Why complicate things?

There you are, knitting a bag with funfur. Why does it have to be complicated as follows:
1st row: (WS). With MC, K1. *yf. Sl1P. yb. K1. Rep from * to end of row.
2nd row: Purl.
3rd row: With A, K1. *K1. yf. Sl1P. yb. Rep from * to last 2 sts. K2.

Why all the Sl1Ps and things? Wouldn't plain ole' garter st do as well? The free pattern from Bernat uses the Disco yarn (yes that infamous giveaway yarn, which by the way, I never got despite giving 3 different addresses two separate times) in two colours, while I am substituting this yarn:

Since this is already bi-coloured, I think I am missing the point somehow.
Will the scientific mind please tell me if it's to make sure the two colours blend, or just a scam to make you think you're making something complex? I'm inclined towards the latter, but maybe it's the former, and I am strongly tempted to swatch in two colours of a unfunfur yarn just to see how it matters.

While on the subject, I've read the pattern through several times, but am yet to understand
#1. How does knitting this pattern lead you to a purse which is halfway usable (may be related to the fact that it is funfur) (or that you start the handles at 5"…what sort of purse is only 5" deep?)

Anyhow, I needed a picot-less pattern, and pretty mindless, so I am feeding this monster knitting this anyway.



  1. I believe the slip stitches are to give a more woven like texture. This may not matter in fun fur but in lots of yarns, garter stitch will stretch. The slip stitches make for a firmer fabric.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s