A Grand Unified Field Theory of Stash

Sarah

Physicists work with particles and waves, I work with yarn. My version of string theory is a little less complicated: if it's yarn (y), and it's pretty (p), I adopt the working hypothesis that the greater the value of p, the more likely I am to want to own y. So far, I have been able to repeatedly verify the robustness of this hypothesis over the course of many, many experiments in the field. Other researchers are conducting ongoing investigations, with similar results -- though determining the value of p seems to vary according to personal preference.

The gradual accretion of y (all with a high value of p) in my household has led to further avenues of scientific inquiry. When one obtains a certain quantity of y, other members of the household (dh) begin to enter into an oppositional relationship with y. This situation must be defused, or dh may put a stop to the inflow of y.

Some (dh) have put forth the hypothesis that after a certain point, the accumulation of y is no longer necessary. They argue that when one has accumulated sufficient y to last a lifetime or two, purchases of y should come to a halt, or at least slow down considerably. I believe my colleagues will agree with me that this hypothesis is utterly laughable, and should never be tested on human subjects.

Still, the problem remains -- how to encourage y and dh to cohabitate peacefully? After rigorous testing, it seems that the answer is, paradoxically, not to attempt to keep all y out of the view of dh -- an impossible task -- but to instead increase the visibility of y. By placing large quantities of y in a set of attractive displays throughout the household, the knitter can desensitize dh to the presence of y. My research has discovered an inverse relationship between the quantity of y on display and the objections from dh. (Above, you can see an example from the field study: a basket of y in shades of blue and green, on display in a living room. No objections were noted from dh.)

This may represent a great step forward toward a grand unified field theory of stash -- but further experimentation must be conducted to verify these early results.

Below: early experimentation using a sample of y and a vase of peacock feathers

Comments

[Theresa]

I would be happy to help conduct ongoing experiments. My boyfriend once told me he thought I should buy as much yarn as I wanted. Then he saw the yarn behind the DVD player. It was quite a shock, I tell you, quite a shock. I now plan to proceed with desensitization as you suggest.

[Laura]

Sarah - I LOVE the yarn that you spun. I have never-ever thought about spinning but this is enough to make me want to start!

[Arlette]

You might just want to break down and do a wall in yarn. That way you can pass it off as themed decor. I mean, it just wouldn't look right to have only three quarters of a wall covered in yarn, right? Best go stock up so you can finish the look.

[Jackie: age 12]

That yarn is sooooo cool!!! I am not a knitter even though some of my friends are as well as my mom and even being a non-knitter I love that yarn. I never ever thought about spinning but that yarn is definitively enough to convince me to start.

[Stephanie]

You have combined my love of knitting as well as my interest in scientific ventures better than I could have!

[Karen B.]

So very clever and well-written, Sarah! I love this post, with its scientific tongue firmly planted in cheek.

[Monica]

Beautiful handspun!

[Donna]

I showed your post to my husband who replied "You can leave as much y out as you like, with positive or negative values of p, it doesn't change the fact that your stash has a discernible field of gravity, g."

;)

[Frances]

Ok, so I, too, suffer with the same 'dh' issues, and the matter is compounded because I have beautiful specimens of 'y' that if used to actually knit something, I would have to sell, or only wear once or twice a year, because I live in Florida! I've collected 'y' from many countries, and continue to acquire it, much to 'dh's chagrin, because I don't knit nearly as much as I used to. Perhaps reading these blogs and hearing about your wonderful knitting groups might provide the incentive I need to get back to it again. Thanks for a great, thought-provoking, story!

[The Purloined Letter]

Thanks for allowing me to post this on Yarnival!

[Mary]

Stash accretion -- I love it!

[Karen Shanley]

Gorgeous photos! And hysterical post! Thanks for the giggles.

[Spinneret]

Absolutely Brilliant! Winner of the Knowball (wool? silk? acrylic?) yarn prize. Well done.

[Kirsten]

I love it!! Thanks! I must test your hypothesis on my own DH? Have you had any adverse reactions to your testing?

[Grace]

Too funny!

I subscribe to the landscape theory of stash-- the values of both y and p are wholly dependent on the observer. While dh observes large y of small p, I see exactly the opposite.

[Rhonda the Stitchingnut]

Oh it's great that I'm not alone. Altho, it's best to keep the y out of sight from my DH. When y is out in plain sight he has made the statement, "Can't you put that away somewhere? I feel like you're trying to take over the house!" Such a pity that he just doesn't get it. Because I have ALREADY taken over the house!

[Margaret]

The testing of this hypothesis could be complicated by certain random variables such as Cat (c), and Kitten (k).

[DeeAnn]

I love it :) and wish you the best with the field research!