Raisa Kabir

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

For my micro teaching session I began by showing the camera several patterned cloths from my own collection, and asked everyone if they could name perhaps where the cloths were from? People mentioned Indonesia, Mexico, Thailand? But were not sure! The pieces were from Mexico and also Sweden, two very different cultures but with distinct cultural pattern in their folk weaving traditions. I often show different types of textiles at the beginning of classes, as a prompt for conversations around global design history, and to demonstrate the unique yet universal languages of weaving, pattern and cloth making cultures.

These images above aren’t quite in order, but you get a sense of the slides. I tried to incorporate thinking around archives, textiles in museums, the value of the craft labourer and the concept of cultural imperialism in design. Some people in our micro teaching group were not aware that paisley shawls were in fact derived from the bhutah/boteh design from India/Kashmir/Punjab textile heritages and appropriated craft knowledge that was industrialised for western consumption in the 18th and 19th century.

I moved on to think about weaving as a form of structure that is replicated in our world around us and asked each person to reflect on a textile in their home, who made it, where, how? This generated really nice engagement and group discussion, but I was worried we spent too long on this, rather than introducing the background for the activity I had planned. I feel like if I had more time, this would have had a more natural progression.

I asked about what kind of structures are there in society, and life, and how certain structures are embedded in our daily lives. I introduced some textile weaving examples that explore the possibilities of the tangle or the knot, or anti surface.

I was worried about time at the point so introduced the activity earlier than planned, and asked people to start drawing on their paper, and draw any kind of structure or pattern, as free form as they could. I carried on talking as people drew on their paper, to create a mood whilst we were doing the activity. I think people said they enjoyed this afterwards, but during the session I do think if the drawing instruction slide was on the screen it would have been more seamless.

Afterwards I asked people to cut up this drawing and create their own object, their own ‘woven’ structure that might be indicative of a different world view or way of imagining a future structure that was less punitive or capitalist.

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

We reflected that if only we’d had more time (me not rushing because I worry I have to stick to the plan) then it would have allowed the free flow of discussion into string theory, Donna Haraway, and the possibilities of weaving new worlds and using textile thinking to examine how we can build our internal and external frameworks for society. The feedback included was mindful that we covered a fair amount of complex ground, sensitive ideas, and allowed a non judgemental space for these topics to arise.

Some feedback from the microteaching:

• Wish there was more time.
• Like the way the museum artefacts – appropriation of things. Realising patterns have been stolen into western society.
• Like the prompting of questions for engagement.
• Enjoyed the delivery in the way you presented, there was a calmness and gentleness. Knowledge and comfort. A way to approach these kind of conversations.
• Enjoyable calm space.
• Liked the way it was framed – textiles framed in a very specific way. Wide context in which other things can be framed. Inside textiles contain these multiple avenues of exploration.
• Decision pedagogically to make and interact with something physically was a nice way to flip.
• Clever to simply unpack some complex themes and concepts through materiality and engagement with personal object in this space.
• Clever way to elicit some very important context. Nature of structure and weaving works hand in hand.

I really thought getting the group to “weave” with paper, and getting everyone to materially engage with structures as a real life object, went really well – especially in a time when we aren’t able to use our hands or sense of touch as much online. Afterwards I realised perhaps the first part of the session about patterns and cultural appropriation was a really great introduction to stirring up the space and setting the scene, but it probably was too much to fit into the time frame. As even though we covered everything in 20mins, we didn’t have time to sit with the objects we’d made and I wondered afterwards if people would have liked to have gone over time, and if I should have allowed that to happen, rather than move on quickly because conscious of keeping to time. I am sure this session would work fine in an hour class, and I totally recognise I was trying to be too ambitious – or rather not trusting myself to do something simple and combining two or three main ideas together.

Some theories on labour, craft, and the body, that I shared with an open unit space lecture series on the course I teach on.

Often in my artistic practice I build ‘structures’ in my work/weaving/machine/looms/body looms – building and performing with craft/industrialised spaces and technology. I try to get participants/students/learners to think about how structures are created in society, and how they are replicated and rein-scribed – how weaving can be a visual and material metaphor for building our society – but also how we may deconstruct it. Weaving technology is developed in proximity to the craft labourer’s body, and thus no labour or work can be divorced from the body.

Some screenshots of the online note taking space created, looking at some of the ways feminist textile art is whitewashed, and also how performance and textiles can embody the visceral politic, and showcase post colonial ways of thinking and learning through the body – and critiquing the material and not just metaphorical structures in our daily lives/worlds.

I used the lecture to discuss positionality and historical contexts to the themes artists use and employ in their work, and how the positionality of the artist, the ethics and responsibility of that artist can speak volumes about the subject matter – who gets to speak for whom, and how we must instil this in all our practices, and learning spaces. Not all history is spoken about, and when it is, who speaks over and for others? Who is left out of the conversation?

I was first introduced to this work by Guillermo Gomez-Pena back in 2017 when I attended a week long performance intensive residency at the Tetley gallery. It was a combination of bringing South Asian performance artists from India, Bangladesh and Pakistan and the UK to form a group and a bond to inform each-other’s work. It was a transformative time that radically changed everything I knew and thought about knowledge, and how performance could be used as a tool to unlock epistemologies of the body. I am reflecting on these works I made, and how this literature underpins my practice as an educator as well.

It was this environment that fostered each of us in that workshop to let go, to fiercely critique racism, borders, language, archives, power imbalances. It led me to re establish thinking through the body and thinking through weaving – weaving as a performance, labour as a performance, and the link between the archival body and trauma/disability in people of colour and queer people. The legacy of that knowledge. I now try to harness this energy with my own teaching, and hope I can root some of these ideas with how I can work in person with students once we can be in person once again. These methodologies in performance always lead me to think that teaching is about sharing yourself, your energy and fostering this very clear and safe environment for discussion to take hold. This tenet of pedagogy – to create spaces for voices, discussion and an exchange of ideas – critical and enquiring, to provide a platform for students to discuss and speak, and maybe speak through their bodies.

• 

Introduction to PgCert – Raisa Kabir

Hello all, I’m Raisa Kabir, I’m a textile practitioner, educator and performance artist. I’ve taught and lectured on weaving, textiles history and the use of craft performance as a disruptive action for many educational institutions, galleries, and public programs. I’m an associate lecturer on the BA Performance Design and Practice at CSM. I believe in the power of education as a tool for resistance and making spaces for critical thought.