Roots In Tradition: Karelian Tradition as a Creative Resource for Finnish Craft Designers

References

• Alexander, J. (2010). ‘‘Iconic consciousness: The material feeling of meaning’. Thesis Eleven, 103(1), 10–25.10.1177/0725513610381369
   Google Scholar
• Aparo, E., Soares, L. and Santos-Rodrigues, H. (2013). ‘Designing innovation with craft-evolution to develop sustainability’. In Ferreira, Telma, et al. (eds), Green Design, Materials and Manufacturing Processes. London, UK: Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 45–50.10.1201/b15002
   Google Scholar
• Bronner, S. J. (2011). Explaining Traditions: Folk Behavior in Modern Culture. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, C. (2005). ‘The craft consumer. Culture, craft and consumption in a postmodern society’. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(1), 23–42.10.1177/1469540505049843
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design 3rd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Drout, M. C. (2006). ‘A meme-based approach to oral traditional theory’. Oral Tradition, 21(2), 269–294.
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, C. M. and Stacey, M. K. (2000). ‘Sources of inspiration: A language of design’. Design Studies, 21(5), 523–538.10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00022-3
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, C. M. and Stacey, M. K. (2003). ‘Sources of inspiration in industrial practice: The case of knitwear design’. Journal of Design Research, 3(1), 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Fingerroos, O. (2008). ‘Karelia: A place of memories and utopias’. Oral Tradition, 23(2), 235–254.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. The sage qualitative research kit. Flick, U. (ed), Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Groth, C., Mäkelä, M. and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2013). ‘Making sense. What can we learn from experts of tactile knowledge?’ FORMakademisk, MAKING – Materiality and Knowledge, 6(2), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Halskov, K. (2010). ‘Kinds of inspiration in interaction design’. Digital Creativity, 21(3), 186–196.10.1080/14626268.2010.502236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heimdal, E. (2010). ‘Physical tools for creativity with textile materials ’. DESIRE ‘10 Proceedings of the 1st DESIRE Network Conference on Creativity and Innovation in Design. Desire Network Lancaster, UK, pp. 34–43. Available at: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1854979 [accessed 24 March 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Hsieh, H. F. and Shannon, S. E. (2005). ‘Three approaches to qualitative content analysis’. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.10.1177/1049732305276687
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of the Environment. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203466025
   Google Scholar
• Komulainen, K. (2003). ‘Constructions of nation, family and gender. collective narratives of war by evacuated Karelians’. Ethnicities, 3(1), 59–83.10.1177/1468796803003001787
   Google Scholar
• Kosonen, K. and Mäkelä, M. (2012). ‘Designing platform for exploring and reflecting on creative process’. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 45, 227–238.10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.559
   Google Scholar
• Leblebici-Başar, D. and Altarriba, J. (2013). ‘The role of imagery and emotion in the translation of concepts into product form’. The Design Journal, 16(3), 295–314.10.2752/175630613X13660502571787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, R. T. (2007). ‘Transforming Taiwan aboriginal cultural features into modern product design: A case study of a cross-cultural product design model’. International Journal of Design, 1(2), 45–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucie-Smith, E. (1981). The Story of Craft. The Craftsman’s Role in Society. Oxford: Phaidon.
   Google Scholar
• Mäkelä, M. (2007). ‘Knowing through making: The role of the artefact in practice-led research’. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 20(3), 157–163.
   Google Scholar
• Mäkelä, M. and Latva-Somppi, R. (2011). ‘Crafting narratives: Using historical context as a reflective tool’. Craft Research, 2, 37–60.10.1386/crre.2.37_1
   Google Scholar
• Malafouris, L. (2008). ‘At the Potter’s Wheel’. In Knappett, C. and Malafouris, L. (eds), Material Agency. Towards a Non-Anthropocentic Approach. Toronto and Cambridge: Springer, pp. 19–36.
   Google Scholar
• Metcalf, B. (1997). ‘Craft and art, culture and biology’. In Dormer, P. (ed), The Culture of Craft. Manchester, NH: Manchester University Press, pp. 67–82.
   Google Scholar
• Meskell, Lynn (2005). ‘Materiality: An introduction’. In Miller, D. (ed), Materiality. Durham and London: Duke University Press, pp. 1–50.10.1215/9780822386711
   Google Scholar
• Moalosi, R., Popovic, V. and Hickling-Hudson, A. (2010). ‘Culture-orientated product design’. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(2), 175–190.10.1007/s10798-008-9069-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasir, N. S. and Cooks, J. (2009). ‘Becoming a hurdler: How learning settings afford identities’. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 40(1), 41–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niedderer, K. and Reilly, L. (2010). ‘Research practice in art and design: Experiential knowledge and organized inquiry’. Journal of Research Practice, 6(2), Article E2. Available at: http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/247 [accessed 2 April 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Nimkulrat, N. (2010). ‘Material inspiration: From practice-led research to craft art education’. Craft Research, 1(1), 63–84.10.1386/crre.1.63_1
   Google Scholar
• Petre, M., Sharp, H. and Johnson, J. (2006). ‘Complexity through combination: An account of knitwear design’. Design Studies, 27(2), 183–222.10.1016/j.destud.2005.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pöllänen, S. (2009). ‘Contextualizing craft: Pedagogical models for craft education’. The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 28(3), 249–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reubens, R. (2010). ‘Bamboo canopy: Creating new reference-points for the craft of the Kotwalia community in India through sustainability’. Craft Research, 1(1), 11–38.10.1386/crre.1.11_1
   Google Scholar
• Risatti, H. (2007). A Theory of Craft: Functional and Aesthetic Expression. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rolfe, G. and Gardner, L. (2006). ‘‘Do not ask who I am…’: Confession, emancipation and (self)-management through reflection’. Journal of Nursing Management, 14, 593–600.10.1111/jnm.2006.14.issue-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meskell, Lynn (2005). ‘A materialist approach to materiality’. In Miller, D. (ed), Materiality. Durham and London: Duke University Press, pp. 72–87.10.1215/9780822386711
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner – How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J. (2013). ‘Constructing familiarity in Finnish-Russian Karelia: Shifting uses of history and the re-interpretation of regions’. European Planning Studies, 21(1), 75–92.10.1080/09654313.2012.716240
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoham, H. (2011). ‘Rethinking tradition: From ontological reality to assigned temporal meaning’. European Journal of Sociology, 52(02), 313–340.10.1017/S0003975611000129
   Google Scholar
• Tschimmel, K. (2010). ‘Design as a Perception-in-Action Process’. In Taura, T. and Nagai, Y. (eds), Design Creativity. London: Springer Verlag, pp. 223–230.
   Google Scholar
• Tung, F. W. (2012). ‘Weaving with rush: Exploring craft-design collaborations in revitalizing a local craft ’. International Journal of Design, 6(3), 71–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentine, L. (2011). ‘Craft as a form of mindful inquiry’. The Design Journal, 14(3), 283–306.10.2752/175630611X13046972590806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, M. and Shove, E. (2008). ‘Product, competence, project and practice. DIY and the dynamics of craft consumption’. Journal of Consumer Culture, 8, 69–89.10.1177/1469540507085726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research. Design and Methods, 4th edn. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zafarmand, S. J., Sugiyama, K. and Watanabe, M. (2003). ‘Aesthetic and sustainability: The aesthetic attributes promoting product sustainability’. The Journal of Sustainable Product Design, 3(3-4), 173–186.10.1007/s10970-005-6157-0
   Google Scholar