Thread: American woodworkers

could it be coz modern stuff is made of chipboard?

Seems to me that the cousins are into three styles of furniture:

American Colonial

Shaker (by far the best imo)

and what we call Arts and Crafts but they call Craftsmen.

Most of their mags seem to concentrate on the arts and crafts.

Got to agree with you Shedhand - can only suggest it's a heritage thing.

Got a couple of plans from Lake Superior - not sure of the website at the moment and a good links page is available at: http:\woodshoptips.com\links.htm

HTH

Jamie

I think the only Americans that actually like that 'craftsman' stuff are the 'craftsmen' who make it. I lived in the US for 35 years, and almost never saw it in anyone's home unless it was made by a relative. Occasionally saw a few pieces at K Mart.

For a good bit of more modern Australian design, try "Handmande Furniture Projects" by Rafael Nathan. Reprints of articles from Australian Wood Review with some very nice furniture designs. Got my copy at Borders.

Tex

Frankly, I find most modern furniture to be devoid of character. It's a matter of taste.

There are, of course, exceptions to that rule. Rafael Nathan is not one of them, in my opinion. In fact, I haven't felt the least bit tempted to build any plan featured in AWR.

Originally Posted by markharrison

Frankly, I find most modern furniture to be devoid of character. It's a matter of taste.

There are, of course, exceptions to that rule. Rafael Nathan is not one of them, in my opinion. In fact, I haven't felt the least bit tempted to build any plan featured in AWR.

Have to agree 100%. The furniture featured in AWR is dull. Their have been exceptions from some very good contributing designer/makers, but the featured projects lack inspiration, they look like high class Arvey Norman classics. The mag in general also lacks inspiration and energy, some articals are good, the comps are generally good, little bit of interesting news here and there, the odd pic of quality designed work, but in general i give it a miss. Thats why i now read it at the newsagent and save my money for the better quallity overseas mags

Originally Posted by markharrison

Frankly, I find most modern furniture to be devoid of character. It's a matter of taste.

There are, of course, exceptions to that rule. Rafael Nathan is not one of them, in my opinion. In fact, I haven't felt the least bit tempted to build any plan featured in AWR.

Mmm...I disagree cobber. I think modern furniture design can be divided into 2 categories, the mass produced (and poorly made, exhorbitantly overpriced) stuff like Hardly Normal and Freedom sell and the true craftsman built quality stuff. I've always been attracted to minimalist furniture design provided it is functional and/or comfortable and made of real timber. Granted, I use some MDF but only where I use rare minor species as a veneer.
The stuff I truly loathe is charred crapiata cowboy furniture that was all the range in the 70's. Horrible horrible horrible.
IMHO

Originally Posted by Shedhand

I think modern furniture design can be divided into 2 categories, the mass produced (and poorly made, exhorbitantly overpriced) stuff like Hardly Normal and Freedom sell and the true craftsman built quality stuff.

I reckon Australian contemporary furniture is in Four categories.

Their is the Arvy Norman and the like that appear in large furniture galleries that appear all over Melbourne and other citys. And i think its reasonablly priced, you pay for what you get, Pay peanuts and get monkeys. Whilst the material selection and construction is often substandard, the designs are generally acceptable. Its usually whats in-style and fashionable at this point in time. Choice is often limited as these shops and galleries appear to be clones of one another and tend to carry a limited style .

The other is in the trendy gallery/boutiques in Richmond, Fitzroy and the like that sell copys of European contempory Furniture, the type you see at the Millan Fair, and they also dabble in their own "designs" and most are poor attempts at trying to make originals based on that style, they then call theirs original, but they mostly just suck .

Then theirs the wacky student contemporary....Ummm....Furniture, if you can call it that:eek: .

And lastly the work of individual designer/makers you see here and in the various woodwork mags going around. Their is some awsome work happening here in Australia by some very very clever makers and unfortunatly they just dont get mainstreem exposure:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Time and money are the biggest barriers we all face, given a free reign and cheque book (just like those wankers who call themselves Artists with their seemingly bottomless grants funding) im sure we could be producing more mainstreem contemporary furniture here in Australia that wood be the envy of the rest of the world

Originally Posted by Lignum

I reckon Australian contemporary furniture is in Four categories.

