What is your favorite style of furniture?
- Contemporary
- Arts & Crafts
- Shaker
- Federal / Sheraton
- Queen Anne / Chippendale
- Other
You will not be able to change your vote.
Discussion Forum
Get It All!
UNLIMITED Membership is like taking a master class in woodworking for less than $10 a month.
Start Your Free TrialCategories
Discussion Forum
Digital Plans Library
Member exclusive! – Plans for everyone – from beginners to experts – right at your fingertips.
Highlights
-
Shape Your Skills
when you sign up for our emails
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. -
Shop Talk Live Podcast -
Our favorite articles and videos -
E-Learning Courses from Fine Woodworking
-
-
Replies
No Art Nouveau? Personally I think some of the Art Nouveau furniture makers did incredible stuff. I don't know how to call it my favorite because Art Nouveau is either fantastic or awful--there doesn't seem to be much in between.
Wish we had a choice....
Which do you like to look at?
Which do you like to build?
I answered from the look at perspective...
I like the Art Nouveau stuff too. Voted Arts & Crafts because there's at least some interesting crossover - A&C with AN inlays, for one.
I suppose Art Deco is somewhere between Arts & Crafts and Contemporary. Its a shame that Deco is not in this list of choices, as the finest high-end art furniture being made today is predominantly Art Deco (Wendall Castle, Dakota Jackson, Brueton, Pace, Lee Weitzman, John Blazy Designs (sorry))
I suppose the very worst of Art Nouveau might look like Art Deco. Maybe that's what I don't like about bad Art Nouveau. :)
Hey Larry,
I suppose after thinking about for awhile, I understand why most (here) dislike Art Deco (I include "Contemporary" in some of what I consider Art Deco).
Similar to your comment about bad Art Noveau, its likely because there is a fine line between great Art Deco design and horribly gaudy. In most of my books on Art Deco, I personally do not like most designs for this reason. Its also very likely that most readers aren't even familiar with good Art Deco design. I encourage you to look at Ruhlmann, Kem Weber, Donald Deskey, or Ely Jacques Kahn. Unfortunately much of their work doesn't float my boat, but some is well worth seeing. Ever see a Dakota Jackson armoire?
I also am more in love with the "Tenets" of Art Deco, rather than style examples. The basic principals (the ones I like) are:
- primarily a "less is more" approach (Streamlined Moderne)
- the embracing and incorporation of the most innovative, cutting edge materials available contrasting well with fine wood (like Stainless Steel, glass, aluminum, opaque lacquer, plastics etc)
- emphasis on "mathematical" design motifs, like the geometric triad of cone, cube, sphere. The use of gradations, repeats, negative space, true arcs, etc.
- The intentional incorporation of metaphors of progress seen in machine-age Deco, like piping, gridding, gussetting/buttressing, stack gradations, cooling fins, all set in pieces that have motion, or gesturing.
Just off the top of my head - perhaps to much of me, but there is much we owe to Deco.
If you like using unique materials in your furniture, high-tech finishes, and geometric shapes - Deco did it first. Unfortunatly, as with anything else, there is bad deco too.
Art Nouveau, Prairie, Mission cam all be grouped as Arts & Crafts. All happened around 1890. It was a natural reaction to Victorian and Edwardian Design.
The Victorians were the first society to have a large middle class. Like most any group to become middle class they desired flashy ornate furniture (When you are a peasant and only own a few pieces of furniture, you want them to stand out.) After awhile people just got tired of the visual clutter.
Also, with all its trim. Victorian furniture could be poorly constructed. Another trait of the middle class is to place a value on price over pretty much all else.
Arts and Crafts design allowed quality workmanship to become apparent.
It showed up in three different areas.
Art Nouveau - France
Mission - South Californian
Praire - Chicago
Each reflect the personality of each area.
Praire is from to business power house of the time simple yet structured.
Mission is from to most Mediterranean place in North America. Also used inexpensive materials. (White Oak to simulate English Oak leather )
Art Nouveau was from the art center of the world the designs just flow. Doesn't produce in volume well.
A good example of the combination of Prairie and Art Nouveau can be seen at the Canadian restaurant (Le Cellar) in Epcot. Eastern Canada got both influences.
These would all merge to become Art Deco. The first design style to embrace clean design within an industrial society.
i am currently an architecture student and this design background has inflluenced me greatly and this is probably why i chose "contemporary" even though you ask any one in the design field and the will say that contemporary really is just a term for genaric junk like those big houses that by the lake that loook like they too every house between the late 1700's and the 50's and mashed them togethe r in a 7000 sq ft piece of junk. i actually am a big fan of marcel breuer and his contemporarys the clean lines and simplisity of the thought intrigues me. that is not to say that i do not find all the other catagorys beutiful. however from a furniture building standpoint i would have to say that anyone can attempt to copy but it takes an artist to truly come up with an original thought.
Just wondering what all of these polls are for. Are you using them to steer FWW to what the readership wants or are you looking for information for future articles. This poll and the last never really had any information regarding what you were looking to do with the information.
Scott C. Frankland
Scott's WOODWORKING Website
"This all could have been prevented if their parents had just used birth control"
Scott, we use the polls in many ways -- to gather quick and dirty market research, to add an interactive feature to our site (the polls can appear concurrently on the magazine home page, if we want), to amuse and stimulate discussion. Because we are limited to yes/no responses and in some cases have space constraints, it is difficult to construct a poll that offers mutually exclusive choices or that satisfies all users. Especially discerning, analytical users.
Ruth DobsevageTaunton New Media
Thanks for the quick reply I understand were you are coming form so we will leave it at that.Scott C. Frankland
Scott's WOODWORKING Website"This all could have been prevented if their parents had just used birth control"
This was a difficult one for me to answer, since, with the exception of "contemporary", I love them all. Not only do I find them aesthetically pleasing, but the passing centuries have proven the timelessness of their beauty and the skill of the original designers.
Ruth,
I was a little confused by the catagories in the survey.
I don't have a favorite.
As a weekend woodworker I build for the family. Whatever we need or want.
As an architect I design something, review it with my toughest client, my wife, and proceed to build.
I've built arts and crafts, contemporary, etc.
I think the survey should have had the ability to pick several catagories in order of preference.
On a slightly different note. Your magazine which is no longer published "Home furniture" I found to be the greatest inspiration. It gave a wonderful overview of what kinds of furniture people were building. I wish FWW had more of that.
ASK
I really like that transition period from William & Mary towards Queen Anne and then on for a couple of decades. Those front parlors in Historic Deerfield have some of the finest furniture I have ever personally seen.
Tom
Bring back Home Furniture!
I second that! Bring it back.
Another run of Home Furniture would be most excellent.
Dave,
An EXCELLENT idea.
Because most for-profit ventures the size of Taunton are risk-averse, and would be fairly unlikely to "repeat a mistake" I suggest the following compromise solution:
I would like to propose FWW produce an annual Home Furniture issue dedicated to excellence in design and execution (quarterly would be terrific, too, Taunton).
I, for one, would find an annual design issue FAR more interesting and worthwhile than the annual tool buyers guide - - maybe we readers just aren't as vocal/assertive as advertisers.
Taunton: How about one of your polls on this subject?
Paul
Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right.
I bet its easier to subisidize the tool buyers guide than it is to subsidize a design issue.
Taunton, what about having a design article in FWW every issue along the lines of what went into Home Furniture. I'd rather have one more design article and one less how to tune up a scraper article.
>>"I would like to propose FWW produce an annual Home Furniture issue dedicated to excellence in design and execution"<<
Jazz, I think this is a fabulous idea. In fact, I've often wondered why Taunton hasn't initiated an annual "Taunton Award" for design excellence. Having worked with Taunton editors for almost a quarter of a century now, I have no illusions about their having any special expertice in regard to design...But as a burned out old marketing professional, this kind of "award" strategy has the self serving side benefit of enhancing the image of who offers it. For example: the Good Housekeeping seal, or the Pillsbury Bakeoff (I was a Marketing Manager for Pillsbury back in the days when they still ground their flour by stone and the Bakeoff was a big deal.)
I doubt if Taunton would entertain a Home Furniture resurrection...It was a mistake to begin with, because it attrited from the FWW flagship's primary theme, which is (like it or not) furniture making...But I think an annual special issue centering on design concepts and announcing an award would be in everybody's interest...both Taunton's and the readership. It would certainly cement the loyalty of our leading craftsmen, because winning an award of this nature would, in turn, function as a selling point for them with their clientele.
Edited 12/24/2003 5:10:25 AM ET by Jon Arno
We could never agree on which style of furniture is best so I look at in different terms. For instance I'm not a fan of the old world stuff or the ultra contemporary stuff and so my favorite style in more eclectic. I like to combine styles to make something I call my own and refuse to categorize. Now my favorite furniture is well thought out, useful, functional, and well made/put together. I think we can all appreciate that no matter what the style.
A quarterly or semi-annual design issue would be great. These wouldn't have to be in addition to, just instead of the 2 or 4 regular issues. Include home, office and architectural work as long as it's "Fine Woodworking". Include your coverage of shows, galleries, and competitions in these issues. Leave the "how to" and tool comparisons to the other issues.
I voted A&C based on my experience as a maker and Green & Green is my favorite which is probably influenced by access to the original pieces in Pasadena. I can be at the Gamble House in 75 minutes. The A&C philosophy is appealing as well.
I like examples of all legitimate styles. I classify illegimate styles mainly as posuer rustic and country that pass-off poorly made crap as time wrought patina and art furniture that functions only as eye-candy. Someday I hope to take-up carving and try some early Philadelphia and Bombe pieces.John O'Connell - JKO Handcrafted Woodworking
Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid - John Wayne
originally by Jon Arno - "...But I think an annual special issue centering on design concepts . . ."
Hey Jon,
Isn't this what the "Design Book" series was all about? When I studied furniture design at RIT, we all drooled over Design Book Three and Four. A few of us got into Five, and I made it into Design Book Six - a real honor. Why no more after Design Book Seven? I sense the answer here - the rise in traditional craft woodworkers, and the accompanying decrease in personal design emphasis?
Dr, I'm a free lance writer and (thankfully) not all that privy to the inter sanctum at Taunton... I just see it from afar and get most of my info on what's going on there from refugees :O)...Like you, I enjoyed the Design Books and was sorry to see them fade away. From a marketing perspective, they contained the germ of a very good idea, but the concept here isn't the same. Magazines are a more timely vehicle and, also, books are sold into a free standing market. They don't automatically capture the attention of FWW's subscription base. The books were informative about what was going on at the cutting edge of design, but they didn't generate the excitement of a "contest-award" approach. I think the more self enhancing strategy for Taunton would be to set this up as sort of the annual "Nobel Prize" of woodworking.
Thanks for your views, Jon. The hype and "contest excitement" was not encouraged much in the Design Book Series, as it was very easy to miss the 'Call For Entries' page in the magazine.
I'll tell you what though - Whenever I hear of a design contest, I'm all ears and many like me rise to these challenges. A simple "Taunton Award" contest announcement, although a lot of work for Taunton, would certainly rivet subscription renewals I would think.
This is one aspect that I loved about CWB Magazine (Custom Woodworking Business), because they published an annual "Design Portfolio Awards" contest, which included fine furniture all the way to professional high-end cabinet/millwork.
You really don't realize the breadth of talent out there until you see the entries submitted by these people you would otherwise never hear of.
- JB
"The furniture designer is an architect." - Maurice DuFrenes (French Art Deco furniture designer, contemporary of Ruhlmann)
http://www.pbase.com/dr_dichro
Ruth,
The results shouldn't surprise anyone since Shaker and Arts & Crafts are also the easiest for most woodworkers to build. I suspect that if you polled the same number of the geneeral pyublic, your results would be quite different.
Doug
I vote for....HOME FURNITURE!!!!!
Ruth, I'd like to make the following suggestions:
1) maybe change poll to rank these not choose one or the other.
2) determine, as suggested by another, if that's what they like to build (because its easy) or what they like to look at -- could Shaker style furniture really excite this many people?
3) why does every poll and magazine ignore any of the european styles?
If the style you like most isn't listed... vote "Other," if there are a lot of votes in that cetegory then it shows that the categories were too limited. Still conveys information, which is the point, isn't it? Whereas voting for your second-favorite, just because your favorite isn't there, conveys somewhat misleading information.
I voted Other, because Gothic wasn't on the list! :-)
I'd love to see a comparison between these results, and the proportions of books/FWW articles on each furniture type... my guess is the correlation would be pretty strong!
A W
You hit the nail on the head. They didn't include my first choice of "Early Trailer Park" either. What was Ruth thinking? "Go figure"... :>)
Regards...
sarge..jtProud member of the : "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
I'm more than a little horrified to see that my favorite ( Federal/Sheraton ) ranks dead last. This result sounds the death knell, for my hope of doing an article for Fine Woodworking, on a particular piece. To highlight even further just how out of touch I am, my least favorite ( Art & Craft) is the run away favorite.
Rob Millard
Hi Rob,
Don't feel completely isolated ... your taste and mine run exactly the same. I'm just starting out and enjoy your work immensely. I would urge you to submit the article to FWW anyway - for most readers I would think your techniques would be fascinating if not the actual piece.
Ken
Edited 12/27/2003 6:36:15 AM ET by SparrowHawk
Rob, I voted for Shaker, just my personal liking, as my favorite. But I like all styles, for they all have something to offer. Your style is beautiful, and is a timeless classic. There will always be people who prefer this. Please, share your knowledge, for if we go through a day without learning something, it is a wasted day.
Jerry
Rob,
No, no, no! I sure hope that doesn't happen. As I've already noted, I really like everything but "contemporary" pieces. (If I see another picture of another variation of a Maloof style rocking chair or Krevnov cabinet, I think I'll puke.)
I have to wonder if people are responding to poll by identifying their favorite furniture style, or that which they themselves build.
While I lack the skills to do all the lovely inlaid work of Federal pieces, or the magnificent carving of a Chippendale chair, I hope to possess those skills someday and look forward to putting them to use.
Jeff
Please read "I just voted," which states my position. I'm with you!
Rob, I wouldn't worry too much about your favourite style languishing towards the bottom end of the popularity stakes. It's not an easy style of furniture to make and requires subtlety and skill.
Naturally, arts'n'crafts'n'shaker styles feature near the top of the popularity rankings because neither style requires massive SKEET to make something that's passably acceptable to the untrained eye. SKEET stands for Skill, Knowledge, Education, Experience, & Training.
Both styles are essentially simplistic and there are plenty of working drawings and measured drawings of existing examples of the styles for people to copy. Many woodworkers aren't very skilled at design work--- they have neither the training nor the time to learn, particularly if they are amateuer--- and like to have a solid framework of known parameters within which they can come up with slight variations on existing patterns-- I find, for instance, the number of 'Shaker' computer desks, or entertainment centres out there, well, interesting, ha, ha.
There's nothing wrong with being essentially an unadventurous copiest-- if it helps an amateur woodworker find fulfilment, then that's fine. Even professionals can argue that the simple lines and ease of manufacture of the styles are popular with the buying public, and are therefore profitable-- and that's simply being in business.
I didn't vote in the survey because I don't have a 'favourite' or exclusive historical style that I refer to for inspiration-- the survey setters forgot to include a category for ancient Egyptian furniture and the like, ha, ha. And we all know that FW will continue to profitably knock out articles on the aforementioned arts'n'crafts'n'shaker stuff for as long as the majority of the readership wants to read about it. Slainte.
Website
Edited 12/28/2003 12:06:28 PM ET by Sgian Dubh
Sgian Dubh,
Your phrase "there is nothing wrong with being essentially and unadventurous copyist" fits me to a tee. I have absolutely no design ability, so I'm forced to make reproductions. Why I chose Federal pieces, I can't really say, since at first I was drawn to Chippendale furniture. I know that Taunton Press, must provide what the public wants, so I would expect to see more emphasis, on those categories of furniture that rank highest in the poll. Unfortunately when American Woodworker was purchased by Readers Digest, Fine Woodworking lost its only real competition, the in U.S. Traditional Woodworking in England is an excellent magazine, but its distribution here is limited, along with its influence.
Rob Millard
Rob, I understand your position. You might find the magazine Woodwork out of Califruitcake, challenging. It's a bit off the wall from time to time, and with your declared non-designer ability, it might get you asking a few questions of yourself.
I must declare an interest because I've been known to write for them, but with the limited readership I suspect it's not going to challenge FW's market leader position. I haven't really read FW in years I must admit. It's got too much of the essentially simplistic oak'n'cherry'arts'n'crafts'n'shaker stuff for my liking, but it does have some interesting nuggets worth a wee look over every now and then, ha, ha.
