Progress in Furniture Design

[Mike Henderson]

Ever since I became interested in period furniture, I've been struck by the change that occurred in furniture style about 1690-1700. Prior to that time the furniture was heavy and clunky, mostly of frame and panel, with mortise and tenon joinery.

Suddenly, in what appears to be about a 10 year span, we begin seeing elegant chests and chairs, lighter and in certain ways simpler in their design elements than the medieval styles that preceded it, which had existed for centuries with very little change.

What happened that caused this change? Was there some change in society, perhaps the growth of a wealthy merchant class who wanted to showcase their wealth? Or was there some change in tools or technology that allowed the fabrication of these new designs?

The Renaissance was much earlier so the change was not part of that.

Anyone have any ideas?

Mike

[Cecil Arnold]

Mike, that is a very interesting question. I would only speculate, but might consider population migration ("exploration?" by the upper classes) as one possible force. Wm. Penn et. al. would not want to transport heavy clunky items to his new post. Just a thought.

[Dave Anderson NH]

Yikes Michael, talk about a broad ad open ended question.:D This is a question that really is one of art history in addition to woodworking.

MY take is that the major change was one of what trades were involved. Furniture which is frame and panel and is often described as Jacobean in England or Pilgrim in the US was made primarily by carpenters and joiners. What we recognize as the cabinetmaker, furnituremaker, or eboniste was really a relatively new trade and only accessible to royalty and the very wealthy at first. As specialists in furniture increased and the move was made to wider use ofmortise and tenon joinery, a wider variety of design opportunities opened up. Also during this time, there was an increasing interest in Greco-Roman architecture and many of these design elements began to make their way into furniture. The rise of a larger upper middle class obviously helped as there was now a larger market and more competition. Competition breeds innovation.

Obviously, this is a vast oversimplification and being at the end of my lunch hour I need to get back to work. A nyone else want to tackle all or part of this fascinating question?

[Mike Henderson]

Cecil, Dave, thanks for your comments.

Cecil, your idea is good, but I think the reasons may be opposite what you suggested. The heavy medieval chests were designed for traveling. The furniture that followed, such as the William and Mary style, were too fragile for travel. But perhaps the opposite of your suggestion is true. The new styles developed for people who didn't need to move often - who could establish a permanent home.

Dave, I wonder what came first: the specialized trades, or the demand for new styles of furniture? That is, perhaps specialization was only possible after there was enough demand for things that a specialist could provide.

I should add that most of my research has been on American period furniture, and perhaps American furniture was driven by European advances, which were driven by societal or technological changes there.

Mike

[harry strasil]

What is it they say, Form follows Function or something similar. Another one is Money Talks. Also one must live within their means.

Thinking of the amount of people that were here in that time period, and remembering that at first it was a full time job just to survive. The lack of private wealth and thus purchasing power would seem to dictate their needs and purchases. The people made do with what was available and within their budgets.

As the populace learned to cope with their new environment and things became more organized, people became more affluent, and life became easier. As a result the people would want better material things.

Skills more than likely improved with the influx of a more ordered and educated society, it stands to reason that with a larger labor force and ultimately a larger consumer base, Craftsmen could improve their abilities and skills away from just trying to survive the new world to a less hectic environment, where they could take the time to improve their skills, acquire better tools and thus switch from the necessity of utilitarian designs to ones of beauty and design.

After all isn't it the desire of all craftsmen of all trades to try and make other craftsmen envious of their ability and skills and to impart the thought in the consumer that they can't live without the fruits of the craftsmans labor of love. Affluent people do have a tendency to splurge so as to flaunt their purchasing power.

Well, so much for my 2¢ worth.

[Cecil Arnold]

Mike, after reading Dave's reply I had a new thought (thoughts are dangerous and can make one's head hurt) that the change in casework and furniture may have followed the the move in art from Christian to neo-classical. You can trace the movement away from Christan art from the end of the crusades (late 1200s) and consider some of the influence of Arab work that may have found its way back to Italy following that period, along with the trade and cross cultural exposure by Marco Polo's return from China in the late 1200s (1291 I think). The movement away from Christian art was slow, evolving to the point at which Michaelangelo and Leonardo (along with many courageous others) seem to have defined Renaissance art. Giulio Romano's Wedding Fest of Cupid and Psyche, 1527-30 depicts lighter Grecco pieces, which may be an indication of the movement away from the earlier, heavier work. Works by Titan (1538) and Tintoretto (1592-4) further show a definite movement toward lighter pieces, however still not near the point to which you refer. Albrecht Dürer's Saint Jerome (1514 engraving) is a point at which the movement to lighter pieces seems to be finally definitive. The pieces depicted are lighter weight with graceful curves perhaps a precursor to Baroque and Rococo.

At the same time art was changing, so was architecture, with the advent of more open, better lighted structures. Looking at Tiepolo's fresco in Kaisersaal, Wurzburg (1750-53) it is obvious that the heavy earlier work would be inappropriate to the architecture. By 1748 (Horace Walpole, Library, Strawberry Hill, Twickenham) it was all over.

The point of the forgoing is that all art (painting, sculpture, architecture, literature) is interconnected. The differences are broadly cultural, i.e. African, Asian, etc. but oftentimes as in the crusades will "cross breed" and evolve. I do not agree that the change was quite so sudden as you imply in your original post, but much more gradual, ever moving in the direction of W&M. I would agree, however, that there was an increasing movement, much like Impressionism, that took place sometime around the period to which you refer. Another consideration is the direction in which French pieces were heading, coupled with the nationalisem of the British. This could easily be one of the seeds bringing about the paridigm shift to which you refered.

[Dave Anderson NH]

Most of the "new" styles of furniture coming up during the 18th century in colonial America derived from England. The mother country set the styles and newspapers, design books like Chippendale-Heppelwhite-Adam-etc, and offerings by English merchants and export agents were the immediate sources. When the furniture arrived at the homes of the wealthy it was often copied and modified by local craftsmen. Note too, that because of a chronic labor shortage many English apprentices, journeymen, and masters came to the new world looking for opportunity and/or better wages. The full time furniture makers were almost exclusively in the larger "cities" -NYC, Phil, Boston, Newport, Salem, Williamsburg, Charleston, Savannah, etc. rural furniture had a much wider variation in both quality of design and workmanship. In fact, Dunlop furniture of NH was made by several generations of the family from about 1760 until almost 1850 and still retained a stlye which was largely Queen Anne (Georgian).

English styles of the period were derived mostly from either Dutch or French high styles, or from architectural works such as Palladio. Occasional influences like the Chinese Chippendale craze would appear for a while though it was mostly a passing fad. Generally speaking, if you look at the design books you will find that the inherent conservatism of the Americans of the time took the shapes from the design books and emiminated much of the fancier embellishments. Interestingly, because of the transit time over the Atlantic and the slow speed of communication, styles in the UK were often on their way out by the time they became widely adopted in North America.

A geat source of scholarship is AMERICAN FURNITURE, an annual publication edited by Luke Beckerdite (sp) and published by the Chipstone Foundation. slow but interesting reading which is heavily footnoted with primary source material. Expensive though- about $55-65 per issue.

[Alan DuBoff]

The period that most facinates me is late 1800s, and early 1900s when the Arts & Crafts movement swept the globe. What started out in the U.K., and spread in America by the likes of Stickley, and more importantly Greene & Greene, took a completely different perspective on woodworking.

The Federal era was a very refined architecture, IMO, and it is most elegant. Much like the Victorian era, which was also very intricate and elegant. Joinery was not shown, and in most cases the joinery was hidden. Most of the joinery was very sharp, fitting perfectly. Hand carving of very detailed panels, fancy corbels, intricate turned legs...

Contrast that with the Arts & Crafts movement, where joinery was celebrated, it was not only put "in your face", but it was softened, with large soft edges and a warmer look, IMO. In this era, many pieces had more exposed joinery intentionally, so not only was it not hidden but it was also put there purposely.

I'm really growing fond of soft edges.

[Dave Williams]

Mike I did a little research on the matter and from an old book from England it seems the change happened due to four factors. It was known as the 'Transitional Period' and it took place between 1660 and 1714. the factors that led to the change were; 1. Charles II ascended the throne, and he had lived for many years in France and preferred their tastes to England. 2. Then William III (and Mary) became king and he was a Dutchman and brought his home land's designs with him. 3. Walnut was introduced to English craftsmen and allowed for finer workmanship. 4. The process of veneering came in to wide use in many countries. All of these combined to form new designs and ideas on furniture construction.

[Barry Bruner]

I`ve enjoyed all the responses, and I think the conbination of what has been said has pretty well covered it. I love period furniture , modern is nice but the old styles catches my eye. And the tools they had back then ,it is amazing what they came up with. I think when people started getting very rich it did have a influence on how good the furniture they turned out. They would have several people that specilized in one certain thing working on one piece.
Before I got hook on furniture I made several period rifles. I read that there was so many gun makes after the civil war that they had to compete for the business, and thats when they really got great at what they were building. I would guess that would be kinda what happened in the furniture market. I really enjoy all of your messages. Barry Bruner

[Barry Bruner]

The heavy, blockey furniture could be a result of coming from a country with plenty of castles. Took a while to scale things down. BARRY BRUNER

[Deirdre Saoirse Moen]

Before I started woodworking, I really loved Art Nouveau. Later, when I realized it was Hard To Do, I settled on Shaker (being closer to the Danish modern I'd grown up with). I grew up in Pasadena, so obviously there were some Greene and Greene examples floating about, too.

Since visiting Glasgow last year, though, I've come away with a real fondness for some of Charles Rennie Mackintosh's work, which is Scottish Art Nouveau, but very heavily influenced Wright as well. I find it a gentler, more organic form than Wright's.

We almost made it to one of the Willow Tearooms, but barely missed the open hours.

[Mike Henderson]

Thank you everyone for your comments. If I might try to summarize the issues you pointed out,

1. The movement to lighter and more refined architecture had been going on for a long time prior to 1700, as pointed out by Cecil. This trend eventually showed up in furniture.

2. The transition may have occurred in the American colonies in a short period of time because of the rapid growth of a wealthy merchant class around 1700. The heavy furniture we know as Pilgrim furniture may have been necessary because of the difficult living conditions in America in the 17th century.

3. Furniture in the American colonies was heavily influenced by the styles in London, which were driven by the things that Dave listed earlier, especially the styles of France and the Netherlands.

4. Once there was enough wealth to create a market for fine furniture, competition drove quality in both design and construction.

Overall, it seems to me that growth in wealth drove most of the changes in furniture styles - and the 17th century was a time of significant growth in wealth due to the new lands found and the global trading that resulted.

If you have additional items, or disagree with items on my list, please post.

Mike

[Alan Turner]

What a wonderful thread. I have learned a bit, and my mind has been stimulated on this (to me) important subject. Thanks, guys.

[Rob Millard]

I’ve had the same thoughts about the transition from the Chippendale to the Federal period. Chippendale furniture with its carving and relatively massive scale, was in marked contrast to the Federal period, with its delicate proportions and more or less linear surfaces; it must have been a jarring change, in so short a time span.
Rob Millard

[Cecil Arnold]

I really think Dave hit closest to it, and now remember (Sr. moments are getting to be a problem) reading the information he quoted. It would make sense for an apprentice to leave London for the colonies where there is less competition and possibly more work. I also think the French and Dutch influence can not be overemphasized, but also think that the British would have denied such. Finally, while I still think the movement toward the W&M style was slow, when it finally came it seemed to "arrive." I wonder, idly, if it may not have been the Starbucks effect--paying more for less?

[Mike Henderson]

Rob pointed out the rapid transition from Chippendale to Federal. Perhaps that's true of all transitions of style, and may be in the nature of people. Advant garde people would not want something that was just a slight modification to an existing style, but would want something that was totally new, while being pleasing to the eye.

For the specific transition cited by Rob, from Chippendale to Federal, I can see the added impetus of the Independence of the United States, and the desire to declare independence from the styles of London. I think Federal was a distinctly American style - is that true, Rob?

Maybe this same human trait drove the transition from Pilgrim furniture to William and Mary and Queen Anne.

Mike

[James Mittlefehldt]

What a great thread it is indeed very thought provoking. I am willing to stand corrected if need be but isn't Federal essentially the same as what we call Georgian funrniture in Canada and Great Britain?

Dave's point about styles being adopted out of sync with Europe is well taken. I believe and again I am not an expert here so correct me if needs be, I believe, that Empire funriture came and went fairly quickly in Europe but it's north American version seemed to have hung on, at least in Upper Canada, until well into the 19th century, due I suspect to local or rural craftsmen being reluctant to move to a new style.

I saw a piece in an antique store a few years ago obviously craftsman made not mass produced, and it was done in the 1920's but in the empire style. The person who made this piece, it was a high dresser sort of like what we call here a bonnet chest, made it in the empire style but lightened it up considerably so it looked quite graceful and not at all clunky like much local empire stuff does.

Sorry if I got a bit off topic but you guys got me to thinking, never a good idea. By the way did many eastern American craftsmen supplement their income as furniture makers as undertakers as well, it seems to have been a trend here in Canada, in the 19th century.

