Communities Part 2
(Demographic Info). (E. Stimmel, Interviewer)
Wills, K. (2007). The close-knit circle: American knitters today. Westport: Praeger.

Community and Identity in The Indie Craft Movement - Emily Stimmel - April 2009

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Community and Identity in The Indie Craft Movement - Emily Stimmel - April 2009

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Community and Identity in the Indie Craft Movement 1

Identity in the Indie Craft Movement

Emily Elisabeth Stimmel

Introduction: The Rise of the Indie Craft Movement

grandmothers, housewives and children – have undergone a resurgence of popularity among

freewheeling, enthusiastic practitioners‖ (Palmer, 2006).

Crafts movement, punk and anti-consumption.

feminism‖ (Wills, 2007, p. 30).

romanticized notions of mid-twentieth century iconography. Symbols of the economically

and a thick layer of irony.

confidence than items mass-produced in overseas sweatshops or pollution-spewing factories.

―disregard apparently ‗aesthetic‘ movements as nonpolitical‖ (Garrison, 2000, p. 164). Indeed,

conveying political messages through their products.

or something betwixt and between‖ (Greer, n.d.). She elaborates:

in a method akin to making a collage or constructing a patchwork quilt. Interestingly, this

Susan Strasser (1999) elaborates:

organizing practices. This conscious construction of community is evident across DIY

as a graduate student completing a degree in Leadership and Organizational Transformation, I

my personal participation in subcultural groups. As a teenager, I was introduced to feminist

guitars and picked up knitting needles in recent years.

I am not alone in recognizing the profound impact of subcultural participation on identity

I still consider myself punk‖ (Herrmann, 2007, p. 5).

permeate youth subcultures?

is being used as a catalyst for political and social change.

my own experiences and observations as a member of the subcultures I studied.

updating my undergraduate work on subcultures. Ultimately, my goal is to synthesize the data

communities. As living systems, subcultures resist permanent definitions; my intent is to capture

a glimpse of these subcultures at specific moments in their evolution and to contextualize

ideologies and goals.

difficulty. To circumvent this challenge, I present an overview of movements that have

the key findings of the survey portion of the project.

of exalted makers‖ (Metcalf, 2008, p. 18).

broadening appeal of a DIY approach to everyday life.

in the dominant culture.

together‖ (Do it yourself, n.d., section 1, para. 4).

motivated to participate in DIY movements to stimulate meaningful communication and social

interaction (Wills, 2007, p. 45):

The DIY movement is a reaction to the forces of technology, globalization, and

rather than consume:

French seams‘‖ (Stripling, 2005).

Anti-consumption & Creative Consumption

bands‖ (Herrmann, 2008, p. 18).

Heimerl, 2008, p. 57).

In the article ―Anti-consumption discourses and consumer-resistant identities‖ in the Journal of

participate in capitalism on their own terms:

The development of creative consumption proceeds as a reaction against unreachable social

doesn‘t, so I make it‖ (Cherrier, 2009, p. 188).

helped to define and shape‖ (Garrison, 2000, p. 156).

Third-Wave Feminism, Girlie Feminism and Riot Grrrl

homemaking as a reclaiming of women‘s culture‖ (Somerson, 2007, p. 38). In particular, the

empowerment through activities traditionally associated with women.

claim is an act of resistance to the values of the previous generation:

In ―Do-It-Yourself Feminism: Feminine Individualism and the Girlie Backlash in the

has faced similar criticism. Amy Spencer (2008) notes:

between regression to old ways and activism?‖ (Sabella, 2008, p. 1).

who has played a pivotal role in the craft revival:

privileges afforded by feminism and technology, while simultaneously romanticizing a fantasy

but we don‘t have contact‖ (Gorman, qtd. in Wills, 2007, p. 43).

(Portwood-Stacer, 2007, p. 2):

Subculture, to be politically effective, individuals who demonstrate resistance ―must do so

that highlight indie crafters‘ re-appropriation of domesticity.

qtd. in Garrison, 2000, p. 153).

between the movements.