A Tale of Two Yarns

It must be stated – I am a fibre snob.  Working as a costumer at an historic site for the last 13 years has ingrained in me the importance of natural fibres.  Being someone who is becoming increasingly aware of my environmental footprint is also something that affects my fibre choices (I am morally opposed to superwash yarns due to the amount of water and/or chemicals involved in its creation – it’s a personal hang-up, I’ll let you use whatever you please).

The first yarn I worked with on a regular basis was by Briggs and Little.  I got a lot of it, in several different colours and weights, so that I could build shawls for work.  I thought its rustic hand would be perfect for the Park.  Now I look at that yarn and shudder – I have sensitive skin and can’t wear it, so why would I expect my staff to wear it?

My latest go-to yarn is, of course, Cascade 220.  It’s non-superwash (well, the original is anyway), it’s got a plethora of colours, and it’s comfy on my sensitive skin.  That being said, I’m beginning to come to the conclusion that it’s not the best for my physique; I can only wear if it’s made into hats, mittens, or scarves.  I’m not very tall, and I’m curvy, and I am about to frog my February Lady sweater that only needs the sleeves finished because I tried it on and felt it was just too bulky for a girl of my build.   However, it is being made into a cardigan for a female 1920s interpreter, two 1920s men’s sweaters, and it’s been doing quite well for finger-woven sashes (after being over-plied so that it resists pilling during construction).

Neither of these are my favourite yarn but they have been, or are becoming, my workhorse yarns.