Enter Kutztown, PA. furniture exhibition

[Pete Lamberty]

Hi, I ran across this and thought that some of you might be interested. There is a furniture exhibition at Kutztown University for furniture makers within 125 miles of Kutztown, PA. Go to http://faculty.kutztown.edu/rogers/index.htm Click on the call for artists furniture exhibition window. I think submissions need to be in by April 2004 so you will have lots of time to make something. Pete

[Bill Grumbine]

Hi Pete

I got all excited when I saw your message header, since I live in the greater Kutztown metropolitan area. :D Then I went to his website. I doubt he would appreciate my furniture any more than I appreciate his. And, since art is subjective, I will refrain from further comment. :cool:

Bill

[Pete Lamberty]

Hi Bill, I feel about the same way you do about his furniture. I like things to be at least 50 percent functional. A couple of his students works looked nice. And I liked his ribbonish end table. I posted this just because I thought someone may like to get involved. Pete



Hi Pete

I got all excited when I saw your message header, since I live in the greater Kutztown metropolitan area. :D Then I went to his website. I doubt he would appreciate my furniture any more than I appreciate his. And, since art is subjective, I will refrain from further comment. :cool:

Bill

[Ken Garlock]

My goodness, I saw three items of use for 27 years work: log house, dinette set, and a china cabinet. All you Pa. residents, remember you are paying his salary. :o

[Dave Anderson NH]

Is that I don't particularly like it. But then what does an ignorant enjinear know about "true art"

Dave- with all my prejudice showing thru

[Von Bickley]

I don't want to say anything bad about a man's work, so I'm going to keep quite about this one.

[Glenn Clabo]

Ya...I can't say it's my cup of tea...or my brand of beer. But I guess that's why there are so many paint colors, eh?

[Kevin Gerstenecker]

I also checked out the link and the photos of the Professors Work. As far as the items displayed go, all I can say is "Alrighty Then". Different, thats for sure! :D

[Bill Grumbine]

My goodness, I saw three items of use for 27 years work: log house, dinette set, and a china cabinet. All you Pa. residents, remember you are paying his salary. :o

Now then Ken, there's no need at all to go rubbing salt in the wound. ;) I don't think there is anywhere one can go to get away from these ivory tower academia nuts. They're probably down by you too. :p

If I want to see stuff like that most recent one, all I have to do is go to downtown Philly to see some drunk lying by a bus stop bench.

Bill

[Pete Lamberty]

Hi, I find it interesting that there have been no positive comments about his work. Maybe the people who like his stuff are afraid to express their opinion. I myself do like some of the things in the 75 to 89 years and a couple in the next group. Maybe we as a group don't try to express our own creativity enough. We as a group don't stretch to see what we can really come up with. We stick to the tried and true. All of us think highly of Sam Maloof, James Krenov, etc, but next to none of us try to emulate their creative approach to the craft. They wouldn't be where they are today if they thought like most of us. Now I don't want you to think that I am sticking up for this university guys work, but I do like to see new imaginative designs. For myself the design process is the most fun. I do notice that there are extremely few posts on the design forum. I guess by everything that I have said, you will realize that I don't think we are artistically progressive enough. That said, let everyone do as they like and enjoy their woodworking. Also I feel that it would be nice for us to let each other know when there are contests or exhibitions to enter. Besides the Kutztown exhibition there is also another exhibition coming up. Go to www.furnituresociety.org and click on the word exhibition in the left side menu. Then on the next page look for the word curvi-ture. Pete





Hi, I ran across this and thought that some of you might be interested. There is a furniture exhibition at Kutztown University for furniture makers within 125 miles of Kutztown, PA. Go to http://faculty.kutztown.edu/rogers/index.htm Click on the call for artists furniture exhibition window. I think submissions need to be in by April 2004 so you will have lots of time to make something. Pete

[Dave Avery]

Pete,

I went to the web site thinking I'd like the stuff - even wanting to like it. But I just couldn't. Most of the guys here aren't reluctant to express an opinion, popular or not.

The reason why so few of us appreciate the work is that all (or almost all) of us build things for function. A chair to sit in, a table to eat at, a bed to sleep in.