[Rob Millard]

The Federal period ( Neo-Classical) in the newly minted United States, was in some ways a rejection of England’s rule over the colonies, but the overall designs were still English. The designs were based on Roman archeology (with Greek influence). As with the Chippendale period, there was some delay in the style being adopted here; the Neo-Classical period began probably 10 year earlier in England. Just as was the case with the previous periods, the American craftsman did their own interpretation of the style. Furniture made in the USA, is usually more vertical and has less ornamentation, than its English counterparts. The eagle inlays found on many pieces, is the most visible symbol of the new republics proud confidence, and independence. (ironically these inlays were probably imported from England).
Rob Millard

[Maurice Metzger]

Great thread! To wonder aloud, were there any changes in technology that could account for the change also? Were modern style handsaws becoming more available? Could the change be accounted for by a change away from fashioning furniture using hewing (with drawknives, adzes, single bevel axes) that was a distant relation to timber framing?

Maurice

[Carl Eyman]

It is threads like this one that make me wonder what I'd do without SMC. Thanks to all.

[Hank Knight]

The dramatic changes in furniture design that occurred around the end of the 17th Century and the beginning of the 18th Century coincide with and are explained by the dawn of the "Age of Reason" or "The Enlightenment" in Western Civilization. Sir Isaac Newton's work, especially his publication of his Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica, or simply Principia, in 1687 shook the foundations of traditional thought and ushered in the notion that man's intellect could unlock the laws of the universe and the secrets of nature and society. An abiding faith in the power of human reason swept Western thought and became the underlying principle of The Age of Reason which lasted through most of the 18th Century - ending with the French Revovlution in 1789. The heavy tradition and pessimism of the "Dark Ages," were swept aside and replaced with an almost euphoric sense of confidence in mankind's ability to explain and prevail in the natural world and improve his lot through his own intellect. The English Poet, Alexander Pope, caught the sense of era in these lines: "Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night,/ God said 'Let Newton be,' and all was light."

The Enlightenment was a cosmopolitan pehenomonon; it rejected nationalism and was manafest in every aspect of human endevor. Beethoven, Mozart, Jefferson, Franklin, Voltaire, Chippendale, Hepplewhite - the list goes on. Because the Age of Reason lasted from the late 1600s until 1789, it saw the development and evolution of many styles, not only in art and music, but also in styles of furniture, archtecture and the decorative arts. Many of the furniture design periods discussed in this thread are attributable to the intellectual firment that was the hallmark of the Enlightenment - all of which began about the time Michael pinpoints as the period of the most dramatic change in furniture design from the heavy ideas of the late middle ages. The new designs mirror the intellectual euphoria, lightness and enthusiasm that was flooding into Western thought at the end of the 17th Century.

[Barry Bruner]

Some of you would be darn good histoty teachers, most interesting thread I`ve read. It`s funny when I was young history bored my, I guess when you get old you can relate to thing because you see so many change take place. Thanks enjoyed this a lot. BARRY BRUNER

[Mike Henderson]

This is a follow up to Maurice's {comment, question} about saws. I was reading a book titled "One Good Turn" which purports to be a book about the history of the screw, by Witold Rybczynski. Rybczynski seems to be somewhat of a tool historian. In his book, p18-19, he comments that the modern western saw was introduced in Holland and England in the mid-seventeenth century. To quote

"In the mid-seventeenth century, a new type of saw was introduced in Holland and England. It had a broad, unstayed blade and a wooden pistol-grip handle. The rigid blade, originally made by rolling steel strips, makes a more accurate cut than a frame saw, and there is no frame to interfere with deep cuts. This effective tool became the basic modern crosscut handsaw."

So maybe there was a technological component to this revolution in furniture design.

Mike

[harry strasil]

Lots of good information and history has been given for this topic, but it still boils down to the Craftsmans skill and the quality and type of tools he had available along with his imagination in creating a functional piece that is pleasing to the eye. Some beautiful furniture has come out of shops with some crude tools. Remember its not the tools that make the craftsman, but the craftsman who makes the tools.

After all copying is the truest form of praise. And the first rule of salesmanship is, Give the Customer what he wants.

Sorry to be the odd peg in the wheel. Better cut this down to my 1/2 ¢ worth. Maybe that's why I don't roll well, I still have square corners. LOL

And I am still learning as I will be all my life.

[Tom Jones III]

As an art and history minor in college Dave's points seem to track the closest to what I learned, except for #3, I thought they had walnut all along?

It seems that everyone missed what I thought was generally considered to be the single largest factor ... mahogany from the colonies. For the first time builders had access to a single plank of wood that was as wide as they would ever need. It was flat and very stable. It was in tremendously high demand and it was available in large quantities.