Natural vs. Embellishment

[William Hutchinson]

I know that if we had similar penchant for objects that we turn, all of us would make the same things. However, being a turning neophyte, the notion of ‘natural’ is a slippery concept to grasp. The Krenov/Nakashima perception of harmonic simplicity to exploit the natural figure and grain patterns of timber is an influence that some use to determine the direction of their work. Traditional and classic forms are often the standards that gauge one’s work acceptability. These are a matter of taste and ones skill to craft a piece from concept to actuality with very little enhancement of the surface and are considered ‘natural’.

It seems a line-in-the-sand is drawn with embellishments of turned woodwork. Coloration, carving, texturing and piercing are lumped into another, not natural, category. I’m not sure where the grossest chunk of knurly tree part turned into a see through blob neatly fits into any category. Maybe the line is one of utility vs. artistic that forms the benchmark of ones judgments of various pieces.

My way of viewing ‘natural’ is anything done to a tree is a detraction from the original state and therefore an embellishment. Sectioning, milling, shaping and finishing are all a craftspersons handy work to use the medium. Are not the selection of particular tree sections or abnormalities to be showcased in the final piece an embellishment? If two turnings are identical in all aspects, except one’s a exotic burl and one of red oak, which will have the most appeal? I'm just curious to others thoughts on this subject.

[John Keeton]

William, first let me say you have a beautiful way with words!! Very nicely written and provocative.

In flatwork, one strives for clear, straight grained wood for stability and strength, using burls sparingly for accent, etc. One of my favorite combinations is walnut and curly maple, but in doing that, I prefer the walnut to be rather plain and provide a warm, darker backdrop for the curly maple. But, in furniture, there is a lot going on with design and function.

Much of what we do as woodturners has similar form. And, over time, most woods mellow into a similar tone/color. For that reason, I see figure as being the one thing that remains in a piece of wood. If one can create a turning that uses good form, and has an appropriate amount of embellishment (very subjective!) and at the same time use a beautiful piece of burl as the canvas, then the beauty of that piece should survive the ravages of time.

That said, some work demands raw wood, as it comes from the tree. The recent work posted by Mark Cothren and Curt Fuller are prime examples of that. Doing anything else to those pieces would be a distraction. In fact, the plain look of the ash in Mark's pieces is what makes them so dramatic, and that quality should survive time. Some of the gnarly stuff Curt has been using seems to have been created by God for that very purpose!

So much of this is subjective. I commented on another forum, that this last little piece I did is one of the very few that Ms. Keeton cares for, and it is not one that I put a lot of thought or effort in to doing. It was done more for the tutorial, and to showcase the rosewood. So, one never really knows what others find appealing.

It will be interesting to see what comments you receive on this thread.

[George Guadiane]

Are not the selection of particular tree sections or abnormalities to be showcased in the final piece an embellishment? If two turnings are identical in all aspects, except one’s a exotic burl and one of red oak, which will have the most appeal? I'm just curious to others thoughts on this subject.

As to the first question, on a technicality; any change in any material made through any means COLD be considered embellishment... But I think it's a reach. There certainly is a skill to looking at a volume of material (a wood lot, then a tree in this case). Selecting a tree or a turning blank, for that matter from a larger lot, then, in the case of the tree, selecting the specific piece(s) of wood to turn takes vision, knowledge and skill (education)...
Education, in this context is just experience. Finding the good stuff starts as chance and evolves with the artist (IMO).

Exotic burl or red oak??? Depends on who the turner is. If Andy DiPietro turns them both, it might well be a tossup.
In the hands of a true craftsman, either is going to attract attention, even assuming the exact same form and finish, each for different reasons.
In the hands of a less capable artisan, the wood may carry the piece, and even in that circumstance, some are going to prefer the red oak.
In making the choice, could the red oak be crotch material or from a particularly curly part of the tree? The person offering their opinion, do they have a favorite color or??? (there are hundreds of questions about personal preference that could come into play here)
I don't hold myself up as a teacher or as having a particular handle on the subject, but I DO think of myself as a pretty ardent student.
What I find, as I go along, is that I keep having more observations and questions like yours that seem to lead to more questions and observations...

I am fortunate to have learned how to collect the most commonly desirable parts of a tree for turning, and, as a result, I have a lot of way above average turning stock. A while ago, having gotten comfortable with my ability to get a form I like, I tried turning some dead plain birch, to get opinions about whether or not I had "it." What I found, for myself and from others, is that a "common" piece of wood, well worked has its own allure.

[Sean Hughto]

At base, I think this is a false dichotomy. Wood is a medium just like marble or oil paint. Good craftsman and artists learn to use their medium to express themselves. Some makers push the medium to the forefront of the piece (e.g., minimilist or "natural" - letting the medium be the medium) and others treat the medium as only a starting point (e.g., a canvas for embellishment). They are just choices in the creative process, and as there are no a priori rules about what technique or approach will yield a successful (i.e., "good") piece in the hands of a given artist, looking for such rules is largely a waste of time. We can note what has worked for others. We can note what rarely works. But until you're standing in front of a specific piece, you really can't know what might just work to produce something good. It's piece and artist specific.

[Allen Neighbors]

I'm just a common man. It probably shows that I've never had any training or education in art. I just happen to love turning wood. I believe that the God of Creation made the tree, and it grew as He planned, because He knew that I was going to be the one to show His handiwork in the grain. I don't apologize for mentioning God in this post, I'm just saying what I believe. You may believe differently, and that's up to you. But when I tried to read and comprehend what William, John, George, and Sean have posted, my common, practical mind can't make heads or tails out of most of it. I just turn what I want to, out of any particular piece of wood, and take pointers from all of you as I get them, to try to make something that is more pleasing to me; and if Her Majesty likes it, she gets it. If she doesn't care for it, and if I can sell it, to make more money for more tools... that's a plus for me. :) If you all like what you see, that's another plus, too. :D I really enjoy this forum, and you guys are all special to me, but sometimes you talk way over my little head. :D

[Sean Hughto]

I just turn what I want to, out of any particular piece of wood, and take pointers from all of you as I get them, to try to make something that is more pleasing to me; and if Her Majesty likes it, she gets it.

Allen, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. You've just said it better.

[Tom Sherman]

Well said Allen, my wife accuses me all the time of over analyzing things. Turning is one area where this doesn't happen, I simply enjoy and am amazed by the beauty of the wood I'm working with. My turning time is limited and for me to try to understand all the why's limits it even further. I truly love the process of turning wood, and I normally enjoy the end result. If someone besides me likes it that's a plus.

[Reed Gray]

Reminds me of watching Mike Mahoney turning a walnut platter when he was here for the AAW Symposium in Portland. Nice piece, good form, and as he was turning the inside, he put in a bead. As he was explaining how the bead would attract the eye and cause it to follow the line of the bowl, I was thinking, "nice form and shape, then you ruined it by putting a speed bump in it." Some like embellishments, I prefer things plain and simple. Just a matter of taste. The same old debate about what is art, and what is craft.

robo hippy

[Ken Fitzgerald]

and...IMHO........

most of this really boils down to personal opinion, personal taste and opportunity.

What is art? What is craft? What is embellishment? These matters can be decided by both the artist/craftsman and the beholder....the person observing them......and they don't have to agree.

Some of this, however, is opportunity. Whether it's finding the gnarly wood Curt uses.....or the plain ash Mark used......or you are in the middle of turning a piece and the wood decides to crack and you fill the crack with material that acts not only functionally with the CA or epoxy but also as an embellishment.... this would also include the "design" opportunities we have all encountered.

My filling a crack with coffee grounds and epoxy to save a bowl or NE.....using the coffee grounds to darken the epoxy...it's a matter of personal taste.....and opportunity.......and yet you may not like it or as a craftsman/artist decide to just pitch the wood. Again....personal opinion/taste and a resulting decision.

Too often I believe we try to be too cerebral in doing some of the crafts/art that we do. I do it because I want to do it, often a member of my family has a need for something I am doing and I enjoy it. That's one of the things that scares me and keeps me from doing turning and wood working as a business (a lack of honed skills is another). I am afraid I might lose the enjoyment and sense of accomplishment as I make minor improvements in my skills. When the fun is gone, what's left? Do it for fun.

[Michael James]

OK, I admit I'm educated way beyond my intellingence. Huh? Never mind trying to explain.... I wont get it. :cool:
In this case unconscious incompetence is serving me well!

[David E Keller]

Hutch, could you ask these questions in a multiple choice format?:D I've always excelled at multiple guess tests...

I agree with those who've posted above. It's all a matter of taste and opinion. My tastes are all over the place, and I often have a great deal of difficulty explaining why I like or dislike something. One of the things that I feel like I'm just starting to learn is how to break a piece down by section or detail to better understand what I like. I think this will be a big step in developing my turning abililty and will allow me to create pieces that I enjoy on purpose rather than as a matter of chance.

[William Hutchinson]

...I often have a great deal of difficulty explaining why I like or dislike something. One of the things that I feel like I'm just starting to learn is how to break a piece down by section or detail to better understand what I like. I think this will be a big step in developing my turning abililty and will allow me to create pieces that I enjoy on purpose rather than as a matter of chance.

That 'better understanding' is what led, in part, to my question. I'm fascinated with the craft/art of woodturning and have an interest in exploring all avenues. Knowledge only inhances the appreciation of the turnings and broadens one vision, --plus it cool to know stuff.:cool:

[David DeCristoforo]

I have a "love/hate" feeling about this subject. The thing is, there is nothing "natural" in the process of taking trees and cutting them up to make things. And, at the same time, it is perfectly "natural" to do so. So it's something of a dichotomy or, if you want a simpler word, a "whack-a-mole". Human nature drives us to create, to innovate, to strive for self expression. The human "structure" is as varied as snowflakes... no two exactly the same. So the variations that self expression takes have the potential to be virtually limitless. Personally, I prefer to not join any "camps" and to try to take something from everything I see. I never was a huge fan of Krenov but I always admired his devotion to his ideals. Maloff and Nakashima were more "my style" but I always loved the work of guys like Edward Barnsley who manipulated his pieces to a much greater degree, using "embellishments" like carvings and inlays to complement the "natural" beauty of the wood. Things could get pretty boring pretty quickly if everyone felt the same, saw the same talked the same, etc. Diversity is the thing that makes the human race fascinating. We have to be willing to embrace the diversity or we end up at war.

[Bernie Weishapl]

I agree with Allen and Ken. For me embellishments such as air brushing, using dye, beads, etc or if it is a Art or Utilitarian is in the eye of the Craftsman/Turner. If the turner/craftsman is pleased with it then to me that is what counts. There are a lot of turners who will make a funnel out of a bowl and throw it away. Myself I glue a piece on the bottom and finish it. For some reason these pieces sell faster that other bowls. I enjoy the challenge of making it work and look pleasing.

[Ken Glass]

Hutch,
Let me start by saying, IMHO. If one sees or hears or feels something that moves you it can be ART. It can be on canvas, paper, print, picture, live scenery, a turning, natural, embellished or not. As long as it captures your attention, emotions, focal point or appreciation, it should be considered ART. Whether it is embellished or not seems not to matter to the individual admirer, only the Turner/Artist who labels something as embellished because it seems to not be of the norm, which by the way is fictional. ART is ART.

[Neil Strong]

William, I applaud you for taking on this aesthetic topic. We wood turners should do more of it.

Allen, I agree with you but use different words. I'm fond of this quotation from George Nakashima:

"We woodworkers have the audacity to shape timber from … noble trees. In a sense it is our Karma Yoga, the path of action we must take to lead to our union with the divine. Each tree, each part of each tree, has its own particular destiny and its own special relationship to be fulfilled. We roam the world to find our relationship with these trees."

My own aesthetic has been highly influenced by my training in the Japanese pottery tradition in which wabi sabi (http://nobleharbor.com/tea/chado/WhatIsWabi-Sabi.htm) informs my aesthetic... the repeated making of objects from natural materials unconsciously moves me towards a respect for the inherent beauty of the wood. As Ken puts it, "too often I believe we try to be too cerebral in doing some of the crafts/art that we do."

In practice, I will turn almost any type of wood and search for the unique qualities that each piece might reveal. As I say on the ticket that goes with each piece:


Beautiful pieces of wood that guide me in what form they might take in their new life beyond the living tree

My galleries prefer more ornamentation. I resist and try to allow the wood to speak for itself.

What you appreciate in art and craft is a matter of personal preference informed by many influences. What is art is determined collectively, but of course you will still have your personal preferences around that.

.....

[William Hutchinson]

So it's something of a dichotomy or, if you want a simpler word, a "whack-a-mole"...

...Diversity is the thing that makes the human race fascinating. We have to be willing to embrace the diversity or we end up at war.

Only Double D could intertwine whack-a-mole and war in the same paragraph. :confused:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/wlhutch/wackamole.jpg

[Curt Fuller]

Only Double D could intertwine whack-a-mole and war in the same paragraph. :confused:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/wlhutch/wackamole.jpg
Besides watching the great work that comes from "Double D", I've enjoyed his perspective on things and his way of expressing it just as much.

But I have to say that I'm one that gets lost in this 'natural vs embellishment' and 'craft vs art' subject. The moment I start trying to define things like that I can feel my enthusiasm for turning draining out of me.

[William Hutchinson]

But I have to say that I'm one that gets lost in this 'natural vs embellishment' and 'craft vs art' subject. The moment I start trying to define things like that I can feel my enthusiasm for turning draining out of me.

Learning, knowledge, experience and combining that into skill takes different routes. Some have intuitive abilities and creative talents that produce outstanding pieces with apparent ease. Some, like me, have to work very hard to hone skills, discover art forms and translate that to a finished product.

Learning about my new found 'passion' is rewarding and enriches the time when I can get to the lathe. It's not about assigning labels or contriving boxes, but to talk about this subject the limitations of verbal/written exchanges demands commonalties of concepts so communication can occur. When speaking of esoteric terms of aesthetic, creativity and how one views the art forms then much can get lost in the translation.

I've really appreciate the views of all that cared to respond and it helps my learning and I hope, my turnings.

And Curt, I too admire talents like David DeCristoforo whom I have learned and studied his work. He is one of the kind souls that is willing to share his knowledge and wit. Watching his quick progression in turning has been an inspiration. Please don't take my poking fun as any disrespect- as it is not intended.