A university professor is not going to make a name for himself teaching shaker or A&C design. He HAS to be different. As such, he's in the business of furniture for art's sake, rather than furniture for the sake of function. Just a different business with a different audience. Calling much of the work furniture, however, is a stretch. Dave.

[Bill Grumbine]

Hi Pete

I agree with quite a bit of what you write, but perhaps it does not come through that way. First of all, don't feel bad about posting the link. I think it is appropriate, and at the very least, it has gotten some discussion going beyond "what tool should I buy".

I participate in a number of groups, both regular woodworking and turning, on and off line. I see a lot of stuff all the time, in pictures and in real life. A large part of my creativity consists of fitting a piece of furniture to the needs, space, whatever, of my customers. I like simple clean lines accentuated by highly figured wood. Occasionally I will go for a very minimist look, with spare lines and less figured wood. Right now I am taking a table design that is about 150 years old and updating it to be harmonious with a very contemporary table top.

Beyond creativity though, there is a highly technical aspect to this pursuit. I am firmly of the opinion that a person cannot effectively express their creativity until they gain some degree of mastery over the technical aspects. I see a lot of woodturnings that are butt ugly and worse. Often the person who turns one of these shapes prefaces his or her remarks with the phrase, "I wanted to try this new shape to see how it would look". Well, it looks terrible now, and it looked terrible 4000 years ago when the Chaldeans first tried it out on their lathes, pottery wheels, or whatever. For the same reasons that certain shapes are always winners, certain other shapes are always losers.

There are certian shapes and certain proportions which naturally appeal to the human eye. They are often referred to as classical. These shapes and proportions have endured for thousands of years and across cultural lines, not because of some hidebound group of guildsmen, but because of the nature of our soul and spirit. While these aspects are not carved in stone (so to speak), one cannot stray too far before one gets onto the shaky ground of ugly. Trying to change them, or break them is like trying to calculate the value of pi to be something different than it always is.

So when I talk about mastery of technical aspects of the craft, I am not talking only of good joinery or proper sanding technique, but even more I am talking about an understanding of proportion and shape. Admittedly, I am very conservative in my approach and in my sensibilities, but there is still a wide range of what appeals to me because it fits into general rules of form and function. There are too many people out there who are trying to explore new areas by breaking old and inviolable rules. This guy is one of them. He says so on his website.

I've danced around it up to this point while making my preferences very clear, but I'll come right out and say it. I don't like this guy's work. But, it isn't in my house, and no one is trying to sell it to me. He has every right to make it, and to associate with others who find it attractive. I do not think (except for a very few pieces mentioned already) that his work is very appealing because it has very little in the way of orderly form to it. It represents chaos and dissipation to me, and quite frankly, I find it repugnant. Maybe it is my German ancestry, maybe it is my religious viewpoint. It is probably a large amount of both.

I see an order and a beauty to creation, even when wood is distorted or rotted (to a certain extent). Even in that fallen state, there is order and beauty. For example, I can really appreciate the free form work of Nakashima because he knew how to bring out the beauty of the medium (Now I'm starting to sound like an artist! Where's my clip on ponytail!?!).

When I look around me at creation, I see an order and a symmetry. That symmetry continues down to a subatomic level. There is asymmetry as well, but even then, there is order. When both order and symmetry are violated, the result is repulsive on several levels, not all of them conscious. But they are there in every human being.

There is the old joke that goes, "I may not know art, but I know what I like". I know that a large part of my reaction to this person's work has not only to do with the work itself, but to his vocation. This is going to sound prejudicial (because it is!), but there is probably very little he and I would agree on in any aspect of life you would care to name. However, in addition to being prejudicial, it is also most likely accurate, based on past experience. In the contemporary art world, I would be dismissed as some proletarian hacker for my failure to appreciate the avaunt garde style represented by his efforts. His website says so, although maybe not in so many words. He writes,

"We are looking for new and experimental approaches to form, and materials while maintaining functionality and are especially interested in innovative design realized in non-traditional materials."

A very wise man once wrote, "there is nothing new under the sun", speaking of course, about human nature and our relationship to the creation. "New and experimental approaches to form" is going to mean breaking the rules of what appeals to the human eye and soul, and I am not going there. I choose to spend my time perfecting the skills I have and perfecting my ability to express my creativity in a way that will appeal to as many people as possible.

Two good friends of mine in the turning world who are no longer with us used to get into this discussion with me all the time, and we had some very spirited discussions. In the end it is all opinion, but opinion don't feed the bull dog (unless one is a university professor of art!). Please though, when you come across something like this, post it for the rest of us. Shooting this guy down in flames is no reflection on you.

Bill

[Ken Salisbury]

Hi, I ran across this and thought that some of you might be interested. There is a furniture exhibition at Kutztown University for furniture makers within 125 miles of Kutztown, PA. Go to http://faculty.kutztown.edu/rogers/index.htm Click on the call for artists furniture exhibition window. I think submissions need to be in by April 2004 so you will have lots of time to make something. Pete


WEIRD ! !
I did finally find a piece of what we traditionalists call furniture. in the 1975 - 1989 gallery (which was not specifically dated). I assume this was made prior to the "artist's" admission to the "funny farm".:D
Of course this is only my personal opinion ! !
I was making plans to go to the "5 Barns" get together in August but I am re-evaluating that decision. I will only go if I have Grumbine's assurance that I will not be required to share a Bud Light with this person (don't want anything to rub off on this 'old man') -- I have enough medical problems now :D.

[Dave Arbuckle]

Maybe the people who like his stuff are afraid to express their opinion.

Can't imagine why anyone would be afraid. SMC has been a flame-free environment thus far.

I don't dislike his work nearly as much as other opinions that have been expressed here. I think he misses the mark a little. But, I don't tend to evangelize, particularly on furniture style. Everyone gets to have their own taste. Thank goodness, or I'd have to learn to like Mission and Shaker styles. ;)

Dave

[Pete Lamberty]

Hi Dave, I agree with you when you said how you wanted to like the stuff but just couldn't. And I, like you, understand the old saying "form follows function". Bill G. has made some good points about history and reasons for good design in the next post. And I agree with all of you guys or at least most of everything that has been said except for the idea that not one of us (or group of us) can be the one/s that can be the originator of a new movement of design like the shaker style or the arts and crafts style. Although they take into account the historical requirements for good design as Bill listed, these two schools of design were not around two hundred years ago ( please excuse my ignorance on the shaker school of design, I am not sure when it started.) I do think that in the next five hundred years "someone" will come up with a new style of design that will be regarded as highly as the shaker or arts and crafts styles and still use all of the old good design requirements. I just don't see why it can't be you or any one of us (I admit that this is a very lofty ambition). I also don't see why anyone of us or group of us should stifle the will to do so. Even tho Maloof, Krenov, Castell (sp?) aren't complete schools of design, they each have their own style, all fitting into the classic "rules" of good design that Bill has mentioned. I just think that each of us could strive to find our own "style" and should be incouraged to do so. I, myself, really enjoy seeing "new" well designed pieces of furniture that are functional and beautiful. In my opinion, learning the aspects of good design is just as important as learning how to make a tight fitting joint. Even as a begginer slowly learns to handle tools, she/he could be slowly learning the basics of good design. My opinions are certainly coming from the fact that I have been taking architecture classes, just about all of them contain alot of design work. I have really enjoyed this discussion. You and Bill have added greatly to it. Some very humerous remarks have been made. I have actually laughed out loud at some of them. Thanks to all of you who have made posts. I will probably have more opinions to post as you and others add to the discusion. Pete



Pete,

I went to the web site thinking I'd like the stuff - even wanting to like it. But I just couldn't. Most of the guys here aren't reluctant to express an opinion, popular or not.

The reason why so few of us appreciate the work is that all (or almost all) of us build things for function. A chair to sit in, a table to eat at, a bed to sleep in.

A university professor is not going to make a name for himself teaching shaker or A&C design. He HAS to be different. As such, he's in the business of furniture for art's sake, rather than furniture for the sake of function. Just a different business with a different audience. Calling much of the work furniture, however, is a stretch. Dave.

