Embroidery Design Work of Ella Margold-Weltmann

Illustration: Ella Margold-Weltmann. Embroidery design, 1910.

Ella Margold-Weltmann was principally a textile designer. She was the wife of Emanuel Josef Margold who although categorised as an architect, also produced work in textiles. The Textile Blog has covered a number of the aspects of Margold's work in the past (Graphic Work by Emanuel Josef Margold, Wallpaper Design by Emanuel Josef Margold, Embroidery Design by Emanuel Josef Margold), but has not really featured the work and contribution of his wife and effective creative partner before. Interestingly the couple worked together on a number of textile based projects and it is often difficult to tell any real differences in their work as they both seemed relatively closely aligned, at least creatively.

Margold-Weltmann produced a significant amount of work in embroidery, much in the style of the Wiener Werkstatte in which her husband was a member. As the couple often worked together it is not always easy to differentiate all of the individual pattern pieces that were produced. However, as the styles were so similar it is perhaps appropriate to mix the two together, so that at least one of the embroidery designs reproduced in this article is by Emanuel Josef Margold.

Illustration: Ella Margold-Weltmann. Embnroidery design, 1910.

The designs were originally produced in 1910 and follow an embroidery motif format whereby the pattern work is contained within an often circular framework, rather than a border or all-over pattern. Some of these motifs would have been quite small in nature and part of a larger composition, whilst others would probably have filled a fair-sized cushion. Interestingly they all take on the appearance of a silhouette or cut-out work and most use a format of negative/positive, black/white, although this could well have changed somewhat depending upon the details or requirements of each textile piece. Interestingly, they can also be seen as being closely aligned with jewellery work giving the appearance of large decorative brooches. It is known that Margold himself produced a number of jewellery pieces and his wife may well have done the same.

 Illustration: Emanuel Josef Margold. Embroidery design, 1910.

Although the couple worked together on a number of textile and non-textile design projects, Margold-Weltmann also worked on her own initiative, particularly when her husband was fighting in the First World War and later when he was wounded. She had the opportunity to produce work on a wholly individual basis although interestingly it differed little from her husbands. This probably says much more about their sympatico relationship than it does about Margold-Weltmann's struggle to procure an identity separate from that of her husband. These creative relationships, particularly those within marriage were not always as simplistically cut and dried as we would sometimes wish them to be and although we are perhaps more prone to see gender discrimination and the domination of the male role within creative partnerships, specifically those made in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, this is not always necessarily true and a number of these partnerships flourished with both partners adding to the creative whole.

Illustration: Ella Margold-Weltmann. Embroidery design, 1910.

As stated earlier, it is always interesting when coming across marriage partnerships, as it is often difficult to identify who contributed creatively in particular projects. Often these partnerships were so intrinsically and fundamentally creatively entwined that in many cases even though work was officially designated as belonging to one partner or the other, it did not rule out any form of creative input by the other partner. This could well have been the case between the Margold's, particularly as their work was so closely aligned with each other's styles, so much so that it appeared often to be the same style, hence the difficulty disentangling the individual. 

 Illustration: Ella Margold-Weltmann. Embroidery design, 1910.

Perhaps ultimately, it is not that important who is identified as being the major contributor to each individual design. What is important is the fact that the contribution made, either singly or as a partnership, has added significantly to the creative world of the decorative arts. These five embroidery designs, whether produced by Ella Margold, Emanuel Margold or a combination of both, are beautifully poised pieces of work. They are both significant examples of the specific Wiener Werkstatte style as well as of that of the larger Central European Jugendstil. They are also good examples of early twentieth century embroidery work and the movement away from the traditions and regulations that dominated the discipline, to one that allowed at least an element of creativity and individuality. However, theses designs are also individually part of the Margold experience, a creative partnership that produced a style that identified itself intrinsically with a successful creative team working across a number of disciplines in the early part of the twentieth century and this personal aspect of the work should not be easily dismissed or treated lightly.

Further reading links:

Franz Metzner and the Structure of Carpet Design

Illustration: Franz Metzner. Carpet design, c1906.

The German sculptor Franz Metzner was a relatively important artist of his time and was particularly influential during the period that incorporated the Jugendstil. His sculpture which was very often incorporated within an architectural setting, both inside and out, tended towards a form of semi-abstraction, with figures often appearing to be rooted within the framework of a building.

Although Metzner was almost exclusively seen as a fine art sculptor, he did produce a certain amount of design work, particularly in carpet design. It is always an interesting diversion in the career of fine artists, to see work that was not necessarily focused on the absolute and the unrepeated. Although, to some extent Metzner could be classed as working at least within some of the confines of architecture, a design discipline, particularly due to his close association between sculpture, ornamentation and architectural detail, he would still be better categorised as a fine artist.

The three carpet designs shown in this article were produced by Metzner in the first decade of the twentieth century. Interestingly, they all show a severe limitation in any real form of expansive decoration or pattern work. Although in Germany there was certainly an element within the design structure of the period towards the limiting and even containment of the more expansive and stylised areas of Art Nouveau, some would even say affectation, even in Germany this was often treated with a certain amount of creative licence.

Illustration: Franz Metzner. Carpet design, c1906.

Metzner seems to have foreshadowed at least elements of carpet and rug decoration that were to be seen a decade or so later in the Art Deco period. This form of extreme geometry that works so well on the flat surface of a rug or carpet, particularly when seen within some of the starker Modernist interiors of the early twentieth century, came to dominate large sections of the textile market which included woven and printed textiles, carpet and rug, tapestry and even embroidery.

The limited and all-over pattern work produced by Metzner, paid little attention to the traditions of carpet and rug design. Whilst he was still capable of using such conventions as borders, as well as using the rectangular or square format, he made those conventions work for him. The practical vertical and horizontal nature of a carpet was used by Metzner to produce his pattern work. He did not insist on using the dimensions of the carpet in order to compose a freestyle composition that paid little attention to the formula of the discipline. Instead, he made the decorative pattern work a feature of the weaving process by creating a vertical and horizontal network that strictly adhered to the technical aspects of the carpet, as you often find in woven materials, but less so in carpet and rug design.

By placing more emphasis on the structure of the underlying practical aspects of the carpet, in many ways Metzner cleverly reflected what were often seen, and still are, as the limiting aspects of textile design. It is often thought that the technical rules of a discipline hinder creativity, but in many respects those same practical rules of limitation can also lead to levels of creativity that are more profound to the discipline than if they were intentionally ignored.

Illustration: Franz Metzner. Carpet design, 1910.

By understanding perhaps that a carpet or rug was basically a structured framework rather than a blank canvas in which to impose a composition, Metzner produced a set of decorative carpet designs that could be seen as strikingly original, whilst at the same time being also grounded within the perceived limitations of the discipline. By flowing with the discipline, rather than against it, by expressing the underlying vocabulary of the structure of its construction through the visual language of pattern and decoration, rather than trying to fight against its natural rules and limitations, we can achieve design work that is far from limited in its scope and direction. Whatever textile discipline we choose to work in and from whatever direction we have arrived at that discipline, using the natural boundaries of the craft as a theme, guide, or starting point of inspiration can often lead to stronger, more centred and certainly more harmonious finished pieces than if we were to constantly struggle to impose a foreign concept to a discipline purely for the sake of it.

This is not to say that parameters should never be challenged, that has been the lifeblood of design, decoration and craft. It also does not necessarily mean that 'tradition' is the best formula in which to work. However, working within a discipline, understanding its vocabulary, both practical and ephemeral, allows an individual to take that discipline for a long creative walk whilst still within the framework of its natural traditions.

Further reading links: