This book caught my attention after taking a class on sexuality and gender in the classical world in which we learned how women used weaving as an agency for communication. This book gave an interesting overview for war-era weavings and textiles. However, I agree with another LibraryThing reviewer, LeesyLou that "The authors' definition of "war imagery in women's textiles" also seems to encompass any textile made during war time with the assumption that it was made by a woman and frequently whether or not there is anything specific to its imagery denoting war time, so long as the production period was war." ( )

I really enjoyed this book. I am just a recreational quilter, so I don`t know all the details about textiles, but I liked to read about the different countries. More pictures would be nice.
I was not able to read the whole book but I read some chapter that I was very interested in. For example the molas in Panama or the cloth dolls from the middle east. The epilogue was very good and the Glossary helpful. ( )

I was immediately drawn to this book when I saw the title: War Imagery in Women's Textiles. I love fabric of any type, I am an avid seamstress and pretty good needle crafter. There are some very good pictures of textiles and pieced/needled pieces; there are good short histories and biographies of seamstresses behind these pieces. I do wish there were a way to have a photo for each history/biography given. I used google to find photos so I could better understand what was being described for some of descriptions. This book would be better if published as a coffee table book.... I do not think someone without an initial interest would care much for this book as it really should be more visual. The writing is excellent and what photographs there are are very good. If you already have an interest in this topic I highly recommend this book. ( )

I was hoping for more of an analysis of women's textiles, something along the lines of Rozsika Parker's The Subversive Stitch or Carola Hicks' book on the Bayeux Tapestry. In addition to the problems the reviewer immediately below me notes, however, this book is more like a series of lists in paragraph form. Further, I was hoping to find information on the Overlord Tapestry (a modern kind of Bayeux Tapestry about England in WW2). The book does little more than mention it, and the plate chosen for it makes it impossible to tell it's a piece of fiber art rather than paint. Disappointing. ( )

As a fiber arts enthusiast with a love of history, I was very much looking forward to this book. However, by the time I reached page 14, where the claim is made that, "…the wearing of linen garments historically has been restricted to the wealthy or to use on special occasions," I became wary, for that is simply historically untrue; linen has been the fabric of both pharaohs and peasants from the time it was first domesticated.
The authors' definition of "war imagery in women's textiles" also seems to encompass any textile made during war time with the assumption that it was made by a woman and frequently whether or not there is anything specific to its imagery denoting war time, so long as the production period was war. They go so far as to include a simple patchwork kimono drawing on a postcard among their color plates.
The statement is made on page 133 that Indian fabric production was done by men after the thread preparation stage (as if all of the Indian subcontinent is a uniform culture, but then go on to discuss it after dismissing women as irrelevant to the anything related to imagery.
I'm also quite bothered by the use, in 2014, of the slur, "Hmong" to denote the people who know themselves as the "Miao."
In any case, the simple mistake that anyone with any background in historic textiles wouldn't likely make, to dismiss linen as the fabric of the masses in many historic eras, makes me uneasy accepting any other claims in this volume as reliable. ( )