[Jim Becker]

I was making plans to go to the "5 Barns" get together in August but I am re-evaluating that decision. I will only go if I have Grumbine's assurance that I will not be required to share a Bud Light with this person

I am thinking that Bill has good taste in my experience and you have no need to worry... :o

[Ken Garlock]

Now then Ken, there's no need at all to go rubbing salt in the wound. ;) I don't think there is anywhere one can go to get away from these ivory tower academia nuts. They're probably down by you too. :p

If I want to see stuff like that most recent one, all I have to do is go to downtown Philly to see some drunk lying by a bus stop bench.

Bill

Bill, go down to the river and wash that salt away. :) There are a lot of things which bother me about our institutions of higher learning, but this is not the place to discuss it..

Now where to I go to order my Bill O'Reilly doormat, "The Spin Stops Here." :)

[Tom Sweeney]

I visited the site, but did not stay very long. 1 or 2 of his older pieces were worthy of my looking more than few seconds. I almost liked the sculpted corner shelves for example. like Bill said - I don't know good art but I know what I like.

A little while ago I took the family to the Philadelphia Museum of Art. I really appreciated a lot of the items we saw there. I liked many different styles of art that they had for viewing.

My 15 year old kinda artsy daughter wanted to see the modern art collection. After I finished moaning we headed off to find it. Sorry - was not impressed at all -OK there might of been 1 OKeefe(sp?) that I kinda liked. LOML jr. however loved all of it??? One thing that kept popping into my head was whether or not most of these people were serious about their art. I can't help but think that not a lot of thought, skill or effort was put into many of the pieces. I get the Andy Warhol self portrait & there was definately skill & thought involved with that one, though I still didn't care for it.

The cinic in me thinks that a lot of these people are just trying to get over on the overly sophisticated art crowd. I mean really - a bunch of light bulbs piled on the floor? Or the one guy that since the mid sixties has made identical rectangular 6" X 12" boxes with the date painted on them in identical type. In other words - It's July 27, 2003 - let me sit down for 10 minutes take one of my boxes and paint - 07-27-03 - on it OK I'm done. he has done about 300 of them and a dozen are arranged on the wall at the museum. I remember seeing a documentary on some famous modern art guy in NY - He was an arrogant SOB & admitted it - he doesn't even do "his" paintings most of the time. he has an apprentise do it - then people pay him 6 figures for it cause he signed it. As I recall this was the splattered paint on canvas theory of Modern art type of paintings.

I will say that this prof's stuff probably took more thought & skill than the lightbulbs - but I just don't like it. Classic designs are classic for 1 reason - most people like them. Personally I like most of David Marks stuff - he takes classic designs & embellishes them a little or fuses them with other classic designs - I like that a lot better than abrubt radical leaps in design theory.

BTW - Ken, you don't have to worry about sharing a Bud light with the guy - we've got good beer up here :D
Pete - I think this is a good topic of discussion - considering that I'm not yet real good at actually doing WW'ing - I actually enjoy the design process more & I like talking & thinking about it - thanks for bringing it up.

Just my 2¢ but I don't mind if anyone else has their own 2¢

[Eldon Berg]

There were a few pieces that looked ok. I agree with another poster that we are more inclined to functional pieces. If you look at the title of the furniture show the artisit is promoting next year it kind of somes it up:

"I Can Live With That: Unique Functional Furniture"

I don't know about you but I prefer to have others say "I Love your furniture", not just can live with it.

Eldon

[Dave Arbuckle]

he doesn't even do "his" paintings most of the time. he has an apprentise do it

It was either Titian or Tintoretto, I believe, who caused a huge flap by doing this in the 16th Century.

Dave

[Ken Garlock]

he doesn't even do "his" paintings most of the time. he has an apprentise do it

It was either Titian or Tintoretto, I believe, who caused a huge flap by doing this in the 16th Century.

Dave

Say Dave,

Did you hear about the guy who stole a truck full of paintings from the Louvre? He stopped after a short chase, and the Paris policeman asked him why he stopped.

