Lucubrating on historical value of turning

It struck me as an original thought, as I don't recall being exposed to such an idea, that wood turning has a history of being snubbed as a valuable craft.

Consider other crafts: the glass crafts such as stained glass work, crystal and glass shaping; textile weaving; metal working; and stone sculpture. Additionally, within the wood crafts, reflect on carving, intarsia, marquetry, lutherie and furniture making. There are historical bodies and progressions of work in each field held in the highest regard, not only through modern appreciation of museum holdings, but during the times the pieces were created. Every craft above has been, and remains, in demand by the ruling and upper economic segments of society.

Castles, palaces and expensive homes were adorned with fine textiles, silver and goldsmithed items, finely crafted furniture, ornate wood and stone carvings in the architecture, as well as free-standing. For hundreds to thousands of years these items have been sought after and coveted.

This is not to say that all work in a given craft was valued equally, but within that craft there have been craftsmen and artisans whose work was appreciated and thus commanded great respect by society's elites, which by and large meant that it was recognized by all society to be highly regarded with a common desire to own similar works.

Where is the historical appreciation for wood turning? I dare say there is none. There has been no golden era of wood turning. Kings and the well-to-do have never sought out a turned wood item to possess as a valuable and status indicative item. Turned wood was and remains largely relegated to utilitarian, consumable, disposable pieces of every day use. A wooden plate was the poor mans version of the higher economic class's pewter, porcelain, bone china or silver dinnerware. A wooden bowl was kitchenware, not suitable for serving or displaying in finer settings. Looking to other products of the craft, we find the bodgers - Itinerant folks who camped in the forests turning chair parts for a pittance. Again, not especially valued as fine craftsmanship or appreciated for artistic value - just components a chair maker would out source to those further down the socioeconomic ladder.

As modern turners we are up against ingrained, historic notions of wood turning's place in the hierarchy of desirable items. There is no widely held belief that one should strive to own items turned from wood. Is it any wonder the artisans of today, by and large, have to rely on other sources of income to continue developing their body of work? The current interest and technical developments in wood turning may turn out to be our golden era. By many accounts it began to get footing about 35 years ago, with great strides in acceptance by some in the upper levels of society taking place in the last 20 years. I believe it's safe to say that society's overall desire for wood turning in the future will owe much to the recent and current artisans and craftsmen who have struggled to gain recognition and acceptance among and along with the other hand crafts.

Reply to
Owen Lowe
Loading thread data ...

Owen, Can't see much wrong with being a producer of regularly utilised products. After all, there are a lot more in the lower class than in the ruling classes. But I take your point. Perhaps the proliferation of salt and pepper grinders/shakers, salad bowls and the like have not helped dismiss the concept that turning should only be utilitarian.

Unfortunately, much of the stuff being put on the market looks very similar and, in reality, it's hard to tell one turner's work from another's. The truly "arty" pieces that demonstrate both the artisan's skills and the timber's qualities aren't seen that often. Perhaps because most turners are trying to eke out some sort of an income from their art.

If turned pieces are starting to be accepted by the upper classes, perhaps this will provide all turners with the incentive to pursue more elaborate and artistic work.

Paul.

Reply to
Paul Griffiths

Though it would seem now that components need to be sourced from UP the socioeconomic ladder given the amount of money one finds one needs to spend. :) mick

Reply to
Michael Lehmann

Hate to disabuse you of that notion -- but I'll bet the pipeful was good anyway... LOL

The Royal Ontario Museum which I mentioned in a post in early March had many turned items on display - from the 19th and 20th century (and a few earlier). One of the chairs appeared to be the one featured in a Darlow book.

formatting link

They had some wonderful furniture displays at the beginning of the month. Not sure what's there now though.

Perhaps you fellows are building the golden age of turning...

Stick around for a couple of hundred years. If you're all famous then you know. :-)

Reply to
WillR

. I believe it's safe to say

Don't equate asking price with artistry. Nor given price with appreciation.

Even the big names make things for money, not love of their art. They then sell them to people whose purpose in purchasing them is possession rather than admiration.

Art, in my opinion, is defined not by snob, but universal appeal. Unless I'm in the wrong venues, that's not stuff for pedestals and glass-enclosed cabinets, but for tables and shelves.

Reply to
George

Turning has always been a labor intensive endeavor. A well done 12" bowl from one piece of wood can easily take 10 hours and when you get into segmented and stave work the time involved jumps dramatically. When you consider that a commercial shop needs $45 to $65 per hour shop fee to stay in business it is easy to see how expensive turning can become. The only way to reduce prices is to use the copy lathes and mass produce an item. To set up a high volume copy lathe is expensive. Lathe $75,000 and up, sander $75,000 up 3 people to prepare stock, one to run lathe and one to run sander. I run my shop with a shop fee of $25/hr but that is only possible because of some VERY special circumstances. There is a lot of custom business out there for the small custom shop that the big companies can't afford to do.

Reply to
Art Ransom

Not true. 19th century ornamental wood turning was not only considered high-craft, but was one of the few crafts performed by members of royalty, not peasants, guild members, or artisans.

formatting link
Turned wood was and remains largely> relegated to utilitarian, consumable, disposable pieces of every day > use. I think you exagerate. There are many wood pieces that are fanciful, permanent, and not used daily. However, there is a grain of truth in what you say. Wood is an organic material and doesn't last as long as stone, glass, or metal. It's not the wood's fault, but the craft person's. After all, THEY made the decision to work with a semi-permanent material.

Dan

Reply to
Dan Bollinger

Owen, good post that provoked good answers. As a practicing COC, I'll generalize from the land of the outstretched palm and conspicuous consumer. Other areas may differ.

We bought a cheap waterfront vacation cottage years ago that's now a modest home surrounded by the mc'mansions of the so called upper class. 'Upper' meaning newly rich in dollars, not in any true appreciation of artistry in any medium or venue.

Most of the grandiose new homes nearby are designed by trophy wives and 'decorated' by interior brokers. The owner's are led to believe that expensive equates to tasteful and they don't much care whether wood, canvas, glass or pink flamingos adorn their abodes. They don't collect art, they accumulate the artificial, a display of networth to be envied not enjoyed. If you favor eclectic, you would would love these residences with their huge columns that are a strange mix of all three types of Greek architecture. As I warned, I generalize and that's rarely a good thing.

I leave it to those of you who have forgotten about the beautiful and ornate woodturnings of the past to wonder why a craft you consider was once mostly treen and chair legs is having such a hard time going from the kitchen to the parlor.

OK, now that you've thought about it, you still wonder wottenhell Arch is trying to say. Likely, not much! :)

Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter

formatting link

Reply to
Arch

By many accounts it began to get footing about 35 years

Since the 'art' of woodturning was revived in the 1930s & 1940s by James Prestini and Bob Stocksdale...and soon after by Rude Osolnik and a few others, it's hard to tell whether we are IN the golden age, or already past it. I'd argue that it began maybe 20 years ago, as galleries and shows began to feature it, and really took off maybe 15 years ago as lathe manufacturers and tool makers gave us machines designed from the ground up especially for woodturning. I've only been turning since 1988, and I didn't even know where to buy a 'good' 4 jaw scroll chuck or carbide tipped tools.... I had the "4 in 1" chuck, which depended on rubber bands to hold parts together, and thought Grizzly was a good source for machinery!

The developement of glues, finishes and a way to trade information on the internet/WWW also speeded up interchange of ideas and techniques

Finally, the growth of wood suppliers who would process some trees into CHUNKS, instead of just boards made a wide variety of wood available world-wide. and gave us an amazing selection of timer to work with.

I suspect that when the history is finally written in a hundred years, the years from 1975-2000 will be looked on as the great creative spurt. Whether we can do more than merely embellish and refine in the future, remains to be seen.

Reply to
Bill Day

Arch, As someone who built homes like the ones that you are talking about, those are for people who have more dollars than they do sense. They also help drive the 'art' market by buying things that don't have much use, but are wonderful to look at. robo hippy

Reply to
robo hippy

... wood turning has a history of being snubbed as a valuable craft.

Much snippage.

Dude, you've got a serious inferiority complex.

:-)

Reply to
C & S

Interesting thread. I think I just received a bonus. I joined the newsgroup to get an education on turning wood. As it turns out I also get an education on wood turning.

However, I still think it's fun. Even though my work may never be appreciated in society, I don't plan to quit

10sc.
Reply to
10sc

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 4:51:36 -0800, Art Ransom wrote (in message ):

10 hours for a 12" bowl!?! are you talking about in the past? like before electric motors?
Reply to
neill

Do feel too bad, I got into turning because it looked more promising, as far as trying to make a few bucks at it, than to continue doing stained glass. I was producing really cool stuff, original designs (check my website for some pics) etc. - no elites to cater to here either and in fact, literally having a hard time trying to give it away...

- Check my most up to date email address at:

formatting link
banjo bridges, tabs, stained glass:
formatting link

**may your moments of need be met by moments of compassion**
Reply to
Bart V

Does the museum know the names of the pre-20th century turners? Can anyone here name a pre-20th century turner?

Reply to
Owen Lowe

There's a difference though... Stained and leaded glass has been valued for centuries in cathedrals as well as a major selling point in old homes. Styles, skills and markets affect all arts and crafts but in the case of glass there have been very clear periods of time when demand was evident throughout society. I don't see instances in history in which wood turning has enjoyed that respect and desire of ownership.

Reply to
Owen Lowe

I looked through the Society of Ornamental Turners website and found it interesting and fascintating. BUT... I didn't see anything about recognized and demanded OT artists of history. Yes, there was quite the movement in the 1800s though it appears to me to be more in line with a gentleman's hobbycraft rather than producing work to meet society's demand for a recognized artform.

When you mentioned the organic nature of wood, it sparked a rather obvious realization: Wood is not and has not been scarce. Unlike precious metals, silk, fine wool, marble, even glass - keep in mind that glass was very expensive and rare, even 300 years ago; you were the top of society to have glass windows prior to that - generally speaking, wood has been readily available everywhere populations of people settled. It has never been a particularly scarce material and is quite suitable to fashioning into unnumerable different purposes. In this light, material that is in abundance is used for the most utilitarian objects; is discarded and replaced as needed; does not cause the owner to view the piece as having any intrinsic value. Plastic today is wood's historic lot in life.

Just scan across the objects on your desk. How many are made of wood? (Not counting turned objects you have made.) There are 9 on my desk, a majority of which are pencils. I don't treat these items with a level of care that I would if they were silver, marble, glass, etc. Why? Because the material itself has little value - hell, it's almost as if the stuff grows on trees.

Reply to
Owen Lowe

John Jacob Holtzapffel - Late 18th through Early 19th Century

Reply to
Lobby Dosser

Peter Romanov

Reply to
George

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 4:17:06 -0800, George wrote (in message ):

Bertram Jones

Reply to
neill

InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.