Living in the UK, I find many of the machinery items and articles in FW on such topics as how to rig up a cabinet or contractor saw with a dado blade, or how to hack out mouldings by jerry rigging some kind of guide and passing the wood at an angle over the blade aren't worth even a look, but that's because US practices and machinery are quite different to our machinery practices and uses.
I've never taken a shine to Traditional Woodworking out of the UK, but I'll give it another look based on your say so-- readily available here of course. Slainte.Website
>>"I have absolutely no design ability, so I'm forced to make reproductions."<<
Yah sure, Rob...Who're going to blame for the design of those fabulous pipe boxes you posted over in the Gallery? :O)
Jon,
Well, the mahogany ones were a direct copy of the one shown in the Keno brothers book, although I think I got the proportions wrong. Mine is a little too squatty. The curly maple ones were my "design", but these were such a simple item, it doesn't count.
Rob Millard
I am very humbly posting on this thread, due to the simple fact that I am not trained (informaly or formally) to design furniture. But isnt it unfair to say that so many people like shaker becuase it is simple and easy to build? wasnt shaker kinda like the grunge music of furniture? (probably a bad analogy) I mean strip away all the unneccessary ornate extras and design excellent, extremely useful, very durable, well crafted furniture from rock solid materials with good joinery. I know that building it doesnt showcase the artists talent the same as others but shakers were humble people. Isnt the real skill behind shaker more in the application of the piece, than the design of the piece? OK I guess this shows how uneducated I am.
aj, I don't think your interpretation of the Shaker style is the least bit uninformed or off the mark. Shaker craftsmen (via the pressures of Shaker ideology) put function first in their designs and the result is a certain unpretentious, pure beauty.
I think, however, what tickles me the most about it is, if you look real close, you can often find subtle attempts at capturing just a wee bit more than pure function in some of their work...either via grain selection or gentle, often unnecessary, curves or tapers that please the eye. I think a lot of those old craftsmen were in the Shaker communities more for the room & board than zeal for the faith...and they sort of made a game of sneaking a little expression into their otherwise utilitarian creations. Some of the finest of Shaker work seems to "whisper" rebellion against the politically correct. I love it.
Very well articulated Jon. Its interesting to see that you all (Aj and Richard) are very correct in your defenses. In general, however, Shaker is clearly proliferated due to its simplicity of construction - naturally being the first style touted by instructors of beginners (shop class all the way to Norm). The subtle elegence of its simplicity and occasional "unneccessary" aesthetic motif are simply additional pros to really seat the style in American WW style preference.
From a design (designer's) standpoint, Shaker itself is'nt so bad of a style - I never was inherently opposed to it, but what I can't stand, and what makes me dislike it so much now is that the style reflects the mediocrity, or sameness and conformity that represses todays craftsmen from ever even trying to find their own individuality in furniture design style (love me through this). Its as if the philosophy of the shakers - to repress individuality - ended up having more far-reaching effect after it disappeared.
Proofpoint - If Norm chose shaker as often as he did for the utilitarian reason of it being simple for his viewers to follow and construct, then why didn't he choose (initially) other simple pcs from other styles that would potentially culture the viewer as well as teach ww'ng? Why not a Mackintosh chair? Why not George Nakashima-esque freeform art furniture on occasion? Why not a simple Art Deco or Post Moderne pc from any number of international-style architects? Why not - simply because "Well now John, we don't want the public to think for themselves now, do we???"
Obviously that's a little extreme, but it made my point (I can see my name blacklisted off of Knots right now . . . :)
"The furniture designer is an architect." - Maurice DuFrenes (French Art Deco furniture designer, contemporary of Ruhlmann)
http://www.pbase.com/dr_dichro
my point being in my earlier post was that the application of shaker style pieces is/was the inspiration behind the style. to allow the function not the asthetics to define a "work of art" seems the intent. its almost an anti-artform, but therein lies the beauty. That to me is what makes it appealing. But I agree that it is in no way a challanging style to build. I am suprised no has comment about the "grunge music" analogy. Oh well again I am in no way even remotely qualified to make statements only pose questions and ramble almost incoherent thoughts. I went to a historical shaker village a few years back and was just amazed what an odd life these people chose to live. I am not sure that the craftsmen were willing to become celibate for room and board (I sure wouldnt), but maybe their previous woodworking expierence made it hard for them not to put a little expression into their pieces.
Interesting thoughts, Doc...another aspect of Shaker design that I especially like is the occasional lack of symmetry...doors and drawers in odd but very functional places...for purposes you have to think about. It stops the eye and begs the question as to what the craftsman had in mind. I always enjoy things that cause me to wonder about motive.
Thats a very good point Jon. I can't think of any other style that breaks the rule of symmetry so often. That creates a unique aesthetic, sometimes surprising. That alone is innovative.
"The furniture designer is an architect." - Maurice DuFrenes (French Art Deco furniture designer, contemporary of Ruhlmann)
http://www.pbase.com/dr_dichro
aj, I stand by what I said and I don't believe it is unfair to say the popularity of Shaker and Arts and Craft styles is due in large part to their relatively simple construction. Both are often attractive and as a designer I appreciate the driving force and reasons behind their inspiration-- reduction of unneccesary ornament and joinery with resultant economy of production, etc., resulting (in good examples) in spare form, functionality, elegance through careful wood selection and carefully chosen motifs, and so on. It doesn't always work for me though, and individual pieces in both styles I find fail aesthetically, although their functionality at the time they were made, for the purpose they were made, may have been excellent.
Another example of a well known designer from the late 19th. century, much admired, is Charles Rennie Mackintosh working in the art nouveau period. Again clean lines, spare joinery, off the shelf standard sizes of timber for reduced construction time, stylised ornamentation. Some of his furniture doesn't work very well-- chairs with very straight and high backs that are rather uncomfortable-- they look better than they perform.
I don't think ornate and difficult to realise furniture is good simply because it has both those characteristics. I've seen more than enough of overly ornate, ugly, and fussy furniture. The Arts and Crafts movement was in part a reaction against such furniture produced by factories dazzled by the rapid advance in woodworking machinery technology which permitted such over the top styles during the 1800's.
Still, the fact remains that a 'Shaker' styled piece that might take me 50 hrs to make-- just over a weeks work, could possibly take someone with less training, an incomplete tool kit, less experience and skill, working only at nights and the odd day at the weekend maybe 100 hrs or more to make. Depending on the makers ability to get into the workshop, 100 hrs might mean several months completing one project.
Simpler styles also make custom work more affordable to the buying public, thus more likely to be commissioned. An Arts and Craft styled dining table with a solid wood edge jointed top, four rails and four legs will generally be reasonably economical in cost. Compare this with the making time and final cost to the customer for a dining table incorporating such techniques as carving, veneering, stringing, drop in leaves, or envelope expansion movements (for instance) cross-banding, custom mouldings, etc.. And how long would it take an amateur to nurse such a project through their workshop if such a table might take a professional three or four weeks solid work? I'm not at all surprised that Shaker and Arts and Craft styles are popular with both designer/makers and the buying public.
But like Jon said before me, I do think some of the Shaker cabinetmakers were somewhat subversive from time to time and slipped in wee bits of ornament or decoration. It's boring making extremely utilitarian stuff and woodworkers often like to show off or express themselves a wee bit. We could all easily nail some plywood together into a square box good enough to sit on and eat a meal, but where's the fun in that? Slainte.Website
Richard,
Guess I would qualify your point by saying that A&C pieces can be simpler than other designs. It all depends on the piece being constructed. Last fall, for example, I did a small "production run" of six end tables for a craft show. Simple construction made for quick work that ended in an attractive, well built product.
On the other hand, one could easily spend a lot of time on designs such as those of Greene and Greene with their use of inlays, and those nasty little parallelograms (not easy to "square up" the shoulders of those tenons.) Ellis, of course, also used inlays to nice effect and I've yet to tackle one, but someday....
Even a simple G. Stickley dining chair requires steam bending, uses compound angles and, overall, joinery techniques which are no different than those used in a Chippendale chair - just the absence of carving. Case pieces and chests still need to be dovetailed and the drawers well fitted.
Yes, a lot of A&C is simple and a good introduction to woodworking for the novice, but that's not true for all of it.
Jeff
BTW, I just spent 2 hours with the snow blower and shovel. Don't you wish you were here?!
Jeff, all good and fair points, but the crux of it is that if you add complexity to a basic structure, as you describe, you also put it beyond the ability or patience of some woodworkers, and if you're making furniture for a living, complexity increases the charge to the customer.
It doesn't alter the fact that it's comparitively easy to make passably acceptable examples of the simpler arts and crafts, Shaker, and the vernacular or country styles.
Nah, I don't wish I was there, ha, ha. I've never had to bother much with snow, and don't plan to move somewhere where snow has much effect on my day to day life. Slainte.Website
Hi Ruth,
I looked through the list of Taunton Staff and noticed that you're in the "New Media" department.
Assuming that you're conducting a straw poll for directions for future publications, please note my preference for either clear unadorned lines (eg: Shaker) or 'good' designs from the Sheraton era, once again, clean and uncluttered (while inlay work should be refined). There's nothing wrong with items such as a bombe chest, or a huntboard, in my opinion.
It would be a shame to have a simple poll such as this one used to drive the future direction of your magazine/publications. Please note my request to keep your focus wide and not 'dumb down' the publication of both magazine and resources to be mainly on a Shaker focus or Art & Crafts, both fairly simple styles of furniture to make, but not really technically challenging. By going this way, aren't you aligning yourself more closely with your competition?
Just my two cents worth.
Cheers,
eddie
Originally by Eddie - "Please note my request to keep your focus wide and not 'dumb down' the publication of both magazine and resources to be mainly on a Shaker focus or Art & Crafts, both fairly simple styles of furniture to make, but not really technically challenging. By going this way, aren't you aligning yourself more closely with your competition?"
Gutsy response, but I agree wholeheartedly. When I began my career as a woodworker, I could have spent my money on any number of ww journals. I chose FWW precisely because they challenged me to do more than just glue a mortice and tenon.
This shouldn't discourage A&C/Shaker fans, because even if you like, and execute A&C/Shaker furniture, we all need to be challenged and need a publication that represents - and REWARDS (Jon Arno) the "high-performance race cars" of furniture. "The furniture designer is an architect." - Maurice DuFrenes (French Art Deco furniture designer, contemporary of Ruhlmann)
http://www.pbase.com/dr_dichro
No Greene & Greene?
Their designs are so much more technically challenging than Gus Stickley's, and
are so much more distinctive.
FWW has published a very few G&G articles in the past, but they should really
consider another.
I like William & Mary as well as earlier styles of American furniture, refered to by Wallace Nutting as the furniture of the Pilgrim Century.
William Sobat
How about some classic Victorian?
I realize our hope that Home Furniture would come back is not likely to happen. But what about offering the old issues on CD? I noticed an issue of HF sell on e-bay last week for $11. That was just 1 issue.
Package the old issues of Home Furniture on CD like you've done for some of the other publications, and I'll be one buyer for sure.
I don't know what the cost is to put together a CD like this - or how many CDs you would have to sell to break even - but it sure would be a wonderful thing for those of us who what HF and don't have it.
I voted "other" while thinking of Danish Modern, which is my favorite western style. Perhaps most people simply consider it to be a variation of Shaker style. By the way other woodworkers, please do not relegate Shaker style to the trash pile. I am convinced that it is very much alive and well. I also welcome any information conerning Japanese and Chinese woodworking techniques. In regard to the discussions about the annual tools issue versus an annual design issue: I would enjoy both. If only one is possible, then I vote for the tool issue. My private library already contains at least a couple of dozen books dealing with design, but I need a reliable update on tools that are currently available. Thanks for reading this.
I've always loved Arts and Crafts furniture style. I love the proportions and the sense of functionality.Simple eleganse comes to mind. Thomas J Butler
Not a big suprise. Most people that look at this site build the stuff. Arts and Crafts is very easy to build. Next to The modern style Arts and crafts is what I call the lazy period. It lacks any kind of detail what so ever.If you want to build a weekend project that at the time will seem great but in a week you will forget its even there than thats the style for you.Dont get me wrong I dont hate it but if people took the time to appreciate the level of craftsmanship that goes in to Queen Anne/Chippendale, Federal/Shearton and many others mabey they would take the challange and try it.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled