I am neither a maker of mola or a stained glass craftsman. Still, I can’t help but admire both arts and in my appreciation and passion notice similarities. Of course there are the tangible differences, glass versus fiber and the rigid outer form of stained glass contrasting the supple functionality of the mola.
A rather brief list of opposing characteristics given the abundant similarities. The mola, due to the concentric nature of its design (a result of cutting down through layers of fabric to reveal the desired shape all the while tucking under and sewing border upon border) is strongly linear. This is true for stained glass due to the nature of the art. The piecing together of carefully cut, brilliantly colored glass pieces married together by a graceful orchestration of soldiered metals.
Further, the mola is a meticulous art requiring imagination, precision and time, time, time. I believe this is also a requirement of the stained glass panel and artist. In each art cutting and connecting are key. The mola adorns the body and tells a story in its design. Stained glass has story telling ancestry (when was the last time you entered a protestant church without allegorical glass panels) and although, as far as I know, not created to adorn the body, stained glass most commonly embellishes sacred human spaces such as the home.
