I noticed that Rob Millard has written an article in the current issue of FWW and a good one at that. I have been considering writing an article on building a blanket chest. I currently have an 18th century design underway and I am taking photos as I go along. I am curious how many of you would be interested in such an article. Spoke with Anatole Burkin at the Philadelphia show when he stopped by my booth. He advised me to see what the magazine needed and then write accordingly. Since what the magazine needs is a matter of opinion, I hereby invite your feedback on my idea. I have posted several pieces in the gallery over the last several months so most of you know what my work is all about. So let’s hear it guys(and gals).Whadda ya think? Would you be interested in such an article?
Mark
Replies
Sounds good to me. All the more power to you if FWW publishes your article. I like to see woodworking projects over reviews and methods to sharpen this and that. Even if the project is of a topic I have little or no interest in I still enjoy reading about different methods of building.
Scott C. Frankland
"This all could have been prevented if their parents had just used birth control"
Thanks Scott, I'm workin on it.
Mark
Prof,
Absolutely. For me, those are the most valuable articles in FWW. The more details the better, from stock selection and preperation to design considerations and glue-up (I have an issue with glue-up). I like the idea of an 18th century blanket chest...it will probably have interesting joinery and expansion issues. Looking forward to it....
BG ,
Thanks for the encouragement and even more for the specifics. sometimes as an experienced furnituremaker I tend to take things for granted and it helps to know what you guys are really looking for. It will help as i finish building the piece and write the text to know what to dwell on. You are right about the expansion and contraction issues and I have spent considerable time solving them. I like my stuff to be authentic but I also don't want it falling apart.
the rest of you guys chime in here as to what you want to see in the article. thanks
mark
Sounds like a great article. Personally, I'm a fan of "sidebars" that elaborate on a certain aspect of building a project, an aspect that might be outside the ordinary, or an unusual or specialized way of approaching a particular part of the building task.
As far as deciding what to submit to a magazine, although I don't know how that generally goes, I was recently encouraged to consider submitting to one of the WWing mags. My first impulse was to ask what they were looking for. Was surprised not to get a response to that question. Assuming the question didn't get lost in a stack somewhere, I'd guess the mags want you to submit what you feel is a quality article and then they'll get back to you.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)
Thanks Jamie,
I thought about the sidebar thing and I think it's a good idea. Appreciate the feedback.
Mark
Very good point about side bars. They allow you to avoid sharp transitions in the body copy, which are always difficult to execute. They also help the readers sort though what aspects of the article are of greatest interest to them. The only trouble with submitting multiple side bars to Taunton is that they tend to have to run the gauntlet of editiorial "sorting" before they have a chance to reach the reader.
They also tend to get sacrificed en masse. If space limitations are tight (which is always the case at Taunton) they're the easiest things to cut. I often offer side bar copy...sometimes as a sacrificial "strawman" to preserve what I want to keep in the body copy. Sometimes they hit a chord and even get published...but the vast majority hit the cutting room floor.
It's important to keep the body copy tight and flowing and offer the side bars for some of the details or tangents you hope they'll buy. You have to concentrate on the prioritation of the truly key points in the body copy...because, if you don't, they'll prioritize them for you...And you'd be amazed at how your judgement and theirs can be as different as night and day. Like Sgian, I usually deal with prioritization on a second pass. The first draft is virtually always just an explosion of thoughts...Like they would come out in an impromptu conversation with a fellow woodworker. If you try to prioritize on the first pass, you'll bog down.
...But then, maybe I shouldn't be talking the finer points of strategy on such a public forum as Knots. After all, those guys are running it...and the only way I've been able to keep ahead of them all these years is they keep changing editors.
Thanks again Jon and Richard,
I know that you guys have been successful in getting stuff published and your comments are very much appreciated. This should be an interesting process to say the least.
And for the record I enjoy both of you being on this board with input on everything from woodworking to your comments in the cafe. I admire your patience, Jon especially, in responding to what I think are some ridiculous posts( in the cafe) without losing your cool.
If you think of anything else let me know or email me with it.
Again thanks
Mark
Useful discussion for all practising and potential writers.
A couple of questions to ask yourself, as a potential author, is "Why should people read my article?"; and "why do people buy magazines?"
When I first started to use computers for publishing and graphic design, in the late 80s, I bought every related magazine I could find. What I read changed what I did.
When I set out to make a living as a furniture maker, in the early 80s, I subscribed to FWW (and the British and Australian equivalents), bought all the books, and read everything I could lay my hands on. That's where most of my learning came from. After a gap of 15 years, I'm buying FWW again, but now because I want to see what's happening in the machinery and tool area, and what people are making - in the `gallery' articles.
When I edited (and mostly wrote) the late lamented New Zealand Woodworker, the articles people most appreciated were 'how to' articles.
The point? Good writing and good magazines change what you do.
So what have you done in the construction of this project that would cause other woodworkers to change what they do? What did you learn that would benefit others? Articles that deliver better ways of working are by far the most valuable, whatever your level of skill.
Thanks kiwi, point well taken.
Mark
Good on ya Mate
Mark, another thing to add to the discussion:
Whether you're planning to submit your article to an editor as a full draft or just a concept, you might also want to consider sending along some photos that illustrate your points and may provide some visual guidance when/if the article gets accepted.
Sure, whoever decides to publish your article may want to schedule a photo shoot at some point to take some publication-quality pictures, but if you're able to get some decent shots while you're in the process of making the current chest, it will likely go a long way toward separating you from those who submit ideas and those who get published.
David"The world that was not made is not won by what is done" -- Mundaka Upanishad
Dave,
thanks for your input. I have a very good camera and plan to take a lot of photos along the way. I felt that would go a long way towards selling the article.
Thanks
Mark
You can never have enough plans for chests of different sizes and styles. I vote YES!
SawdustSteve
thank you Steve
mark
im a regular over at breaktime and just happened over here, and you should definitely go for it.
i wrote an article for fhb a few years ago and currently working on another,
you'll find the editorial staff most professional and very helpful
with both of my articles the assigned editor visited my shop and the workplace for the photoshoot
the editor for my first article was Zack Gualkin who as you may know died last winter in a car accident, see the obit in last months fhb and fww
it is definitely worth pursuing, its a great feeling to see your work and writing in print
steve
"caulking is not a piece of trim" Z Gaulkin 1997
Thanks Steve,
We talked about this a couple of weeks ago over at breaktime when I posted the big mahogany door. I appreciate the feedback. And you are right, it would be an ego trip to see yourself published in the pages of FWW.
Thanks and I still have your email, I might pick your brain a bit when I get a little farther into this project. so far all I have done is the glueups . The hinges take 6 weeks to get so I guess I have time.
mark
prof, I've never known where my attempts at verbal diarrheoa come from, nor where they are actually going until I get to the end. When I'm in the mood, words flow out-- at other times I'm as dry as an old stick and can't even start a sentence. After the screeds of aimless drivellings have been committed to hard disk I have to go back in and make some sense of it. All I know is that when I'm in the mood to produce, I'd better just let it all spew out.
Sometimes I start something, get a couple of paragraphs scrawled out, and it whithers on the branch for a couple of years, only to be reactivated by a task that comes into the workshop.
I would say though that Jon has got it right. Think of your perceived audience and write for it-- or in my case I take a look at the nonsense on the page and imagine a reader of certain abilities and rework as I think right. When you've finished, read it all out aloud. If it sounds daft to you at that point, rework it again. I have never written for Taunton, and probably never will, so there's a good chance that I don't know what I'm talking about, ha, ha. Slainte. Website I just didn't like being 'me', so my alter-ego is back, ha, ha.
Thank you Richard,
You are another for whom I have great respect and your points are well taken. This might take awhile as I have other fish to fry but I do intend to follow it thru. I am pleased with the response so far and hopefully Taunton will like the idea. I appreciate your input.
Mark
Writing, prof, requires direction. You either impose your own direction, or an editor suggests to you a topic to be covered and its limitations. I liken it to designing and making furniture. If, out of the blue, I say to myself I'm going to design and make a chair-- well, where do I start? Dining chair, easy chair, fast food restaurant chair, etc.? Each has a different functionl, requires diferent design aesthetics, and a price to work within.
The clever designer elicits all the necessary information from the client, establishes the brief, and designs within that brief. Articles are similar. In my case I generally just let myself bang about like a loose cannon until I discover what the focus of the article is, although sometimes I know exactly where I want to go at the beginning. I may start with a general idea of what I want to convey, but the direction is usually a bit hazy. It's a very inefficient way of writing, but fortunately I've got plenty of words to spare, ha, ha, and I'm full of it.
Often I'll get to the end of some stream of conciousness thing, save it, and later I'll look at it again, and think, "What a load of twaddle!" But I've learnt to leave it as is, for now. Sometimes months later, I go back in and rework the reams of rubbish into a concise short paragraph that makes a pertinent point.
Now, for instance, I've got about three or four articles on the go. Each contains what I think might be useful stuff, but it's longwinded, and there are gaps in the flow-- spaces I don't know yet how to fill. As time goes on I'll revisit each and tidy them up. I liken my twitterings to responses in forums. Here, I'm responding off the cuff, and it's messy, but given editing time, I could make it much neater.
Luckily, you have a specific project to write about. There is a beginning and an end. Your choice is down to things like, "Should I describe how to get a board flat so that the novice can follow, or should I assume that the reader already knows that?" You'll have to pick the latter because an aspiring novice can learn how to flatten a board somewhere else-- and novices like to dream about what they might be capable of--- later. Slainte.Website I just didn't like being 'me', so my alter-ego is back, ha, ha.
Professor, I'd be exceptionally interested in an article like this! I'm fascinated by historic pieces and not just originals or pure reproductions...but old styles executed using modern techniques. To me, it honors the Great Masters more than slavishly reproducing their solution to a given problem. An article like this is also far more useful to the modern woodworker who doesn't know a molding plane from a muck shovel...nor how to use either one.
As for tips on writing it, never let your potential audience leave your mind. My mental image of the stereotype FWW reader is one who is moderately advanced in basic skills, familiar with the essential power tools in his shop, intensely interested in woodworking, and eager to know how YOU did it. He's there to steal your knowledge...i.e., how YOU converted 19th century techniques to modern machine processes; why they did it the way they did and how YOU achieved a like result in the way you did. Pretend you are looking at this guy straight in the eye and your only goal is to communicate your thoughts to him...as if it were a verbal conversation (but keep it clean...some of them wear skirts these days.)
Forget about grammar, spelling and all the other formalities of modern English in its written form. Straightening that grimble out is what editors are for...and Taunton has some very good ones...including the one you met at the show (in fact, he's such a nice guy, I'm amazed he's still there. :o))
Your soul tactical objective is to leave that reader (your "listener") with the sense that; "hey, I can do that." And, hopefully; "hey, that's so nice I WANT to do it."
...There may be other ways to peddle a manuscript to Fine WoodWorking, but I've managed to slip between the covers of that rag literally scores of times...and I've written every one of them using the above mind set. From your posts, I know you know your stuff, Professor...now just tell it like it is.
Godspeed.
Note: The numerous edits here were needed to correct enough of the grammar and spelling to make this phiosophical rambling almost intelligible. Sure do wish they'd assign an editor to clean these posts up...this is a real pain.
Edited 6/17/2003 11:06:13 PM ET by Jon Arno
Edited 6/17/2003 11:08:00 PM ET by Jon Arno
Edited 6/17/2003 11:11:05 PM ET by Jon Arno
Edited 6/17/2003 11:19:55 PM ET by Jon Arno
Thanks Jon,
I appreciate the tips and I have always enjoyed your articles. I specifically remember you taking on Scott Landis over the certified lumber debate some years back. I thought you took him apart rather well. He is no doubt a nice guy just mislead.
I have learned most of what I know from the pages of FWW and their other publications so now I think it is time to give something back. And the idea of getting paid for it aint bad either LOL.
I do use a lot of period methods but I also use machines for the grunt work just as an old time cabinetmaker would have used an apprentice to do it
Thanks for the ideas in terms of the target audience. Sometimes it is hard to gauge that. The letters to the editor really run the gamut. From rank novices to seasoned pros.
I have great respect for your opinions and expertise (and your writing sucess) so it means a lot to have you respond.
thanks again
Mark
Yes Mark, FWW readers span a spectrum from hand tool purists to people wondering if the magazine will ever get around to tips on hanging wallpaper...and it's often these fringe readers that write in because, from their point of view, the magazine doesn't spend enough space on the details in their specific areas of interest...But if you aim for the hypothetical guy I described, you'll take out the center of the spread like a top-of-the-line battle Tank.
...As for Scott Landis, I know he's a sincere and caring conservationist and a very experienced and accomplished woodworker. We just don't agree on the worth of Certification Programs. In my almost quarter of a century of writing for FWW, I've avoided confrontation like the plague, because it always allienates some fraction of the readership...and that is never good for business.
The only reason I dug in on that issue is I think these misguided and fact oblivious Programs are nothing more than a bucket of Holy Water. Like the Medieval Indulgences; they're a fee based system for the absolution of sin. They have the (albeit unintended) potential of doing a greater damage to the world's precious gene pool than what our ancestors did in burning and converting most of the forests of eastern North America to cereal crops. We lost some species, perhaps some we'll never know we had, but what these "programs" portend in the tropics is a massive cascade of extinctions...in the hundreds (if not thousands) of species, both flora and fauna. We CANNOT manage these tropical ecosystems yet. We simply are not smart enough...and we are at least decades away from developing the state-of-the-art to where we even understand the details of how they work.
...But other than that, I'm always open to new concepts in forestry. Now that we've recently discovered that those legume "weed trees" in our Southern Pine plantations actually play an important role, we're almost up to speed on how to manage a monoculture.
Edited 6/18/2003 8:51:41 AM ET by Jon Arno
Jon,
Just wanted to pick up on this:
"hey, I can do that." And, hopefully; "hey, that's so nice I WANT to do it."
For me, I want to experience this. Perhaps the best thing I've read in woodworking thus far is Ian Kirby's book The Complete Dovetail. He begins by speaking to the tenets of the Arts and Crafts movement and focuses on "It should be constructed in a rightful manner". He takes the reader through a disciplined process that reflects the philosophy of the times and builds successful outcomes based on a foundation of smaller steps. I could not wait to get to the shop and experience the process the masters followed. As important, many of the process steps are transportable to other projects.
With the Prof's article, He'll probably reflect another period of thought eg. Amish, Shaker. Perhaps he'll have an opportunity to share how they integrated there philosophy into the design and work process also.
I mention this because many of us who have no formal training in woodworking get as motivated by the 'common sense' of the process as the actual 'how to' of the project
BG,
I know you addressed your post to Jon, but thank you anyway. I have never been a big fan of Ian Kirby but yor point about techniques being transportable is very well taken. I have learned a lot from articles featuring projects that I would never chose to build (unless a customer specificaly asked for them). Some techniques are directly transportable and others may suggest a solution for a particular situation. The point is to be adaptable. thanks for your input and as I write this article over the coming months I will try to keep that point in mind.
Mark
Mark,
I write for a trade magazine also, and writing (for me anyway) is a lot easier then getting what I want to say straight first. What I usually get hung up on is what knowledge I want to assume the reader already has. I would accept that FWW has readers that cover all the possibilites of experience and knowledge so be prepared to fill the needs of all. But.....too remedial and you lose the more experienced and a lot of "knowledge" holes and you lose the less experienced. This is where the preparing to write makes the writing a whole lot less aggrevating in the edit process. A good editor can really make or break the joy and pleasure you can get out of writing an article.
This is hard to explain, but get a real good sense of why you are writing the article also. I often write for myself, and I often write for others. There is absolutely nothing right, wrong, good or bad about either process or perspective, but being honest with yourself from the get go sure helps the words appear with confidence because you will spend a lot less time trying to figure out exactly what it is you are trying to communicate. It's also been my experience that as much as you may like to, you can't do both. It results in a lot superfurlous explanations and backtracking which is fine for text books, but not for "reading pleasure."
You already have the knowledge or you wouldn't be considering writing the article so what you are up against is just the presentation, and that's up to you. There's a lot of satisfaction in writing so "Good luck."
FG, I look forward to reading your first.