Their is the Arvy Norman and the like that appear in large furniture galleries that appear all over Melbourne and other citys. And i think its reasonablly priced, you pay for what you get, Pay peanuts and get monkeys. Whilst the material selection and construction is often substandard, the designs are generally acceptable. Its usually whats in-style and fashionable at this point in time. Choice is often limited as these shops and galleries appear to be clones of one another and tend to carry a limited style .

The other is in the trendy gallery/boutiques in Richmond, Fitzroy and the like that sell copys of European contempory Furniture, the type you see at the Millan Fair, and they also dabble in their own "designs" and most are poor attempts at trying to make originals based on that style, they then call theirs original, but they mostly just suck .

Then theirs the wacky student contemporary....Ummm....Furniture, if you can call it that:eek: .

And lastly the work of individual designer/makers you see here and in the various woodwork mags going around. Their is some awsome work happening here in Australia by some very very clever makers and unfortunatly they just dont get mainstreem exposure:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Time and money are the biggest barriers we all face, given a free reign and cheque book (just like those wankers who call themselves Artists with their seemingly bottomless grants funding) im sure we could be producing more mainstreem contemporary furniture here in Australia that wood be the envy of the rest of the world

On reflection...yep, gotta agree. AN added problem is that if you make something that's truly exceptional and whack a suitably impressive price tag on it the average punter looks at the price tag and walks right on by not appreciating that it probably had 200 or 300 hours of labour in it. People like those who inhabit this forum, who can see the quality (like me) can't afford to buy it (we'd rather buy a new toy... ).
Cheers

Originally Posted by Tex B

I think the only Americans that actually like that 'craftsman' stuff are the 'craftsmen' who make it. I lived in the US for 35 years, and almost never saw it in anyone's home unless it was made by a relative. Occasionally saw a few pieces at K Mart.

For a good bit of more modern Australian design, try "Handmande Furniture Projects" by Rafael Nathan. Reprints of articles from Australian Wood Review with some very nice furniture designs. Got my copy at Borders.

Tex

Guess it depends on what part of the states you were lookin in. I've built a fair bit of it for customers and seen alot on the west coast from washington to california.

Originally Posted by markharrison

Frankly, I find most modern furniture to be devoid of character. It's a matter of taste.

There are, of course, exceptions to that rule. Rafael Nathan is not one of them, in my opinion. In fact, I haven't felt the least bit tempted to build any plan featured in AWR.

I reckon its cause most contempory furniture makers lack the skills necessary to build high end period pieces such as the one attached:eek:

Just waiting for the howls for that one

Originally Posted by Lignum

I reckon Australian contemporary furniture is in Four categories.

[/COLOR]

While I don't necessarily disagree with your catagoiries, you left out one:

Cheap Indonesian and Indian "ethnic" pieces. Usually badly made out of inadequetly seasoned timber.

Originally Posted by MathewA

I reckon its cause most contempory furniture makers lack the skills necessary to build high end period pieces such as the one attached:eek:

Just waiting for the howls for that one

Sure it may take a lot of skill (more time and patience I reckon) but IMHO, that piece is ugly. I wouldn't spend the time to make it for myself.

I guess I would be satisfied with my display of skill if I made it for a client.

Too me a lot of that type of furniture is all frills and lace.

American designs to me seem to be grand and sometimes overdone... bit like thier cars and utes... sorry minitrucks. I find the shaker style boring, but thats whats its about "being practical" in a minimalist way.

I like the look of modernist art farty stuff, but usualy thats all it is arty and impractical(mostly). Combining different materials give's pieces a nice look and contrast which old time furniture doesnt have... not saying the old stuff is no good especialy when its all darkside methods!

I love designs by aussie makers like our very own Different and Major + many others here, I think Neil Scobie has nice practical designs too.

But for now I'll stick to my own designs made in crapiarta... until I feel Im ready for the real wood!(tempted to take a few design only course's one day)