Educate me please, I need to understand

[Peter Hochmann]

The recent design critique featured 3 masters. What makes these craftsmen great? What, in their individual styles, is outstanding?

A quick background...I'm a newbie at this woodworking craft...just coming on 3 years. Everything I have learned to date, has been self taught. My technical abilities still need much practice, that only the years will provide. My 'eye' for design is in need of maturing.

For my tastes,the Nakashima and Wegner examples are simple...the Malouf is stimulating. Having said that, perhaps, I'm not seeing some elements that I need to be. Even Krenov is repetitive. So, please, assist me in guiding my eye to what I may well not be seeing in these designs.

My opinion may well not change, but at least I'll know.

Thanks in advance

[Jim Dunn]

Pete,

You said it. I don't know enough about the history of ww to affect an opinion of any of these styles. That said, I wonder if any of the "masters of wood" cut off their ear or something?

[Mark Singer]

Peter,
The work of the 3 crafstman/designers are good examples of each of their work. I thought it would be interesting to compare them. They are not Masters because I said they are ...their work is well known...they have made chairs for Presidents of The US and are in major Museums throughout the world. Still as with any art your ouw individual preference is most important. I would suggest reading about them...each of them have books written about them. This would help. I have the Nakashima Book, "The Soul of a Tree" , the Maloof book "The Furniture of Sam Maloof" and the thorough article on Wegner..."Hans J. Wegner, 75 Years" in Living Architecture. Their work is simple as you stated. What should a chair be? If more ornate styles appeal to you than you probably want to research others until you find your special interest. There is some good information on the web if you are interested:

http://www.designboom.com/portrait/nakashima_bio.html

http://www.denmark.org/mermaid_Sept97/Danishdesign2.html

[Jim Becker]

That article on Wegner is wonderful, Mark. There are a lot of great points for all of us to ponder as we work on our designs and projects...and they are not limited to chairs!

[Mark Singer]

Here is a small excerp....again this is not me speaking, but with it said, it is worth knowing more about this great, Hans Wegner!


But as Henrik Sten Møller wrote many years later: I would venture to say that Hans J Wegner is the most gifted cabinetmaker the world has ever known.'

[Jim Dunn]

Having read the article on Wegner, the most important thing I took from it was the statement that no piece of furniture should have a back. I take that to mean that furniture should be built to be viewed from all angles? You should be as proud of the back as the front?

Solves a question in my mind about how much is to much. Seems Mr. Wegner would say there is no such thing as to much, when it comes to form and finish.

[Jim Becker]

Good observation, Jim. Thos Moser (http://www.thosmoser.com/), whom I admire a great deal, generally makes all the furniture so that the "back" is just as skillfully done as the "front" and "sides". You can place the pieces in the middle of the room and enjoy them from every angle. Many of us don't build that way, but maybe we should?

And speaking of chairs...take a gander at the wingback on the Moser site. I sat in this at the Philadelphia Furniture and Furnishings Show last spring and it was very comfortable.

[Ryan Singer]

Good observation, Jim. Thos Moser (http://www.thosmoser.com/), whom I admire a great deal, generally makes all the furniture so that the "back" is just as skillfully done as the "front" and "sides". You can place the pieces in the middle of the room and enjoy them from every angle. Many of us don't build that way, but maybe we should?

And speaking of chairs...take a gander at the wingback on the Moser site. I sat in this at the Philadelphia Furniture and Furnishings Show last spring and it was very comfortable.

thanks Jim. I checked Thos Moser out. he has a lot of pieces on there! I liked the arm on the wing chair and how it's 2 pieces carefully formed together, yet obviously 2 separate pieces. nice detail. it's expressive! nice attention to different grain directions and great ways to solve expansion issues.. he really pays attention to how wood behaves. is he on SMC? we should invite him on here! he'd be a great guest to be on here!

Thos. Moser looks like he has a good thing going :D I would love to head design for a furniture company that was devoted to making quality pieces

some of the best artists, writers, designers are people who just look at things a new way and go for it. that is to say that even if you don't have an education of the history of wood working, your ideas and what you pay attention are valid. there are so many aspects to wood that your respect will continue to grow as you continue to "play" in the shop. it's evolutionary!

about designing the whole enchilada, so there is no "BACK". some use the idea of a "back" as a way out. in certain situations it's a valid solution. as we all know a free standing piece should look good from all angles. which leads me to a thought about one of my teachers who said, "turn it upsidedown" and it should still be interesting. I still use that technique of looking at the object upsidedown when developing a new design language. in most furniture design, there is usually a bottom and a top. by going upside down, you stimulate flexible thinking. with flexible thinking you can think of ideas which don't have a bottom, such as a piece that rolls. maybe there is no top, bottom or back? Hmm.. hope this idea inspires someone out there ;)

[Jim Becker]

Ryan, Moser's latest book, Thos. Moser Artistry in Wood (ISBN 0-8118-3611-8), might be an interesting read for you. It also has a very nice forewar by Andy Rooney...who is a serious hobbiest woodworker, himself.

[Glenn Clabo]

Ryan, Moser's latest book, Thos. Moser Artistry in Wood (ISBN 0-8118-3611-8), might be an interesting read for you. It also has a very nice forewar by Andy Rooney...who is a serious hobbiest woodworker, himself.
Great book Jim!
Thos. Moser is one of my favorites also. Even though he wasn't a part of the show here at Providence this year, he became part of it when he was noted walking around.

"Thos. Moser and his wife were seen roaming the aisles, keeping tabs on the show even though they did not exhibit since they were busy opening a new store in Boston."

Here is one of his newer designs that ties to the chair that Mark put up recently for discussion ...The Players Chair ...."The original inspiration for this chair had a tilting seat for musicians with instruments."

[Jim Becker]

Not only do I love to look at Moser's work...I love to TOUCH it. Silky smooth and friendly. BLO and wax is just that way...

[Geoff Irvine]

Peter ,
Hope this gives you some thoughts and ideas to chase down. I personally find that if I can understand the design concepts involved and the strategies and solutions employed often helps me to enjoy furniture more. Sounds pompous I know but I've came across an Australian chap who used the ratios he found between the branches of a tree in designing his work and it looked , to me , balanced. I later found out that this type of ratio can be described in maths associated with 'fractals'. Then you come across others who use other ratios eg the golden ratio/rectangle. Also the way that the greats 'read' the wood in relationship to the piece - see if you can get your hands on articles to do with grain control i.e why is it best to use diagonal end grain for leg blanks, or on orientation of grain to follow curves especially with respect to curved legs. Maybe other members can help here. My personal thoughts are that after so many years working with wood this all came innately to them - it's just dullards like me that have to learn it. I hope this helps and generates some leads for both of us. http://sawmillcreek.org/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Peter Hochmann]

Business has kept me from responding earlier than this. Thank you all for the feedback.
My post was not meant to offend or imply offense to any one individual on this forum. I am left with the impression that I did by the tone of some of the responses. Nor was the post questioning any one individual's perception of these 3 craftsmen illustrated in this exercise. I enjoy these little examples and reading the perceptions.
With a 'design eye' in need of maturity, I was merely curious as to what made these 3 masters great. I should ask the same of Krenov...what made his work great?
Mark, those limks you posted, I had read, thank you though.

Again, thanks all for the comments. Perhaps, if I can figuire out how to post a pic on here I'll do so inviting design critique from the forum.

[Jerry Crawford]

The recent design critique featured 3 masters. What makes these craftsmen great? What, in their individual styles, is outstanding?

A quick background...I'm a newbie at this woodworking craft...just coming on 3 years. Everything I have learned to date, has been self taught. My technical abilities still need much practice, that only the years will provide. My 'eye' for design is in need of maturing.

For my tastes,the Nakashima and Wegner examples are simple...the Malouf is stimulating. Having said that, perhaps, I'm not seeing some elements that I need to be. Even Krenov is repetitive. So, please, assist me in guiding my eye to what I may well not be seeing in these designs.

My opinion may well not change, but at least I'll know.

Thanks in advance



Well, to start, part of what makes them noteworthy is their body of work; that accumulated number of noteworthy pieces they have generated over a lifetime of craftsmanship. Their pieces have, not only evidence of technical excellence, but also, artistic and archectectural qualities most people recognize even if they can't articulate that quality; you get that "gee, I like that but I don't know why..." feeling when you see a Krenove cabinet or Maloof chair. There is a grace and balance inherent in the design that your eye automatically sees and your mind records. Even if you've never sat in a Mallof chair your senses tell you "that must be comfortable".

What you comment on as Krenove being repetitive, others (myself included) see an artistice dedication to a style and theme following his career. That theme is carried forward in the way he gracefully turns down a corner or install's a hinge or proportions the dovetails in a simple hidden drawer. Now, a theme may change over the years but these atrists have th ability to work an idea to it's ultimate configuration then push it beyond so it's seems part of the material rather than a contrived embellishment. The style may be based on a national genre such as Krenov or Frid or include elements of asian influence ala Nakashima. When a comprehensive view of the body of work is made you can often see how themes evolve and sometimes make subtle transitions from one piece to another.

Leraning an art or craft in a vaccume cannot be done (self taught). Without critiquing and feedback from peers and other artists/crafts persons better than you you never start to understand your own potential.

[Peter Hochmann]

thanks Jerry, that was the type of response I was seeking.

[Jerry Crawford]

happy to oblige Peter.

I've thought of one more element that's important in these masters that you and I have yet to acquire - Control of the medium.

These guys' have long past become masters of the control of their material and tools. They all have/had an intuitive understanding of the wormanship of risk and are able to control how an edge turns in whatever kind of wood they are working. That's a lifetime learning curve :cool: