redefining rules

.....i love old needlework books. the smell  and color of the old paper. the great detailed photos and the encyclopedia style format. and i often find humor in the strict rules of how to and even more so in the subtle association to right and wrong. i just received  Art in Needlework by Lewis F. Day.  on page 145 there is a comment to the effect that embroidery is perfect woman's work but tailoring and preparation for applique (which is described with some elaborate methodology) .."is not the thing a woman can do best". ha!
anyway, many of the methods described are tedious and exact and it is always useful to try executing these steps as is just to see how things were done.  and then again....sometimes it is useful not to. i think learning  must  be free from the shackles of right and wrong. some rules have no real purpose. they are actually recording an opinion or choice or focus and not anything really necessary to the process itself.
.....i mean... why are we matching the thread to the fabric? will it hold together any better?  no. matching must be more of an aesthetic judgement rather than a functional necessity. what if  i like the seams and the stitches? what if it is important to glorify them? what if it is just ( in my opinion) a great design element?
.....to take things a bit further....if the seams can show, how about basting that doesn't? the tiny stitch on the front is done in matching thread. long float on the back. here matching thread has a reason. not showing. because why the hell should i take it out then? extra flattening and stabilization and less work.

also recorded as what if  #148 (related to # 31)