Master of Science / Department of Apparel, Textiles, and Interior Design / Sherry J. Haar / The overarching goals of the project were to acknowledge both traditional and modern aspects of Turkish culture, inform designers and researchers of natural dye and screen printing methods, and advance the developing practices of sustainable design. Mixed methodologies of scientific and practice-based research guided the project. A collection of 25 prints inspired by the Anatolian region of Turkey were screen-printed with thickened natural dyes onto sustainable fibered fabrics. The research of traditional Turkish art and culture led to the inspirational concepts and brought the textile prints to fruition. Understanding the dyeing practices, regional traditions, and political rule of this nation informed the design process and directly influenced the composition and imagery of the designs. The final outcomes were exhibited at the Kansas State University student union art gallery. Research was conducted on the use of natural plant-based dyes madder, weld, and woad for screen-printing by determining the most effective thickener and thickening method. Thickening agents gum tragacanth and gum arabic were tested for fabric hand and the printed natural dyes were tested for colorfastness to light. Gum tragacanth at a ratio of .9875 g agent to 10 ml water emerged as the most smooth and pliable when evaluating fabric hand. Colorfastness to light was as expected for madder and woad with excellent to good fastness. Weld had an unexpectedly low rating indicating further study is needed. The developing practices of sustainable design were advanced as I used sustainable materials (natural dyes, natural gums, naturally fibered fabrics) and methods (hand screenprinting) throughout the project. The information from this project may be valuable to artisans to further develop their natural dye and screen-printing techniques; to researchers to provide a foundation for testing additional thickened dyes; and to industry professionals to modify their practices.

Whole document restricted, see Access Instructions file below for details of how to access the print copy. / How meaning is articulated, suggested or repressed in transition processes is an inherently social phenomenon. The history of theorising about ornament bears evidence to this as much as do current practices of ornamentation. From myths, as narratives of meaning, to ‘mere ornament’ – the various signifying practices (and forms of life within which they take place) determine how meaning changes. People will perceive such change differently, depending on their perspectives and circumstances and, under certain conditions, change can be conceived of as loss. This thesis, in its theoretical part, explores issues pertaining to meaning and ornament in epistemology, philosophy, sociology, semiotics, aesthetics and psychoanalysis. In its practical part it seeks to make connections with signifying practices involving ornament in the life-worlds of users, the use of ornament in public buildings, bicultural relationships involving appropriation or misappropriation, and the education of designers in New Zealand. For that, data derived from four empirical research projects are presented and theorised. In the fourth part, theories and practices are brought together to shed light on struggles with ornamental meaning in the past and in the present. Theories, with their classification of myths, symbols and ornament, ignore wide ranges of signifying practices and privilege some form of significations at the expense of others. Because of their separation from the language- games and forms of life of ornamental practice, they often fail to grasp issues that are important to non-theorists. All the research projects demonstrated that the large majority of participants like and relate to ornament. They also showed, however, that Pakeha traditions of ornament are not only perceived to have suffered the same historical rupture as those in the West but also that the theoretical discreditation upon which they were based was used as a tool of oppression when applied to Maori art. Attempts to explain bicultural practices of appropriation or misappropriation without reference to the history of colonisation and present power configurations must fail. Whether or not a cultural image retains or loses its meaning depends on factors such as knowledge, understanding, relationality and co-operation. If culture is, however, treated as a resource for commodification – as it is by the culture industries – cultural elements are subjected to rules inherent in marketing and capitalist economies and their meaning is deliberately changed. Those who ought to be able to deal competently with these issues (designers and other cultural intermediaries) receive little in their education to prepare them for the ornamental strategies and tactics of their future clients. The academic environment is still largely determined by modernist agendas, and ornament as a topic and as practice – continues to be repressed. If a meaningful ornamental language and practice relevant to Aotearoa is to be shared, created, and sustained the divisions between theory and the life-world need to be interrogated; the distance through an assumed superiority of Pakeha to Maori history, culture and people relinquished; and a type of conversation must commence that takes seriously the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of this country. The partnership concept of this document facilitates conversation about differential positions and rules and can ‘take us out of our old selves by the power of strangeness, to aid us in becoming new beings’ (Rorty, 1980: 289).

Whole document restricted, see Access Instructions file below for details of how to access the print copy. / How meaning is articulated, suggested or repressed in transition processes is an inherently social phenomenon. The history of theorising about ornament bears evidence to this as much as do current practices of ornamentation. From myths, as narratives of meaning, to ‘mere ornament’ – the various signifying practices (and forms of life within which they take place) determine how meaning changes. People will perceive such change differently, depending on their perspectives and circumstances and, under certain conditions, change can be conceived of as loss. This thesis, in its theoretical part, explores issues pertaining to meaning and ornament in epistemology, philosophy, sociology, semiotics, aesthetics and psychoanalysis. In its practical part it seeks to make connections with signifying practices involving ornament in the life-worlds of users, the use of ornament in public buildings, bicultural relationships involving appropriation or misappropriation, and the education of designers in New Zealand. For that, data derived from four empirical research projects are presented and theorised. In the fourth part, theories and practices are brought together to shed light on struggles with ornamental meaning in the past and in the present. Theories, with their classification of myths, symbols and ornament, ignore wide ranges of signifying practices and privilege some form of significations at the expense of others. Because of their separation from the language- games and forms of life of ornamental practice, they often fail to grasp issues that are important to non-theorists. All the research projects demonstrated that the large majority of participants like and relate to ornament. They also showed, however, that Pakeha traditions of ornament are not only perceived to have suffered the same historical rupture as those in the West but also that the theoretical discreditation upon which they were based was used as a tool of oppression when applied to Maori art. Attempts to explain bicultural practices of appropriation or misappropriation without reference to the history of colonisation and present power configurations must fail. Whether or not a cultural image retains or loses its meaning depends on factors such as knowledge, understanding, relationality and co-operation. If culture is, however, treated as a resource for commodification – as it is by the culture industries – cultural elements are subjected to rules inherent in marketing and capitalist economies and their meaning is deliberately changed. Those who ought to be able to deal competently with these issues (designers and other cultural intermediaries) receive little in their education to prepare them for the ornamental strategies and tactics of their future clients. The academic environment is still largely determined by modernist agendas, and ornament as a topic and as practice – continues to be repressed. If a meaningful ornamental language and practice relevant to Aotearoa is to be shared, created, and sustained the divisions between theory and the life-world need to be interrogated; the distance through an assumed superiority of Pakeha to Maori history, culture and people relinquished; and a type of conversation must commence that takes seriously the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of this country. The partnership concept of this document facilitates conversation about differential positions and rules and can ‘take us out of our old selves by the power of strangeness, to aid us in becoming new beings’ (Rorty, 1980: 289).

Whole document restricted, see Access Instructions file below for details of how to access the print copy. / How meaning is articulated, suggested or repressed in transition processes is an inherently social phenomenon. The history of theorising about ornament bears evidence to this as much as do current practices of ornamentation. From myths, as narratives of meaning, to ‘mere ornament’ – the various signifying practices (and forms of life within which they take place) determine how meaning changes. People will perceive such change differently, depending on their perspectives and circumstances and, under certain conditions, change can be conceived of as loss. This thesis, in its theoretical part, explores issues pertaining to meaning and ornament in epistemology, philosophy, sociology, semiotics, aesthetics and psychoanalysis. In its practical part it seeks to make connections with signifying practices involving ornament in the life-worlds of users, the use of ornament in public buildings, bicultural relationships involving appropriation or misappropriation, and the education of designers in New Zealand. For that, data derived from four empirical research projects are presented and theorised. In the fourth part, theories and practices are brought together to shed light on struggles with ornamental meaning in the past and in the present. Theories, with their classification of myths, symbols and ornament, ignore wide ranges of signifying practices and privilege some form of significations at the expense of others. Because of their separation from the language- games and forms of life of ornamental practice, they often fail to grasp issues that are important to non-theorists. All the research projects demonstrated that the large majority of participants like and relate to ornament. They also showed, however, that Pakeha traditions of ornament are not only perceived to have suffered the same historical rupture as those in the West but also that the theoretical discreditation upon which they were based was used as a tool of oppression when applied to Maori art. Attempts to explain bicultural practices of appropriation or misappropriation without reference to the history of colonisation and present power configurations must fail. Whether or not a cultural image retains or loses its meaning depends on factors such as knowledge, understanding, relationality and co-operation. If culture is, however, treated as a resource for commodification – as it is by the culture industries – cultural elements are subjected to rules inherent in marketing and capitalist economies and their meaning is deliberately changed. Those who ought to be able to deal competently with these issues (designers and other cultural intermediaries) receive little in their education to prepare them for the ornamental strategies and tactics of their future clients. The academic environment is still largely determined by modernist agendas, and ornament as a topic and as practice – continues to be repressed. If a meaningful ornamental language and practice relevant to Aotearoa is to be shared, created, and sustained the divisions between theory and the life-world need to be interrogated; the distance through an assumed superiority of Pakeha to Maori history, culture and people relinquished; and a type of conversation must commence that takes seriously the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of this country. The partnership concept of this document facilitates conversation about differential positions and rules and can ‘take us out of our old selves by the power of strangeness, to aid us in becoming new beings’ (Rorty, 1980: 289).

Whole document restricted, see Access Instructions file below for details of how to access the print copy. / How meaning is articulated, suggested or repressed in transition processes is an inherently social phenomenon. The history of theorising about ornament bears evidence to this as much as do current practices of ornamentation. From myths, as narratives of meaning, to ‘mere ornament’ – the various signifying practices (and forms of life within which they take place) determine how meaning changes. People will perceive such change differently, depending on their perspectives and circumstances and, under certain conditions, change can be conceived of as loss. This thesis, in its theoretical part, explores issues pertaining to meaning and ornament in epistemology, philosophy, sociology, semiotics, aesthetics and psychoanalysis. In its practical part it seeks to make connections with signifying practices involving ornament in the life-worlds of users, the use of ornament in public buildings, bicultural relationships involving appropriation or misappropriation, and the education of designers in New Zealand. For that, data derived from four empirical research projects are presented and theorised. In the fourth part, theories and practices are brought together to shed light on struggles with ornamental meaning in the past and in the present. Theories, with their classification of myths, symbols and ornament, ignore wide ranges of signifying practices and privilege some form of significations at the expense of others. Because of their separation from the language- games and forms of life of ornamental practice, they often fail to grasp issues that are important to non-theorists. All the research projects demonstrated that the large majority of participants like and relate to ornament. They also showed, however, that Pakeha traditions of ornament are not only perceived to have suffered the same historical rupture as those in the West but also that the theoretical discreditation upon which they were based was used as a tool of oppression when applied to Maori art. Attempts to explain bicultural practices of appropriation or misappropriation without reference to the history of colonisation and present power configurations must fail. Whether or not a cultural image retains or loses its meaning depends on factors such as knowledge, understanding, relationality and co-operation. If culture is, however, treated as a resource for commodification – as it is by the culture industries – cultural elements are subjected to rules inherent in marketing and capitalist economies and their meaning is deliberately changed. Those who ought to be able to deal competently with these issues (designers and other cultural intermediaries) receive little in their education to prepare them for the ornamental strategies and tactics of their future clients. The academic environment is still largely determined by modernist agendas, and ornament as a topic and as practice – continues to be repressed. If a meaningful ornamental language and practice relevant to Aotearoa is to be shared, created, and sustained the divisions between theory and the life-world need to be interrogated; the distance through an assumed superiority of Pakeha to Maori history, culture and people relinquished; and a type of conversation must commence that takes seriously the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of this country. The partnership concept of this document facilitates conversation about differential positions and rules and can ‘take us out of our old selves by the power of strangeness, to aid us in becoming new beings’ (Rorty, 1980: 289).