WoodCentral Forums

Est. 1998 — 27 years of woodworking knowledge

classical vs "modern" furniture

Posts

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#26

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

Jeff Schmidt (KY)

>Pam,

Here is an excerpt from Thomas Moser.

�In fact, the evolution of Shaker furniture style runs more or less concurrent with the evolution of American country furniture style in general. In the cities, of course, there were large shops which produced in the grand style much of what we today call �period furniture�....These period styles were copied by most cabinetmakers of the day, but the further from the city the copier, the less elaborate and ornamented the work appears. The rural builders lacked not only the skills and materials to do multichromatic inlays, for example, but also customers to sell them to. Simple rural families needed a table off of which they could eat, not a status symbol. And so we have, passed on to us over the generations, what is called Country Chippendale, Country Hepplewhite, and Country Sheraton furniture. This legacy is characterized by simple lines, the absence of superfluous decoration, and a sturdiness of construction rather than delicacy.�

�...The Shaker style therefore has its origin squarely in the secular world from which it drew its practitioners.�

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#27

Re: This building in particular *LINK*

Jeff Schmidt (KY)

>I can imagine Darth Vader living there, but I can't imagine a person voluntarily entering such an objectively ugly and dehumanized obelisk. Does it actually house books, or only video games and internet edutainment?

Thank God for the The New Urbanism movement.


The International Network for Traditional Building

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#28

Re: arts and crafts

Jeremy Osner

>I reckon Arts and Crafts movement fits in with "modern" rather than "classical" as the distinction is being posed here -- based on my limited understanding of the movement it was pretty revolutionary in its time, divergent from what had come before.

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#29

Re: This building in particular

Joel

>Amen,

I find buldings like this very alienating. I did research at the NY public Library reading room last week - everything about it says sit down and study, - carve comfy oak desk chairs that are just comfortable enough to enjoy but not to slip down and sleep in.

GReen shaded desk lamps giving pools of light.

A very high decorated ceiling so you don't feel claustrophobic.

Most of these new building IMHO look much better as a tiny model than something you might want to actually work in. THere are exceptions but they are few and far between.

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#30

Re: arts and crafts

Jeff Schmidt (KY)

>Actually, the Arts & Crafts movement was reaching back to the Medieval period (see Ruskin) and in many senses was thoroughly premodern.

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#31

Shaker design ancestors

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Well, to a certain extent functional considerations dictate design and furniture designs all differ only in surface ornamentation. However, where are the Shaker bombe chests and other curves? The form should lend itself quite nicely to a lack of ornamentation, as contemporary (to us) designers have shown.

There is a severe plainess to Shaker furniture that appears to be due to more than ornamentation removal.

Pam

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#32

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Moser may be right. I was thinking the Shakers weren't all that disconnected from cities, but I had the wrong century, was thinking late 19th century, they were late 18th. Anyhow, I've ordered the Becksvoort tome on the Shakers.

Pam

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#33

Re: Shaker design ancestors

Jim Crammond in Monroe, Mi

>Pam,

In my previous post I cited the Federal furniture as a base of Shaker furniture design. In your response, you correctly questioned other influences on their furniture products. I assumed you were somewhat familiar with the Shaker religious believes, how these believes affected their way of life and the resultant affects on their furniture. The subject is too complex to cover in depth here, but, if you are interested in it, I would recommend any of the books about Shaker furniture written by Edward Demings Andrews and Faith Andrews.

The Shaker faith was based on the teachings of the sect�s founder, Mother Ann Lee, writings of her disciple, James Whittaker, and later by the codified Shaker covenant, the Millennial Laws. They believed the way to salvation was through order and perfection. Whittaker wrote that �all work done or things made�ought to be faithfully and well done but plain and without superfluity. We have a right to improve the inventions of man, so far as is useful and necessary, but not to vain glory, or anything superfluous.�

The Millennial Laws went farther describing what things were permissible and what was not. �Beading, mouldings, and cornices, which were merely for fancy may not be made by Believers.� Articles which were considered improper included superfluously finished or flowery painted clocks, bureaus, looking glasses, any brass hardware on furniture or anything that was for show or fancy.

This religious pursuit of perfection was manifested in all the work that Shakers did whether it be farming, cooking, architecture, weaving, etc. etc. In cabinetmaking, this pursuit manifested itself as superb craftsmanship and the simplification of form derived through the lack of ornamentation.

I think that the lack of curves in their furniture was due to their desire for order and that the fact that curves in many of the earlier furniture styles does not add to the functionality of the piece. Although there are few curved surfaces in shaker furniture, there are subtle features that incorporate curves such as the sides of the two Shaker style stools in another thread or the beads on the bottom of drawers. The icon of Shaker craftsmanship, the oval box, is an ellipse. I think this demonstrates that curves were used when it was appropriate in furthering the functionality of an object. Besides, as a civil engineer, I think that straight lines and 90 degree angles are a thing of beauty in themselves. 8^) (Bombe chests are not a Heppelwhite, Sheraton or Federal form but rather from the earlier Chippendale period.)

Sorry this went on so long. I hope it answered some of your questions, but again, if you are interested in this subject, there is much written about it that is available in your library that will go into greater depth and do a much better job of explaining the Shaker way of life and its influence in the development of their furniture.

Jim

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#34

Re: Shaker design ancestors

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Thank you, Jim. I thought I did understand the influence their religion had on design, after all I was raised a Baptist; but on further research found I'd got the dates all wrong, had glossed over them. So I need to reexamine, found a cheap copy of Becksvoort, the library has the Andrews' book(s) and many others. Will also actually read the ones I've got as I've tended to scan the texts and look very hard at the pictures.

Pam

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#35

Re: Shaker design ancestors

paul womack

>There is a severe plainess to Shaker furniture that appears to be due to more than ornamentation removal.

One might almost say an ostentatious lack of ostentation!

BugBear

Re: classical vs "modern" furniture

#36

Yes, indeed. :)

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>

👍 This page answered my questions

Your vote helps other woodworkers quickly find the answers and techniques that actually work in the shop.