Those are interesting points about the things we enjoy because we don’t *have* to do them (and what differentiates them from the things we still enjoy even though we have to do them). I think something else that’s going on, at least in Anne and the other L.M. Montgomery books, is that they really valorize a particular kind of intellectually dreamy yet physically adventurous, almost tomboy-ish girl, and that type of girl (as portrayed) is unlikely to enjoy a quiet, non-narrative activity like sewing. I find that in many novels about girls there is this idea that the main character is interesting because she’s different from other girls – and sewing/knitting is often the shorthand indicator for boring feminine normalcy. So often the “dull” girls are content sitting still and sewing, whereas you can tell the “interesting” girls because they like to read and to be outside, roaming over the prairie/dale/moor (Callie Woodlawn, Scout Finch, and Jane Eyre also leap to mind). Which is interesting and problematic, in terms of discounting the traditionally feminine & claiming that girls are only interesting if they’re more like traditional boys. Not that I don’t find this type of female character totally charming. Anyway, thought-provoking post; thanks!

I like your ruminations re: the joy we get out of crafting vs. the slog it would be if it were necessary. It illuminates for me one of the possible reasons my grandmother wishes I wouldn’t knit/sew so much!