The roughness of older work

Re: The back

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Here's the back of the dresser, which, by the way, is said to have come across the U.S. with the family some time in the 19th century (not clear if by train or wagon). The boards were sawn on a circular saw mill; at one time, I knew what period that indicated.

Re: The back, in close up

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Here's a closer look at a couple of the back boards. No time wasted smoothing these boards.

Re: The crest

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>The funny little crest piece was band or bow sawn. I'd guess band, from the regularity of the cuts, not terribly visible in this picture. I'm not sure it's original. Note how carefully the screw is countersunk (he said ironically), and how rough the back of the board is.

Drawer detail

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>The dovetails on these drawers - which have held together for probably at least 150 years, maybe more - are a great comfort to me. If these are good enough, maybe I can stress less when I think about joints.

Drawer web frame

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>Another rough bit of wood, not visible when the drawer is in.

The door

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>I couldn't get a good picture of the back of the door, but the top rail has got a really rough spot in the middle of its backside, and the panel is very rough on its back. The panel is visibly glued up from two pieces of wood - the seam is proud on one side at the top, transitioning to being proud on the other at the bottom. Also note the tight joints.

*

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>The asterisk in the first post was intended to refer to a note in that first message, which I then forgot to add, but which was supposed to say:

*This is going to a distant (Alaska) member of the family on my uncle's wife's side - it was from her family, so was in my family only by marriage.

Re: The roughness of older work

Joe Rogers, Northern Virginia

>Neat tour of the piece Bill. Can you determine if it was always painted?

If so what was the first color on it?(if you know)JR

No, don't know original color

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>

Charles Locke Eastlake

Jim Reed @ Tallahassee

>was upset with the ornate decor at the time and wrote a book called, Hints on Household Taste. It was published in 1876 (I think) and caused a revolution in furniture design. Incised carving was used and the wood was treated *honestly* with bandsaw cuts, not pierced carving like the earlier Belter stuff. I think your piece is midwest factory made around 1880-1900. I love Eastlake furniture. Sometimes local makers copied the current factory stuff and left edges pretty raw. Your piece is probably the washstand (commode) from a bedroom set. Commonly with a bed, dresser, washstand, nightable--all matching. Woods used were chestnut, ash, walnut, cherry, and later oak.

looks Art Deco to me

Larry Williams

>This is Eastlake:

Re: Charles Locke Eastlake

Todd Hughes

>I agree....Hard to tell from the photos but the top back piece almost looks like somthing that was made and added on later. I think piece probably dates from 1900 or so.Pretty certain it wasn't painted originaly but probably stained dark ......Todd

Re: The roughness of older work

Adam Cherubini

>I don't find it surprising to see such surfaces on primitive work or factory made stuff, like this piece appears to be. I do find it surprising to see this same treatment or worse on pieces intended for the tops of society. (no offense, Bill! :) In my mind it challenges our notion of what a "good job" is or what constitutes a "successful" piece.

I think these pictures are helpful, Bill. Thanks for them.

Adam

Re: some more eastlake  *LINK*

Robin Corell in Atacsadero CA

>


http://ah.bfn.org/f/fstyles/east/3/index.html

Thanks for sharing this Bill

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>Kinda makes me feel better about some of my DT work too!

I will comment, as to success

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>that there was more than one person in the family interested in this little chest. I think that qualifies as success.

The date painted on the door is 1883 - my aunt believed this date was significant to the chest, but I don't know if that was a purchase date or what, and she died in 1979, so I can't ask her.

Look again

jim reed @ tallahassee

>Eastlake style took the country by storm and later degenerated into things that were called Eastlake, but were certainly did not follow true Eastlake rules. Sorry, but the round vase carvings on this settee were exactly what Mr. Eastlake was against. He considered round object carvings on wood to lack honesty and counter to the true nature of wood. Actually the Arts and Crafts movement showed more true Eastlake design characteristics than did much furniture stuck with the Eastlake moniker.

Re: The roughness of older work

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>I would say that the roughness of the work definitely depends on the market you are aiming for. Some people have money, probably a larger portion of the society than we realize. By "have money", I mean enough that they can't keep track of all of it. When these people go out to buy something, they want the best in a style that they like. They have to feel they are getting their money's worth, because mostly they did not get money for being stupid. I can't imagine that it took enterprising business men too long to figure out that it was very simple to set their work apart from the competition simply by finishing the back and less noticeable areas of a piece. Doing work that functions exactly the same but looks better is one way to get a premium price for your work; people figure that if you take the time to make the back look good, you are certainly not skimping on the areas that really count. On the other hand, if the back looks rough, they wonder where else he was skimping when he built the piece.

Re: The roughness of older work

Dale Stansbery

>It's definitely a commode. The "bean pot" went in the door. It most likely originally had a different top with a couple pieces sticking up at the back corners with a towel bar across the top and was probably originally varnished. 1880's sounds about right.

Re: The roughness of older work

ThomD

>Truly,

It's not as thought he best furniture in the world was on the wagon train. Like basing couture standards on what hobos riding the train used to get by with.

There may be something fairly middle class, best case, about the idea of parts of the furniture that aren't going to get seen. My house is certainly small enough that most pieces get pushed against the wall. But some folks have 20 000 square foot places where a piece of furniture might be placed well away from a wall.

Re: The roughness of older work

Adam Cherubini

>Right. I agree wih you, Moses. So the fact that early pieces from the best shops exhibit some degree of roughness, a degree, let's say, that you and I would have problem with, indicates that our sense of quality and theirs was different. That's really the news item. Because you're right, those rich folks then had high expectations for their furniture. The roughness of older pieces doesn't stop at the middle or lower class pieces.

The definition of quality (like so many other things, morality for example) is neither absolute nor eternal. People in different places and times defined such things differently. That's why I think its important not to judge our ancestors too harshly. When reproducing period furniture, I think its important not to let my values, my defintitions of quality, unduly influence the work. I think this is much more difficult than it seems.

Adam