Is power loom a threat to hand loom?
In my 20 years of working with handlooms, one question keeps coming up: “Is the powerloom a threat to handloom?”
For the first few years after completing my design education, I believed this concern was valid. The reasoning seemed straightforward: designs and patterns traditionally created by hand could be replicated on a machine at a much faster pace. Power looms could produce these designs at a lower cost, flood the market with cheaper products, and certainly attract buyers. I initially thought that price was the primary factor driving consumer choices.
Yet, as I gained more experience and observed the sector closely, I began to question this assumption. If price alone was the decisive factor, then why did handloom products continue to have a loyal customer base? I realized that the relationship between handloom and power loom was far more complex than a simple competition over cost.
A vital moment in my understanding came during a conference in Chirala in 2018. A weaver from the North East visited the event and, upon seeing a pit fly-shuttle loom, asked if it was a power loom. This question made us to think and rethink. It challenged our understanding of what constitutes “power” in weaving. Power isn’t just about electricity or mechanization; it can also refer to any innovation or adjustment — what we colloquially call “jugaad” — that increases the pace of weaving. Such technological advancements invariably influence what can and cannot be woven.
Today, if we examine the handloom sector, we find that approximately 90% of active handlooms use mill-produced yarn supplied by the government or private sources. The reeds and wire healds used in these looms are typically made of metal or synthetic materials. Moreover, many weavers prefer to replicate the same designs repeatedly with minimal variation, often staying within their comfort zones. They look to external entities — designers, NGOs, or companies — to provide orders that align with their existing capabilities.
In effect, the “hand” in handloom has often been reduced to a mechanical process. Many weavers follow production parameters designed to optimize pace and efficiency, parameters that are heavily influenced by mill practices. This shift has far-reaching consequences for the entire ecosystem. It affects the choice of fibers, encouraging synthetic blends for greater yarn strength. It impacts pre-processing methods, tools, and accessories, focusing more on the final output rather than the raw materials or processes involved.
This approach, though practical in some ways, has significant drawbacks. On a subconscious level, weavers are aware of their limitations within these fixed parameters. They understand how difficult it is to compete with motorized or machine-driven production. This awareness creates a sense of vulnerability and fuels the perception that power looms pose an existential threat to their craft.
The real issue, however, may not be the power loom itself but the systemic changes in the handloom sector that have aligned it more closely with mill-driven practices. This alignment has distanced the craft from its roots, where handloom was not merely a production method but a deeply integrated part of local culture, materials, and traditions.
To truly address this perceived threat, we need to reimagine the role of handloom in a way that celebrates its unique strengths rather than trying to compete directly with power looms. This involves revisiting raw material choices, investing in natural fibers, embracing diverse designs, and supporting processes that honour the intrinsic value of handwork. It also means empowering weavers to innovate within their craft rather than confining them to a narrow, production-oriented framework.
Ultimately, the handloom’s strength lies in its ability to create products with a human touch, steeped in heritage and individuality. By focusing on these qualities, we can ensure that the hand loom sector not only survives but thrives, offering something that no machine can replicate.
Note:
A robot weaving by hand, AI-generated and edited. The image and text are good examples of different forms of creativity. While the image is easy to generate, the text is carefully thought out and written. However, the image often involves compromises, such as inaccuracies in how the loom is constructed, how the yarn is stored in the house in which format, and other details of the hut’s setting. Text, on the other hand, does not face these issues.
Ease to generate the image makes one first compromise and later surrender to unknown power.