Don
Edited 6/18/2003 12:19:48 AM ET by Don C.
Edited 6/18/2003 12:25:09 AM ET by Don C.
Thanks Don, I will bear that in mind as I go thru this.
Mark
I'd like to see the time it takes for an actual project. Also the material cost and the selling price of the piece. The selling price is what interests me. We see all these great pieces and don't know what they sell for. If I'm building something for the first time, I don't charge for my learning curve but I do build into my price a bit of a cushion. I don't expect my customer to pay for me to scratch my head and drink coffee while I work out the kinks.
Dave Koury
Fellow woodworkers and magazine readers:
This has been a most interesting discussion. Jon, you are right on target in how you described the average FWW reader. I guess that's why your articles usually score very well with our subscribers. (In regards to your description of me, I too am amazed I am still here!)
Writing and editing, like woodworking, only improves with experience. Just when you think you're getting good at it, you see someone else's fine work and it makes you realize there's still a lot more to learn. And the more you know, the more you realize that learning is a lifelong pursuit. That's what keeps it interesting and one mentally challenged.
As far as being published in the magazine, we have a very talented staff that is dedicated to helping authors, whether you are a beginner or a veteran, with both the words and visuals. I would say to budding authors, don't worry so much about the actual writing: concern yourself with presenting clear, valuable information. We are always looking for a new twist on a process (after all, woodworking of the kind that we are interested in has not changed all that much in the last two centuries--dovetails and mortise and tenon joints are still the building blocks of well-made furniture). As some have noted here, oftentimes readers read project articles with the intent of learning a new way to do something, not necessarily to build that particular piece. When we look at story ideas, we look for those tips and techniques that will be of broad appeal to readers, whether they're building in the Queen Anne style or Shaker or whatever.
And last, don't be dismayed if we don't bite on an idea you send us. Try us again with another idea. Publishing a magazine for 300,000 woodworkers is a very fluid process -- we have to mix up the topics and the furniture styles from issue to issue and year to year in order to satisfy readers of very diverse needs and tastes. It's impossible to please everyone with every article; the hope is that there's enough interesting material in each issue to keep enough of you folks coming back for more. A few years back the magazine took a direction toward the fringe -- some really interesting albeit unusual stuff did get published -- but not enough of you were interested. That's why we are sticking to more traditional furniture, tools and techniques. It's not unlike being in the business of making furniture: If most of your customers want Arts and Craft, but you keep building Biedermeier, your business is not going to make it.
And last, aspiring authors often ask me what the magazine is looking for. I am not being dismissive when I say we're looking for your ideas. That's what keeps the magazine fresh and interesting.
Anatole BurkinExecutive editorFine Woodworking
P.S. Is this spell check program strange or what? It wanted to change Biedermeier to Tenderometer. That must explain some of the "interesting" spellings that Jon comes up with. ;)
DJK,
Your points are well taken and I will keep them in mind as I write the article. As Anatole pointed out in the post after yours there is no guarantee it will be published but I have my fingers crossed. I always keep track of the time on my projects so I will include that. but it may as Jon put it,"wind up on the cutting room floor" we shall see.
Mark
I would be interested in such an article. I have built 7 chests for my daughters and daughters-in-law (all cedar lined since they wanted "hope chests"), but I'm always interested in any new ideas for design or tips on construction. Go for it.
PaulW
Needs to be an article with an angle --- Mike Dunbar did one for FW on building a blanket chest with only hand tools.
Over the years most ww mags have had lots of articles on building blanket chests. I'd imagine you will need to differentiate yours in some manner from those before you.
I most appreciate articles that describe "why" instead of just "what". I need to know why you selected a certain joint or wood, not just what you did.
As several have already noted, the subject of simply building a blanket chest has been done to death in all the woodworking magazines. I count 71 references in a FW search on the subject. There is, of course, nothing truly new in any aspect of woodworking, but can you really add something fresh about building a blanket chest?
I wholeheartedly encourage you to submit an article idea to the magazine--it needs fresh viewpoints. But perhaps you will consider another topic.
Don,
I have yet to see anything remotely close to the chest i am building but I thank you for your input, and yes I do think I have things to add.
Mark
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled