SAPFM

I don't care what kind of tools you use. I think you are better off if you know how the furniture you are copying was put together 250 years ago.  Call me a zealot, a purist, any names you wish.  Just makes sense to me.

Adam. 
 
All,
These two quotes are from Mark Twain:
This first covers what I believe Adam is trying to get across.

" Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please." MT

This second needs to be employed by all whenever it applies:

"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did. I said I didn't know." MT

They have been kicking horses like this one forever.
Miike
 
Rich & Ed,

You asked, “Who Cares?” 

It depends on what part of this thread you are talking about.  If it was the misunderstanding listed in the original post in Wood Central “… spray shellac …”, then I would agree with you.  “Stick a fork in it, this thread is done.”

If it is about “SAPFM does a disservice?” then I care very much!!  And the reason I care is because I want this organization to continue.  I enjoy the topics.  They are very informative, even if it is not on something that I am directly concerned with.  I just enjoy learning.  I can also ask for help when I get into a jam. To me, this is a wonderful site and organization.  I also care about whether; we as part of the leaders of this organization are doing what our members want.  Are we taking care of their needs?  My payoff is this organization will still be around 10, 20 years down the road. 

Finally, if I did not care about “SAPFM does a disservice” to its members, and no one else cared about it either, then there would be no need for this organization to exist, and thus it would eventually die.

I care about SAPFM!!

Adam is right about that beer.

Cheers,
David
 
The saga continues,first,I think all information about "Period Furniture"is welcome here.The contributing non-member posts are an example of the  open door policy,we have here.This is a great site for everybody interested in period furniture.The academics, that share information with "us"(plumbers,electricians,milkmen,etc) are greatly appreciated.As far as the direction of the site,so far it's been pretty good.If others would like to have more to say,about the site policy,a good first step,might be to become paying members.Everybody knows the old saying about the "Cow"!
                                                                           
                                                        Ed
 
This conversation has been almost beaten to death in past forums, but the discussion is good.  I was the one to make the comment about an "eletist" attitude be some members a while back, in response to the use of traditional hide glue vs. other glues.  Guess I survived, and speaking as a member of the EC, I don't feel SAPFM does any disservice to any member.

Let me put some thing is perspective, hopefully about using only traditional 18th century hand tools to make "a period piece of furniture".  I somethimes think the purists (who can do what they want, and good for them!) often forget that the furniture we see in museums, etc. came from shops with apprentices, journemen, etc who did a lot of the scut and routine work, and there were specialty carvers, turners, etc. who all worked on or contributed pieces.  I doubt any one 18th century cabinetmaker working alone could produce enought to feed a family.

I can attest to this when working with early 19th century tools at my shop at Genesee Country Village.  It is a tedious process to prepare rough stock and do all the joinery, etc. myself (granted I do talk to guests also which slows the process down).  I really feel the old time cabinetmakers would have bought any "power" tool available if it saved them time.  In a sense, the apprentices were the power tools of the day.  I do rough preparation of stock in my nice heated shop in the winter, and do the real finish work at the village, so I can complete a piece in one season.  I do not in any way feel I am being dishonest by doing this.

Enough rambling.  I feel SAPFM is doing a service to members by examining the older pieces, disseninating information about techiques, but also education about how to work in the 21st century.

I think Gene Landon, Jeff Headly, or other cartuche winners would agree.

Jim
 
CBWW  Your post was along the lines of what I was trying to say - many of us are interested in the techniques, tools and materials used to produce those coveted antiques in the museums, but that is not the only way to produce a representation of what an 18th century piece should look like. 

Since many of the SAPFM members (like yourself) are professionals that make their living making representations of 18th and early 19th century pieces, and using all hand tools and period finishes doesn't pay the bills, it should not be a surprise that many of the techniques discussed on the forum and found in Period American Furniture contain many modern methods of generating close facsimiles to the originals.

A related topic to this thread is what, exactly, is "close enough" to be considered an "authentic" reproduction?  The answer, of course, would vary depending on whom you ask.  In my case, I would not consider making any piece with plywood in any location, nor modern fasteners such as phillips head screws, but that's because my definition of "authentic" is that it should not be immediately obvious to the casual observer that the piece is modern. 

Others, however, might have a very different idea of what's acceptable.  Norm's 2005 show on building a 18th Century Connecticut Highboy comes to mind.
 
If I am working as a historical interpreter building a piece of 18th century furniture then I would follow the historically correct processes of the original builder to show how it was done, the purpose  to educate and to record the event for future references.  But if I’m building the piece for a client or my own use then I would take liberties to speed up the building processes by incorporating modern tools.
It’s not as if there is a disservice being committed by SAPFM.  For SAPFM goal is to pull together those that are interested in American Period Furniture... But I believe that the most important aspect of SAPFM is that it is collecting a treasure chest of knowledge for future generations.
My suggestion to those that criticize SAPFM, become a member, make a difference, it’s easy to sit back and criticize.

Don Boettler
MRV Chapter
 



 
Hi Jim,

apprentices were the power tools of the day

I keep hearing this here.  No evidence exists to suggest this is the case.  Anecdotal evidence suggests the contrary.  We don't know for sure because they never told.  But there's just no reason to believe this commonly held belief is accurate.

apprentices, journemen, etc who did a lot of the scut and routine work

I believe this to be true, though probably not as intended.  I think apprentices were given routine jobs, but they were whole jobs like coffins, hat boxes, etc, not subprocesses like surfacing stock for someone else.

I doubt any one 18th century cabinetmaker working alone could produce enough to feed a family.

This is probbaly the easiest to refute.  Journeymen cabinetmakers in 18th Philadelphia earned approx 5s/day for the first three quarters of the century.  This was more than enough to feed a family.  It was a good middle class living at the time.  We have no reason to believe these men needed or had slave labor or indentured labor to help them earn their 5s/day or to execute their work.

Some places, like Philadelphia did indeed have professional carvers distinct from other trades.  But this was not common to all colonies.  And the furniture produced in these different regions shows it.  In fact, this is used to distinguish between pieces from different regions.  New York for example, did not have great carvers.  Philadelphia had many many.  I think I heard up to 10 operating at one time in a city with at least 20 active cabinetshops.  But of course carvers carved more than furniture.  

Coincidentally, records from the PMoA show Philly carvers like Martin Jugiez earning up to 10s/day.  Master Thomas Nevell, the Philly carpenter who built Mount Pleasant in 1760, billed 8s/day for his time.  Carpenters like Nevell probably did have more cooperative shops, where the average project (build a house) really couldn't be accomplished by a single man efficiently.

Adam
P.S.  Please don't read anything into the above or try to place into the context of this thread.  Its just information for you to consider and nothing more.
 
"Some places, like Philadelphia did indeed have professional carvers distinct from other trades.  But this was not common to all colonies."

Adam - this is not strictly true.  While it may indeed be possible to find a specific example of a (smaller) colonial city that had few, if any, specialized carvers, this was not the usual situation.  As an example, Samuel McIntire did a great deal of bespoke work as a carver in Salem, Massachusetts, which was not exactly a huge city.

Probate records from a number of colonial cities indicate specialized carvers - Charleston comes to mind.
 
That's interesting.  I think we're talking about slightly different things. 

Jim and I are talking about professional carvers assisting cabinetmakers in the construction of furniture.  We know that happened in Philly.  We also know it didn't happen everywhere.  Even large urban centers, New York for example, may have had carvers in town, but they weren't necessarily called on for furniture work.  I think Goddard did his own carving, is that right? 

Jim and I were just talking about whether or not these folks were required to execute the construction of period furniture.  I think the quick answer is they were not.  Ditto, apprentices were not required.  They probably weren't workshop helpers per se.

Hey this has been interesting stuff.  All good.  I'll see you guys in Wmsburg.  Don't forget to track me down.  I'll be in the first session but will more than likely stay over at least one additional day.

Cheers,

Adam
 
You're (probably - I've never seen a reference in a scholarly work that suggests otherwise) correct about the Goddards, but Samuel McIntire was a proper example of a specialist that was employed to complete the carving on furniture, though not build it, in Salem.  Some of the more spectacular examples are the Derby chest-on-chests where the carving is attributed to McIntire, but the construction of the cabinet was by another shop.

Here is another example of the specialization of the furniture trade - this quote comes from a reference to the article "The Use of Wax Finishes on Pre-Industrial American Furniture" from the Wooden Artifacts Group archive (really good reading for those interested - and it's free):

"The Boston furniture industry was a very specialized trade, with carvers, turners, and jappanners offering very specific services", which strongly implies that the construction of a high-style piece in that city was similarly parceled out as in Philadelphia.
 
I am new to SAPFM I have recently been involved in restoration of period antiques.  I would like to learn how the "old masters" did what they did.  I am eager to learn. New techniques are good also.  Frank Klauz said "if my grand father a router he would have used it".  Having said that i am fascinated at the joinery of the pieces I have worked on, some were deliciously elegant and I have yet to figure out just how they were made.  I have much to learn and hope SAPFM will be a valuable resource.

Raul
 
  I once had a college professor who said "imperfection is the beauty of music".

  Much so with period furniture. The sterile surfaces and crisp perfection of modern machining are as bland as perfectly synthesized music. I sacrifice much profitability to incorporate period tooling on any surface that can be seen, and most that are unseen. Each time I have an opportunity to study the great period pieces I am suprised not at the perfection but at the imperfection and inconsistency. The overall result of period tools is to produce a sculptured surface that is a comfort to the eye.

  Believe me, I couldn't stay in business without my wide-belt, planer, and jointer, but after the stock prep it's time to turn off the electricity.

  Love to hear more from others on this matter.  By the way, lets hear some opinions on "copy" vs "reproduction".

Paul Rulli
 
As a sucker for getting drawn into lively debates, here's my two pence.  I have run a pro woodshop since 1995.  Started out focusing on furniture, but soon evolved into more of a custom cabinet shop.  This was nature's way of allowing me to earn a living.  I am truly amazed at the lengths that many hobbyists are willing to go in the pursuit of period furnituremaking.  It is no doubt some of the finest furniture being made in the world.  I cannot wait until life permits me to spend a year or two in the shop doing my period dream piece.  I even have the Federal drop front desk to reproduce picked out.  That said, even when I make the piece that is the culmination of all my woodworking experience, I cannot promise that I won't use electricity.

On another note, I received my annual APF journal today.  The journal, under Mark and Margaret Arnold's stewardship has evolved into a publication that is extremely worthy of the furniture that it is devoted to.  THANK YOU to Mark and Margaret!!!!! 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top