How to work with Heritage Craft Communities – ten safe-guarding steps

Authors: Merel van der Vaart and Areti Damala

Drawing from the wider literature and our experience in the Mingei project, we set out a series of ten steps that highlight tips, tricks, good practice and Heritage Crafts-specific challenges. The advice is structured based on the 2003 ICH definition of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage but starts with an extra preparatory step: introspection. From introspection we take you on a journey of working with Heritage Crafts Communities, through research and preservation to promotion and revitalisation. To explore each of the ten steps, we illustrate it with good practice drawn from case studies from Mingei and from our research.

1. Introspection

Before reaching out to craft communities, it is important to understand the role and position of your institution, now and in the past. Take a moment to examine the way your organisation has represented and engaged with crafts in the past up until today. If you are an organisation that looks after tangible cultural heritage related to Heritage Crafts, look at your collections. Where are crafts present in your collections and how are they described or labelled? For example, does your organisation refer to them as applied arts or folklife? Understanding the lens through which the organisation you work for has collected, studied and interpreted crafts will help you see what perspectives might be missing. Through introspection, you can better understand the relationship your organisation had with craftspeople in the past, while also anticipating how you might be viewed by Heritage Crafts communities today.

Mingei case study, Haus der Seidenkultur (Germany). The Haus der Seidenkultur is founded at the site of the last silk weaving workshop. The original tools to create point paper designs, punch cards for Jacquard looms and the looms themselves were present at the site before the museum existed. The museum was founded in response to the workshop ceasing production and in close collaboration with silk weavers that had worked at other local silk factories.

2. Identification

Do you have a clear understanding of the diversity within or among the communities related to the Heritage Crafts you are working with? Try to list all the people involved in the craft and differentiate between Heritage Crafts communities and stakeholders.

Once you have done this, do some desk research to find out who the key people might be who could introduce you to the community. Always make sure if a person you consider to be a representative of the community is indeed capable of representing it. Try to understand what this person’s motivation might be to take on this role of representative. Do they have an alternate agenda? Ask for introductions to other community members and make clear you find it important to better understand the diversity within the community. If a person is unwilling or unable to make these introductions, it is probably important to better understand why this is the case. Stay aware of potential alternative stories or diversity within the community while you conduct your work. 

In most cases, it will be impossible to meet with all the members of a Heritage Crafts community, but when deciding how to invest your time, ask yourself these three questions:

  1. Do you have a clear overview of all the different Communities related to this Heritage Craft? Think about practitioners of the various stages of the craft, formal or informal students, and others who are directly affected by, though not participating in the craft. 
  2. Who are the key representatives of these different communities? 
  3. What are events or places where you could informally meet a wide range of community members, as an opportunity to identify more relevant partners?

External case study, Shetland Museum (Scotland). Shetland textiles are part of Shetland culture and visitors to Shetland Wool Week are known to want to engage in all aspects of the islands and their traditions. The relatively small scale of the event and the connection with the local community are part of the success of Shetland Wool Week. To make this possible, locals had to be willing to participate. The organising committee first invested in relationships with experienced knitters, who were hired to teach several classes at the event. This meant these knitters could both make money from their finished product and also by teaching others how to knit in the Shetland tradition. Younger knitters are trained to become teachers themselves, to make sure this skill does not disappear either. As well as teachers, the organisation works with farmers and crofters, asking them to give tours of their farms and talk about their work. The organising committee advises farmers on creating an event that will match the expectations of participants and provide an opportunity for farmers to explain their role in the production process.

3. Research

Most Heritage Crafts can be researched through desk-based research to a point. Historic and contemporary descriptions, videos, photographs and other physical materials related to the craft might help you get a sense of it. But because Heritage Crafts consist of tangible and intangible heritage, a lot of the research can only take place in collaboration with Heritage Craft Communities. Firstly, it is important to understand the status of the craft among these communities. Does their view of and valuing of the craft match that of the documentation you have studied? Or do you see differences that need to be further explored? 

For the Mingei project, we are exploring how to digitise both the tangible and intangible elements of Heritage crafts. To do this, the technical and heritage partners on the team have identified the many different elements that could be studied to create a good understanding of each craft. Physical items are materials, artefacts, manufacturing tools or machines, protective or traditional clothing relevant to the craft, as well as the workspace(s). Craft practices encompass actions of the practitioner(s), which means our research should not be limited to ‘things’, but should also include the bodies of the practitioners, as well as their motions. It is clear that this research cannot be done in any other way other than in collaboration with practitioners. Craft understanding involves the identification of craft processes, separating them into activities and actions, the spatial and physical expression of craft processes, their temporal organisation, as well as the identification of the involved objects and actors.

Mingei case study, Musée des Arts et Métiers (France). Once the glassblowing project in the Musée des Arts et Métiers started, museum staff decided to move forward with an ethnographic study. One of the curators joined the glass blowers in their laboratory in an attempt to replicate one of the chosen objects of the collection so as to understand connections with the old crafts techniques, differences and breakthroughs in glass-blowing both in the past and in the present. The ethnographic study involved participatory observation, taking photos, fieldwork notes, cognitive walkthroughs (taking videos and revisiting the videos with the craftspeople), interviews, and common work sessions with the technology partners who were there to digitise the crafts.

When it comes to understanding the craft fully, we also have to identify points where decisions are being made in the process, alternative techniques, and the correction of mistakes. We have to understand if the craft is changing, and if so, how. If you want to describe a craft, you would need to collaborate with Heritage Craft Communities to develop a vocabulary of terms, verbal definitions, and visual descriptions that should include the materials, tools, and products of a craft. Holistically approaching a Heritage Craft creates a lot of data. These data need to be organised in terms of craft roles and steps, the materials and the actions used. This organisation of data needs to work with the tools or machines that you will use to map the craft tasks and processes. 

Working with Heritage Craft Communities in your research phase can take many different forms. Depending on the situation, you might choose or be able to use techniques that allow for more or less active engagement. Techniques you could use include co-creation, ethnography, participant observation and interviews. 

4. Documentation

The output of the research phase is documentation. As research methods vary, so too will the type of documentation you produce. The primary output may be in the form of notes, images, audio-visual recordings, reports, etc., that describe the operational part of the process or stories relating to the socio-historical context of the craft. We propose the use of storyboards to organise the output of this process as a useful tool for (a) illustrated scripts that separate actions into simpler ones and (b) validating this transmitted information with the craft community, collecting feedback, and identifying parts of the process that may be underrepresented. Storyboards can contain temporal arrangement, visualisations, verbal description of actions and activities, and identify the involved objects and actors.

Mingei case study, The Mastic Museum of the PIOP Museum Network (Greece). During a visit to the island of Chios, we found ourselves interviewing local Mastic growers on the town square of a local village, collecting audio recordings of our conversations and taking pictures with our smartphones while a drone flew overhead, capturing footage that would allow us to create a 3D model of the entire village.

5. Preservation

To understand how a Heritage Craft can or should be protected it is important to understand the past, current and future threats facing the craft. Heritage Craft Communities are best placed to understand these threats. Is there a limit to the source materials needed for the craft? Are certain tools or instruments no longer in production? When the craft relies on selling the end product, maybe the market for this product has dried up or demand has changed. Perhaps there is less interest in maintaining the craft among younger generations. If so, why is this the case? Only when we have mapped the threats facing a craft, we can start thinking about potential ways of protecting it. What protective measures are acceptable needs to be decided together with the Heritage Craft Communities. Is it possible to start using other source materials or instruments, or is this unacceptable? To what extent can the outcomes of the Heritage Craft be monetised, or patterns and products altered? These questions have no one-size-fits-all answers but need to be explored through intensive, collaborative work with Heritage Craft Communities. 

Mingei case study, The Mastic Museum of the PIOP Museum Network (Greece). Mastic growers are actively involved in creating new and innovative products, such as skin care products and supplements using the mastic they collect. This innovation does not negatively impact their Heritage Craft, because they, as a community, are the undisputed owners of their craft and have the power to set boundaries. They can identify which elements of their tradition they want to maintain as they are, and where there is space for innovation. This shows how innovation and tradition are not opposing forces, but can exist alongside each other, as long as the Heritage Craft Community has the autonomy to set boundaries. In contrast, although the looms at the Haus der Seidenkultur could produce all kinds of fabrics, the fact that they were traditionally used to create ecclesiastical vestments and altar hangings is integral to the story of the workshop and the specific Heritage Craft that was practised there.

6. Protection

To understand how a Heritage Craft can or should be protected it is important to understand the past, current and future threats facing the craft. Heritage Craft Communities are best placed to understand these threats. Is there a limit to the source materials needed for the craft? Are certain tools or instruments no longer in production? When the craft relies on selling the end product, maybe the market for this product has dried up or demand has changed. Perhaps there is less interest in maintaining the craft among younger generations. If so, why is this the case? Only when we have mapped the threats facing a craft, we can start thinking about potential ways of protecting it. What protective measures are acceptable needs to be decided together with the Heritage Craft Communities. Is it possible to start using other source materials or instruments, or is this unacceptable? To what extent can the outcomes of the Heritage Craft be monetised, or patterns and products altered? These questions have no one-size-fits-all answers but need to be explored through intensive, collaborative work with Heritage Craft Communities.

External case study, Heritage Weaving Communities  (India). Both Europe and India face the same biggest challenge in terms of Heritage Crafts. The numbers of Heritage Craft practitioners are dwindling, and the population is aging, as young people move to cities or find employment elsewhere. The big difference between Europe and India, however, is the context within which this challenge takes place. In India, this context consists of more significant rural isolation, greater socio-economic differences and cultural differences between rural communities and city dwellers. Where in Europe often local communities can maintain a craft as a hobby, or for example develop a heritage site that can facilitate the safeguarding of a Heritage Craft, this is not an option in most rural communities in India due to poverty, a lack of infrastructure and other socio-political structures. The solution surfacing in India is also different from that in most of Europe; it is commercial. For the case study at hand, ensuring weavers receive fair and regular pay for their heritage products is the best way to safeguard this particular Heritage Craft. A good example of a company working in this model is Jaipur Rugs, a company specialising in producing heritage rugs for a global market.

7. Promotion

In theory, anyone can promote a Heritage Craft. From opening a shop, either brick and mortar or online, to sharing products on an Instagram page, promotion can take many forms. However, as the example of the Shetland Wool Week shows, involving Heritage Craft Communities can be crucial for enhancing the impact of the promotion activities, both for the Communities involved and other interested parties, such as researchers and customers.

External case study, Shetland Museum (Scotland). The unique qualities of Shetland wool and woollen products have drawn outsiders to the islands for decades. They come to do research, often with the intention to share the outcomes, be it knowledge or patterns, with a wider audience. The local community did not necessarily support these outside researchers and would be reluctant to share their information. Still today, some are very protective of their patterns and techniques. There is a sense of wanting to protect the craft, not wanting outsiders to ‘steal’ a local tradition. Yet Shetland Wool Week was set up in 2009 with the specific intention to draw outsiders to Shetland and create awareness of Shetland wool and woollen products outside of the islands. Initially, locals did not engage much with Shetland Wool Week: they considered it something for tourists. What made and continues to make Shetland Wool Week a success is a combination of two approaches. First, a good marketing strategy and secondly, a continuing commitment to engage locals who are involved in the wool industry in some way, from farmers to knitters. Once the local community started to see the event’s value, its impact started to grow locally, nationally and internationally. The Shetland Wool Week meant that the tourist season was extended into September. It enhanced international interest in Shetland’s knitting heritage, even resulting in #fairislefriday on Instagram.

8. Enhancement

If you are used to working in a more traditional heritage field and deal primarily with tangible heritage, the idea of ‘enhancing’ heritage might seem a contradictory term. But since intangible cultural heritage is a living and evolving kind of heritage, a decision can be made to enhance it, or in other words, to further improve its quality, value, or reach. Our case studies of the Chios Gum Mastic Growers Association, Shetland Wool Week and Jaipur Rugs show that stakeholders like external parties, a research lab, an organising committee or a commercial company can help enhance a Heritage Craft by introducing new uses and products, a new market, new patterns or ways of working. However, in all of these cases, the Heritage Craft Community had to be involved in the process.

External case study, Heritage Weaving Communities (India). The Jaipur Rugs company had created an international market for traditional rugs created in various Indian regions. One way to enhance the production of the rugs was to create workshops where weavers can come together to work on their looms. While this approach was successful in some places, in most cases the weavers did not want to move their work to a workshop. Traditionally, weaving rugs had always been a cottage industry, done at home alongside many other activities, related to taking care of the family, but also farming. Weaving was not the only source of income and making it so, for many weavers, did not weigh up to the flexibility they enjoyed or needed when weaving at home and combining it with other tasks. In order to honour the Heritage Craft tradition, the community’s interest came before that of the rug company. In this case, what might have seemed an enhancement from a business perspective was not an enhancement from the point of view of the Heritage Craft Community.

9. Transmission 

How are the knowledge and skills related to a Heritage Craft transmitted? How does a Heritage Craft Community train the next generation? And who is allowed to hold certain knowledge or skills? When thinking about safeguarding a Heritage Craft, either by analogue or digital means, these are crucial questions. Firstly, these questions come back to ownership and respecting community knowledge and skills. But secondly, there is usually a very good reason why a Heritage Craft is being shared or taught the way it is. The process of teaching or training is inherent to the craft itself and therefore should be taken into consideration when developing any kind of educational resource about the craft. This does not mean an understanding of the craft can only be transmitted traditionally, but it does challenge us to find a middle ground that respects the traditional learning trajectory. 

Mingei case study, Musée des Arts et Métiers (France). Each month, an artisan was invited to design, in collaboration with the public department, the content of a workshop according to his/her crafts activities (jewellery, mosaic, clockmaking, silk painting). Once the activity was decided, the craftsperson trained the museum mediator in charge of this public activity to his/her craft and taught them their skills. Then, the mediator connected with the public and transmitted to them the craft he/she learned from the craftsman/woman. The mini-workshops reached thousands of people. Due to this success, the museum decided to perpetuate the project and to create the “Fabricateurs” (Makers) as a permanent workshop space where the public is invited to do things with their hands in the museum. This is important because as a museum of the history of technology, the public needs to understand the value of making in knowledge production and what it means to “know by doing”.

10. Revitalisation

Just as Heritage Crafts change and adapt, they can also fade or lose meaning and relevance for a Heritage Craft Community. It might not mean the community is no longer interested in the craft; in fact, they might still want to preserve it as a Heritage Craft. But at the same time, they might not have the time and energy to invest in maintaining the craft as it is, or once was. Freezing a Heritage Craft is a sure way for it to lose its meaning over time. For the same reasons, it is not necessarily useful to look back in time, through books and images, for example, and try to find the moment in time when the craft was most ‘authentic’. This is the opposite of revitalising. To revitalise a Heritage Craft, the Heritage Craft Community should be involved in a conversation about what the craft once meant to them, what it means now and what it could mean in the future. Which techniques must be kept or brought back? Where could machines be used to create a faster process, while maintaining the important heritage qualities of the craft?

Mingei case study, Haus der Seidenkultur (Germany). When the Haus der Seidenkultur  opened in 2000, the workshop had not been in operation for nearly twenty years and the last weaver who had worked there had passed away sometime before that. To make the workshop operational once more, the Association of Friends had to rely on the knowledge and expertise of its volunteers. Due to their old age, many still had some experience using more traditional methods, although they had spent their working life in more modern factories. One could say that by working at the museum, they became part of the Heritage Craft Community of that particular workshop. Through action research, this Heritage Craft Community expanded its knowledge and skills, safeguarding a Heritage Craft which had been on the brink of becoming extinct.