Why is it that the mainstream media can’t resist taking shots at Granny? Every time crocheting gets labeled cool or trendy, someone somewhere, who I am sure thinks that he or she is being very clever and original, says, “This is not your grandmother’s crochet!” Like that’s a good thing. One of the things I like about crochet is that my mother did it, and my grandmother probably did, too. I personally don’t want to disengage from Granny but to take her work and move forward from it.
And what do we as crocheters have named in Granny’s name? The granny square. The poor granny square gets mocked from time to time, particularly in reference to some of those boxy, clunky, garment styles from the 1970s.
Granny squares don’t need to be changed, but I think they need a little PR. Some clever designers have taken to referring to any sort of repeatable unit, including granny squares, as “motifs.” This is a great idea—let the art of the pattern speak for itself without any knee-jerk negative connotations drawn from the name. I probably wouldn’t look twice at a pattern called Granny Square Poncho but I would be intrigued by a Square Motif Wrap.
So I propose a new nomenclature … instead of being a granny square, a particular motif could be called, I don’t know … Jenny or Tiffany … or Kate. Jenny could be hip and trendy, whereas Granny might be a little old fashioned. Tiffany could be lightweight and drapey, whereas Granny might be a little stiff in the joints. Kate could be sunny and warm without being a mélange of too-bright colors like Granny was in her hippie days. It’s the same great square, but a new name that doesn’t carry the negative connotations of the past.