What You Should Be Learning

[george wilson]

Derek,I would not do well in a discussion of contemporary furniture makers because I never liked to make furniture(Though it seems that I have made quite a bit that is in our house!) Furniture is too DULL for my interest. I have made a lot of musical instruments and tools,even including an 18th. C. fire engine posted here before. Huge cider press and mill,lots of gifts for presidents and leaders,PGA trophies. All kinds of things. But furniture making I never got real excited over. It just sits there. And the only reason I made some of the things I mentioned was that it was part of my job.

[Patrick Chase]

This is a very difficult question to answer. Highly elaborate pieces need not be gaudy. It depends on how tastefully they are done.

This guitar I made is not gaudy,though a FEW(maybe 2 I know of) who need more education have branded it as such. It is mentioned in one blog,I know of. Out of jealousy. I made it because I liked the challenge,and it was made to order, though for my personal use, I prefer restraint.

Wow, that is a magnificently executed guitar.

It isn't to my taste, either, but you're right that that such variation in preference doesn't in any way justify a label like "gaudy". It isn't.

[Derek Cohen]

Derek,I would not do well in a discussion of contemporary furniture makers because I never liked to make furniture(Though it seems that I have made quite a bit that is in our house!) Furniture is too DULL for my interest. I have made a lot of musical instruments and tools,even including an 18th. C. fire engine posted here before. Huge cider press and mill,lots of gifts for presidents and leaders,PGA trophies. All kinds of things. But furniture making I never got real excited over. It just sits there. And the only reason I made some of the things I mentioned was that it was part of my job.

George, you have "The Eye". My comment earlier about aesthetic of planes was not as a lover of planes, but as an student of aesthetics. The ability to recognise a line, a curve, whether a moulding is appropriate, proportions ... the list goes on ... does not require that you like furniture, or even that you like a particular style. For example, I am not a fan of ornate rococo furniture - that is gaudy to my eye. Nevertheless I appreciate what is done, and how it is done. I can still take in proportions.I am not even a fan of Queen Anne furniture, as I still find this too busy. However, I admire the elegance of many pieces, and took some inspiration for my Lingerie Chest from bombes of this period. My own taste runs to the lighter, cleaner lines of Danish/Shaker/Japanese furniture. I see a lot of cr@p built in their name. I ... you ... we ... can look beyond styles to explore and understand what makes good design.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Ray Selinger]

When I was in high school, I took Art, more girls take Art then Ind. Ed. The study of Japanese gardens which is what I did when not talking to girls helped in the carving of gun stocks more then any Ind. Ed. would have done.

[Brian Holcombe]

I don't know how my work is viewed. I like to think that I am continuously learning of how to apply a subtle touch.

Design remains the main interest in my professional life. I became a woodworker to see my thoughts come to life. Some basic training goes a long way but I was drawn toward art from as young as I can remember and have pursued it relentlessly. One of my earliest memories was of being in kindergarten class and making art, even then I enjoyed making compositions.

As I progressed through formal education, however, I found that I truly hated formal art education. In spite of excellent grades in school for architecture I abandoned formal study as I found it to be restricted by instructor taste. I decided that self study would allow me to read and understand the thoughts of other artists in my own interpretation rather than through the filtered interpretation of instruction. I felt that subjecting myself to peer review did much to improve my ability and maintain my spirits to the point where I could continue to pursue my passion with enthusiasm.

That said the most important aspect of art is a muse, someone who pulls the best work out of you. The work that I consider my best effort thus far has been work for clients who require my best efforts, shoot down what they do not like but generally allow free thought. Collaborative thought and problem solving creates good art once a basic framework of aesthetic taste is developed. This cannot be understated, at least in my case it has pushed my boundaries and created the subtle amount of pressure required for thoughtful creation to ensue.

For my work, as well, I feel that continuously revisiting and revising projects has made for worthwhile improvements. Your best work should be treated not as something to put on a pedestal but instead the penultimate design of something better. The process of continuously improving a work through to the point of shear exhaustion can truly bring out the best.

My interest in hand tools was solely to improve my art, putting myself further in touch with my medium through manual efforts has increased how much thought is applied to the work and how many improvements have been made. Doing something over and over and over again makes you think about it and get better at it.

I think viewing masterworks can be helpful and not necessarily viewing them in the same field. I like woodblock prints, I feel it is one of the least expensive ways to acquire and appreciate master work as the compositions are often those of the absolute best in their field at the time when the field was at its best.

I look toward the earlier work of people who I consider to be great as they were putting the most amount of effort into their work (in my opinion, there is no real way to know) when I see something like the Wishbone chair by Hans Wegner and all of incredible detail considered by Wegner and how well it works with the material at hand it allows long periods of contemplation. It is a chair that is completely taken for granted, since it is affordable and now ubiquitous but it remains an absolute wonder in my mind. That is something that did not happen all at once but with years and years of refinement and improvement, that is without a doubt the struggle to provide quality work for a demanding but highly encouraging client.

I would like to note that is also, quite often, it is the trained but subconscious mind which produces good efforts. If you read Yanagi's book, The Unknown Craftsman, his interpretation of this effect and how it applied to items throughout history is truly interesting. I have looked at the work that he too finds enjoyable and feel that his discovery of that work and bringing it to the limelight was a service to the people who made it but did not think of it as art so many years prior.

Furthermore we're very lucky to have George pushing us to think about art! Look at that guitar and you see a composition thought about from not only a macro perspective but also a micro perspective. Compare to the compositions of someone like Sharaku or Yoshitoshi and you will see the same ability to see the macro composition without any lack of consideration or perfection in the smallest detail. I feel suspended in time when I look at George's work, it provides such wonderment.

[Bob Glenn]

I've recently been reading and mulling over "By Hand and Eye". Lots to think about and question in that book. Also been reading David Pye's work on design, but finding it a slow slog and a heavy read.

As discussed in Hand and Eye, the old guys didn't use rulers so much, as dividers and sectors. I am currently making a sector and looking forward to discovering what it will show me in use. I am some what upset that after considerable formal education in drafting and architecture, that I wasn't taught what I wasn't taught. Maybe I missed that day, but until recently, I didn't know what a sector was or how it was used.

I am also questioning Tolpin and Walker's thesis about design proportion. From what I understand, the ancients developed the classical orders (Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, etc.)
with very specific proportions. Was it because there was some perceived proportional magic with these, or were they the result of using what they had at the time, IE dividers?

Lot's of questions. Bob

[george wilson]

Bob,in nature,you can very often see the proportions of the "Golden Mean" rectangle shown in the height and width of trees. This may be seen standing "on edge" in some trees. There are other rectangles they used also,such as the "Root 2". They used these rectangles in designing great buildings such as the Parthenon.

They had great concepts of how the eye beholds a building,and they made the base of the Parthenon with a convex curve. Their columns were not just straight tapers,they were also convex.

There is too much to go into here about ancient architecture. It would require studying a good book. Their sense of proportion was much greater than what we have today,though we are aware of their work,and sometimes employ it today. They employed it a lot more 200 years ago. At that time,people were much more trained in the classical arts. Chippendale used these proportions. So did Inigo Jones and Christopher wren when they designed structures. Inigo was the first to use Vitruvian rules in his work. You need to Google these men to see more about them. Too much to write about here. There is a World of knowledge about proportions to use if you study it.

The spiral of the chambered Nautilus shell is a very mathematically conceived form. Look it up. Much of nature's designs follow definite mathematical proportions.

Look up "Golden Mean rectangle",and Root 2 rectangle for an explanation with illustrations,and other classical rectangles. Apply them when you design a chest of drawers,or other things. A Colt Sheriff's model with 3" barrel fits perfectly into a Golden Mean rectangle. I do not know if this was intentional or not.

Somehow,I never use these rectangles consciously. I just design things that have their proportions,such as in dovetails. Don't ask me how. I just do it. I don't mean to sound braggadocio here. It is just something I have "built in". I certainly did not inherit it.

[george wilson]

Patrick: At the top of this page is "Neander sticky threads" go to it and select "FAQ" to see many pictures of various people's work and mine.

[Brian Holcombe]

How did the arrive at specific proportions, such as the golden ratio? I believe in viewing nature and deriving proportion from natural formations. Polykleitos' treaties 'The Kanon' provides what he surmises to be ideal proportion and it is based on the human form.

Fast Forward a number of years and we have Charles and Ray Eames, doing similarly excellent work based entirely on human proportion. Their molded plywood chair was designed based on ergonomic study.

So as humans we seem to relate well to works done in human proportion. We derive the best rectangle based in our own image and seem to like to seeing it applied to many things.

For this reason many cultures have derived the same set of proportions from their surroundings.

[Brian Holcombe]

Sorry George, I see you had already written your explanation by the time I finally hit post on mine.

It seems it can be developed in intuition as well. I performed an experiment to judge the calibration of an experienced eye utilizing my father, formally trained in drafting and a lifelong metal worker. I asked him to help me set the legs of a cabinet to what he viewed as 'good'. We did so and it came out to golden proportion almost exactly.

[Jim Koepke]

In response to the 'Golden Ratio' or 'Golden Rectangle' my golden ratio dividers get used in designing projects at times:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...at-s-in-a-Name

jtk

[george wilson]

A handy thing to have,Jim!!

In addition to learning how to design,which is a complex but sometimes intuitive field,you need to be learning how to use tools accurately. I suggest that you Google "George Wilson Harpsichord",and watch my film which is shown in 6 parts. Pay attention to the use of the tools in the film.

If you have seen my movie,in the part where I am sawing off the ivory tusk,you will see that my saw is moving in a perfectly back and forth motion. There is no wagging or wiggling about it. Absolutely straight line motion.

This straight line motion must be learned as the body's joints want to work in circular motions. I cannot tell you how I developed this straight motion. Again,it is intuitive on my part as far as I can tell. I can't recall ever trying to teach myself to saw with straight motions. I can only tell you that you need to learn how to use a saw like this. It will make for more accurate sawing. There must be no jamming of the saw from excessive force that is mis directed. Let the saw's weight do the cutting.

Keep your eye on how the saw is moving. A back saw is better to look at while you are sawing because it has a rectangular blade with a straight back,for the most part. Old saws often have a tapered blade,though not as tapered as a crosscut or rip saw. If you are sawing with a tapered saw,you can try to keep your eye on the cutting edge,rather than on the back of the tapered blade (which will not be helpful!) Once you master straight motion with the back saw,it should transfer to using the crosscut and rip saws anyway.

Let the weight of the saw do the cutting. If the saw is a decent one,with a heavy enough back(brass is best as it weighs more than steel.
The one I am using in the movie has a steel back,but thick enough to work fine).IF the teeth are sharp,AND OF THE CORRECT SHAPE!!,the weight of the saw will do the work. The saw in the movie was an old Disston that I made a better handle for.

I wish that I had had more authentic tools on hand. But,as in most things that happened in the museum,decisions from on high were suddenly announced,and there was no time to get better tools made. The shop was not very old and established at that time. It is usually all rush rush and a too close deadline.(That includes the special gifts we were asked to make). I used what I had on hand. The Woodcraft "registered chisel" I cut the dovetails is another example of tools I regret having to use. But,there it is. The important thing for you to take away is HOW the tools were used. The dovetails were cut with a few strokes of the back saw,and quickly chiseled on the correct angle. I tilted the non beveled chisel so I could clear the angled sides of the dovetails.I have seen old timers grind a tapered angle on the ends of their square edged chisels to make them clear dovetails better. The angled bevel tapers out in to nothing in about 1/2" This looks ugly to me,so I don't do it. But,I'll bet it was common back when bevel edged chisels were not common. The angle to fit the dovetails into the angular tail of the spinet cabinet was just done by eye. The dovetails pressed properly together when finished. They would be covered by a molding anyway,because in the 18th. C.,it was not considered desirable to see the joints. They were hidden whenever possible. Everyone made dovetail joints. Not an unusual thing to make. Today,they are sort of considered a novelty,a mark of good craftsmanship. Somehow considered hard to make and therefore must be seen. They really aren't that hard to do.

The plane I used right at the beginning,to plane the 4' long back section of the spinet's bottom did not tilt sideways when pushed along the cut. The plane did not take a downward DIVE as it exited the cut. I have seen people who consider themselves good craftsmen DIVE off the end of a cut. Wrong,wrong,wrong. Such "craftsmen" are deluding themselves. Period.

I have seen such a"craftsmen" push 2 boards through a radial arm saw as it cut the line where the 2 boards were pushed together,and consider the resulting cut suitable as a glue joint!! Somehow they think that the edges of the boards are going to fit together tightly just because they shoved them together through the saw!! Amazingly stupid thinking!!! In fact,these 2 silly processes were done by the SAME PERSON! This guy thinks he knows it all. He will NEVER learn anything better. But,I have seen others do it too.

He made a copy of the same spinet I made in the film,and they had it for sale at the Craft House(a retail outlet of the museum). The inlay over the keyboard,which I sawed out in the film,in 3 hours,while the film crew stood around and waited,was a PHOTOGRAPH on his spinet. Glued to the name board and varnished over. The lid of his spinet,if you laid a rule across it from front to back,had warped to more than a 2" deep hollow! I don't remember how they dealt with that defect in the store. The maker thought he was safe from warping since he made the lid out of an antique walnut door. WRONG: wood still holds stresses even when very old. I hope they sent it BACK!

But,I have digressed too much and viewers don't like to read very long posts. Enough for now.

[Jim Koepke]

George,

As usual good advise for beginner and advanced woodworker.

I recently watched a video of someone sharpening a chisel. They were trying to work a straight bevel, but the top of the handle was moving considerably up and down. Seeing this gave me a new insight on my own sharpening method.

I have made videos of myself to demonstrate one thing and learned more about what I was doing wrong than just showing a technique.

It may be good for 'modern' woodworkers with access to a video camera to watch themselves using a saw to find the room for improvements.

jtk

[george wilson]

An excellent idea,Jim! Watching a video WILL expose faults that people might never know they have when performing work that requires skill.

[Prashun Patel]

I very much appreciate this post. Thanks, george. Intuitive but overlooked advice.