The theif said that he didn't have the Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh. ;) :o

[Bill Grumbine]

I am thinking that Bill has good taste in my experience and you have no need to worry... :o


That's right Ken! All my taste might be in my mouth, but it is good taste, and we do have good beer up here as Tom says, so you won't have to worry about that Budweiser stuff. :D :D :D We'll try and get you some Yuengling, or even better, some Weyerbacher!

Bill

[Mark Mandell]

Seems to me that the professor has attempted, but not very well, to fuse the concepts of furniture and sculpture in the belief that the two have a common ground.

I think that it is his concept of "furniture" that is causing you all such problems. That concept appears to be that of the sculptor who makes a single piece as a focus of attention. To that end, his concept will run afoul of the view of many that furniture, even unique designs, is subservient to the room and its owner and must "work" with other pieces of furniture in the same space. Sculpture, on the other hand, is, on a basic level, an object which, while it may be decorative, is almost by definition insular and encapsulated rather than a functioning part of a group of objects which the sculptor has no idea of and will never see.

The prof. is thus making pieces of sculpture which he hopes will be integrated into a living space rather than be stand-alone sculptural objects. The concept of "Something to Put Things On" illustrates that he has forgotten or missed the essential idea that in order for a flat surface to be viable furniture as a table, it has a basic function to support the things placed on it, and must, to a large extent, also to be subservient to those objects. Prof's problem is nobody's gonna put Hummels and pictures of Fluffy and the kids on his shelves or over the top on a lifesize white plaster nude because they'll be visually overwhelmed by the "table" that's supposed to hold and show them off.

An object may be sculpture, it may be furniture, and certainly any three dimensional object has the capability to be either. Trying to be both, however, raises conflicts because it askes the viewer to decide which this object is. If you cannot reconcile the conflict, you don't like the piece as either.

I also find his design sense too cluttered. There are good lines in some of his pieces, but he camoflages them with all the stick-ons.

Oh. I hold a BA in Art History with original research, plus a masters in sculpture, with 6 years teaching art and humanities and 3 years in professional private practice in sculpture by commission.

I demanded that my students to work by a very simple rule: "It's better to be clearly wrong than unclearly maybe."

The professor is all about "maybe."

Mark Mandell

[Mark Mandell]

he doesn't even do "his" paintings most of the time. he has an apprentise do it

It was either Titian or Tintoretto, I believe, who caused a huge flap by doing this in the 16th Century.

Dave

Dave,

Oft told story that Picasso was notoriously forged and drove the art dealers nuts when they would submit a painting for "authentication" by the master. Was reported that if he liked the painting, he said he did it, if he didn't like it, he called it forged even if he did paint it. Talk about letting others work for you . . .

Mark

[Tom Sweeney]

Than I try to make the same point as I do :D
Cause you actually make sense with your post :rolleyes:

Snipped>>
Seems to me that the professor has attempted, but not very well, to fuse the concepts of furniture and sculpture in the belief that the two have a common ground.

I think that it is his concept of "furniture" that is causing you all such problems.

An object may be sculpture, it may be furniture, and certainly any three dimensional object has the capability to be either. Trying to be both, however, raises conflicts because it askes the viewer to decide which this object is. If you cannot reconcile the conflict, you don't like the piece as either.

I also find his design sense too cluttered. There are good lines in some of his pieces, but he camoflages them with all the stick-ons.

The professor is all about "maybe."

Mark Mandell<<

[Mark Mandell]

Hey Tom,

See you at the 5-Barns Hoe-down and we can continue the topic if you like.

Mark

[Glenn Clabo]

My mechanical minds view on all this relates to my theory of rivets in a plane being the same as people’s opinions or even in nature’s balance. If each rivet equates to an opinion…or each insect/animal/plant… as a group, they hold the plane (earth) together. If you asked each person if his/her opinion is the most important…or the most right…of course they would say yes. If you ask each person if a particular tree/bird/animal is important…most would say they didn’t care about that one in particular. If you asked them if they should disregard the other opinions (rivets)…many would say they would and do. If you ignore enough opinions as irrelevant AND try to stifle them by generalizing them as useless then eventually the whole thing falls apart…the plane crashes.

What bothers me is the stifling effect that generalizations have. Because some of the things that come out of academia are so far out many people feel they have a right to stifle them. I also disagree with some of these things…and frankly can’t figure some of them out for the life of me. However, I’ve been involved in enough “far out” ideas in my business to say those with far reaching ideas…even if they don’t have the ability to link it to a result that most people can touch…should be allowed to proceed. To summarily group them into ivory tower academia nuts because you don’t like what they are doing is a disservice to those who spend their lives trying to reach into areas that don’t make sense…right now. I can’t tell you how many of my friends can’t understand why anyone would spend more money on furniture beyond the cheap stuff that’s in most furniture stores. After all it looks okay and it’s functional.

And if it wasn’t for those weirdo scientists at Budweiser and Miller who reached so far out in making what most Americans call “beer”… some people wouldn’t appreciate what real beer was meant to be when they take the next step.

[David Blangger]

Hi Pete,

Bill Grumbine has elequently summed up my view on this subject. My likes aren't from fears of doing something different. They are what they are... things that I enjoy. Traditional furniture such as Shaker, ( whom by the way invented the table saw), Mission and Arts and crafts are beautiful to me. I also like Pennsylvania Dutch and Chinese pieces.

I like most English furniture and love the old *traditional style* cabinetmakers bench, (even though it is a stretch to say it is *needed* in a modern shop.

In this forum I have learned new ways to make jigs and build more modern cabinets to use in my shop. I get so excited from some of my fellow woodworkers projects and furniture that I shout " Honey, come see this." I certainly didn't call her to view the professors woodworking.

I guess to sum it up I would say that I was so excited to find this forum that I would venture to say that I love it more than my subscription to Fine Woodworking which by the way is the only magazine that I still recieve.

I didn't look to see if the professor had a forum or an online newsletter but I assure you I wouldn't have subscribed.

Best Wishes.

David

[Bill Grumbine]

Glenn, I don't see anyone stifling this guy, or trying to stifle him. We're just expressing opinions. While we are allowed to do that here, I suspect that might not be the case in his classroom. While I have not been in his particular classroom, I've been in enough classrooms in my academic career to know a thing or two about how things can be, and are, stifled. Looking at the work of his students which he chose to display, I would say that they are encouraged strongly to think along the same lines he does, at least if they want a passing grade.

I live out in the country. I know what a skunk looks like, and what a skunk smells like. I do not need or want to engage every skunk I meet in order to prove or disprove anything about the characteristics of skunks. Even though I tend to generalize about skunks, I'm usually right about them too.

Oh yeah, this analogy between college professors and skunks is purely coincidental, and no similarities are intended.

Bill

[Pete Lamberty]

Hi, I am amazed at the response from my original post. I think many of you have thought that the only designs that I think we should try is the far out artsy stuff. I didn't mean that at all. I just think that it is important for each of us to flex our creative muscle and see what we can come up with. Its fine that some of us like the shaker style, the arts and crafts, or any of the other styles. I like them too. But someone/s was the first to design those styles and we don't think that they are to far out. Why not try to design something that is a little individualistic (is that a word?). Maybe you will be the originator of a whole new style that will be admired by future generations. It is unlikely but not impossible. I have seen many of the photos of the work that we do. Many of us are very good craftsman. But most of our projects are someone elses designs. I just think that we should forge ahead and try to do something original. Even if it is just a small design change on a shaker table. Pete



Hi, I ran across this and thought that some of you might be interested. There is a furniture exhibition at Kutztown University for furniture makers within 125 miles of Kutztown, PA. Go to http://faculty.kutztown.edu/rogers/index.htm Click on the call for artists furniture exhibition window. I think submissions need to be in by April 2004 so you will have lots of time to make something. Pete

[Anthony Yakonick]

Hey, hey, hey, those people around the benches are my friends from my drinking days. We used to hang out together in the 70s be nice they would share the bottle with me :D

[David Blangger]

Pete,

Let me take one more stab at this and I will let it rest. Since you do not have a Bio posted I can only assume that you mean woodworkers in general when you say *we.* Allow me to apologize if I am the only one that doesn't instantly know you from name recognition.

I rarely see exact duplicates of early works. There seems to always be changes. Some are necessary for electronics and lighting. Others just because the craftsman liked it. More often than not it stems from someone asking if you can make them a piece showing you a picture or a sketch.

There happens to be many design schools here and abroad that teaches one to think out of the box (God, I dislike that expression). They can be sought out and new designs can be learned.

Having said this I guess the problem that I have is why would you want to change a group *we* that has sought out a forum that they enjoy or they wouldn't be here in the first place?

Perhaps I wouldn't have felt so strongly in my example if you ahd eased into the topic with your statement- quote( "Even if it is just a small design change on a shaker table. Pete ") but to compare the work of this group to I suppose *modern art* and say changes need to be made and we can if we will just dare is extremely diffucult on my part to digest.

David

[Jason Roehl]

I might have let this go, but someone mentioned beer, so now I can't.

First off, let me make some clarifications about me. I do not consider myself an artist, nor particularly of the creative sort, nor do I play one on TV. However, I do have a close friend who will be in debt for much of his natural life because he was counseled that a private art school was the only way to go. I believe that, looking back, he is a little upset with that recommendation. The reason being, that he has many ideas and thoughts and was hoping for guidance in the technique and the craft as much as the history and community of art, but received little other than propaganda about how much of classical art (Michelangelo, Van Gogh, Monet, etc.) is garbage because it was by dead WASPs, and the only true art is something totally new and/or totally offensive to as many non-artists as possible. Anyway, being the conservative Midwesterner that I am, we still had differing viewpoints and talked about them at length.

I am not opposed to the idea of someone stretching the limits, or "thinking outside of the box," when it comes to woodworking. As others here have pointed out, that is how we ended up with many of the enduring styles we discuss and produce today. However, those who tend to reside in the fringe of what is commonly acceptable should not have a fragile sense of self-worth because they are going to be rejected--often. Occasionally, they may hit on something comparatively new or obscure that gains acceptance and popularity, but the likes and dislikes of the people as a whole changes too slowly to embrace every new piece that comes along. But, as Bill quoted from a particularly large book, "there is nothing new under the sun." In that vein, I am no longer surprised by anything the art community puts out that is intended to shock and offend. When people are given money with no accountability they do things like pee in a jar and place a religious symbol in there and then call it art--I call it a bodily function that rightfully should have been kept private. It's disgusting, offends me and has no business being called art.

I suppose that where I am going is that I believe art in general has been hijacked by a crowd that does not see the purpose of art as being pleasing to the senses, rather invading to them. What was once a noble yet unprofitable profession has turned into an elitist, self-serving pursuit that has little relevance to the masses. I believe woodworking in general may be as yet immune from that assessment as many in the craft produce items that are useful yet add warmth and seasoning to the lives of the owners. And there is a broad range of abilities in the creativity and craftsmanship department. There are those who need or want to work from a set of plans and fashion a piece that is technically proficient and that satisfies them--more power to them. Then there are those who might make a few chicken scratches on a piece of paper and build something that fits more or less into a style but has some personal touches to it. And then there are those who have a style all their own and build things for the "wow" factor--and these tend toward being liked by a smaller group.

I looked through the professor's entire portfolio on the web. Much of it I found not particularly tasteful, but there were a few items that still had some semblance of function and weren't entirely displeasing to the senses as well. I only say this because I don't know the man. As Bill pointed out, he would likely dismiss much of what many of us make as not up to his standards, and, if he did so, I would probably do the same for him. Personally, I'm comfortable with where I stand in the equation, and where I'm going with what I do.

Oh, yeah, I almost forgot about the beer. It's a shame what has been passed off to the masses in this country under the label of beer. As a result, I have taken up making my own, joining a growing number of those who have discovered the wonderful tastes of microbrews and homebrews--beers brewed that follow the lead of monks and pubs and the like of the Europe of hundreds of years ago.

I gotta go get the next batch started so that it's ready for the 5 Barns picnic...

[Mark Valsi]

In this P.C. world in which we live, it is considered not only rude to express a contrarian opinion, but even a sin . . . or a felony.


However, I have no fear !!


I don't like that stuff !!! To me it is not art !! It is c***!


There is little art made after 1920 that I like.


You have your opinion and I have mine !!


Mark