Progress?

(In which I have another rant about Modern Life.)

I need to replace my phone. It has been glitching from time to time and apparently this is because, at all of three-and-a-bit years old, it cannot handle the latest technology used in various updates. I'm also going to have to do something about my Windows 10 laptop this year, although at least I've had that for eight years.

Not in need of an upgrade any time soon

As someone who makes most of her own clothes on a 92-year-old sewing machine which is still going strong and for which I can get spares, I am unimpressed, but not surprised, by all this. We live in a world where built-in obsolescence is king, and hang the consequences. I do appreciate that I am not comparing like for like - my sewing machine is purely mechanical and therefore far less complex than something which relies on software. But I still think that lessons could be learned from the way Singer attempted to keep older machines up to date, rather than just encourage/expect their owners to upgrade to a newer model.

The starting point seems to have been the idea that a Singer machine was an investment which was expected to last a long time, and to be passed down through generations (as happened with my mum's machine, which is now mine). So when electric machines became the norm, Singer devised a motor and light which could be attached to a hand crank or treadle model, using fixings which were already part of the machine.

The sewing machine as heirloom . . .

. . . and how to bring it up to date

Similarly, various attachments were designed which allowed a straight stitch machine to do fancier sewing by moving the fabric from side to side.

Attachments for my Singer machines

I already have a buttonhole attachment from, I think, the 1950s, but recently acquired an older version. It's in a cardboard box rather than a 'modern' plastic case, and uses wingnuts rather than plastic dials to make adjustments to width etc, but underneath the cosmetic improvements it's the same.

My older buttonholer

The attachments were made with the same longevity in mind as the machines, with anti-corrosion paper pasted into the box.

It clearly worked, as the buttonholer is rust-free

The 'zigzagger' is mechanically similar to the buttonholer, in terms of the way it moves the fabric. It comes with four different cams, which produce the various style of zigzag illustrated on the box lid.

Wonderful artwork

The zigzagger, with one of the cams inserted

The stitch design is on the cam

Singer also produced further sets of cams for the zigzagger and yes, I am keeping an eye out for them!

The final attachment which I have is the hemstitcher. It is by all accounts quite tricky to use.

Unlike the other two, it doesn't have a casing

It's also the only one of the three which still has its instruction leaflet, but all of these are available online.

The hemstitcher could also be used to produce a picot edging.

From the instructions

My mum can remember picot edging being offered as a service by the local Singer shop, for anyone who didn't want to try it themselves. The effect looked like this.

Picot edging on a frill

Seen from a modern economic perspective, Singer's determination to keep older machines usable rather than sell new ones seems bizarre. Presumably it came from a strong belief in the quality of their original product. Of course, ultimately none of this did Singer any good. They were slow to adapt to the changing market, and eventually folded. (The Singer of today is a different company from the original.) But I'm glad to have at least one piece of equipment in my life which I can expect to last for years to come.