As I get on with this blog, I think it seems logical to address the subject of the "hand tools only" debate that is getting stronger each year. I say debate, which may be too strong a word straightaway. I wonder when we use the word debate to describe something, we may actually be escalating something that's currently more in the discussion stage. I consider myself somewhat informed of the current state of affairs in the woodworking world, and wouldn't necessarily say there is a debate about the use of hand tools. Ignorance, yes. In some pockets and venues, there is no doubt a raging argument on the issue of woodworking with hand tools only. But across the entire landscape, I think not. As always, it is the little word only that introduces conflict. If I say I only vote republican, or listen to certain teachers only, or only listen to certain musicians, etc., then I immediately introduce the potential for conflict. I have no issue with conflict that inseminates a growth in the understanding of the topic, but I despise conflict for its own sake. I will admit that I knowingly (and unwittingly) say provocative statements on occasion, but I do it in the interest of furthering the craft and helping another artisan in some small way. My fascination, appreciation, and confidence in older (or should I say "less modern") methods and hand tool approach will become obvious to you, but you needn't suspect any agenda on my part other than prodding you to a deeper enjoyment in what you pursue. If what you make is far more important to you than how it's made, then my opinions and musings will undoubtedly cut against your grain. And I should give strong credit to Paul Sellers for this idea, though I doubt he is the first to coin the phrase: "it's not what you make, but how you make it". He may or may not have been the first to say this, for it seems to echo something I read in old Krenov books, but Mr. Sellers is the most important person to come along in a long patch to voice it boldly and with authority.
To be fair, I will state that I am still presently what is often called a "hybrid" shop. Which is to say, I use a blend of hand tools and machines/power tools. I try to make a living with my work, and I live daily with the pressure to produce something of a certain value in a time frame that makes the "numbers" more appealing to me (and my wife!). I will, after all, die someday and in view of that have limited time to devote to each endeavor or project. It may be romantic to think that Walt Whitman spent his whole life tinkering with lines in Leaves of Grass, but we know better when it comes to a project for a paying customer or a project for ourselves. It's the same old tyranny of the urgent, in opposition to quality before quantity. I'm not stating unequivocally that speed in a task equals lower quality in every case, but surely, nor does it always increase production.. In my writings, it will become apparent that I have a stubborn preference for the types of surfaces, effects, and character of components and pieces done mostly by the older, hand tool methods.
Do I have any strong agenda? I don't think it is strong, but who in their right mind and with complete honesty could say they have no agenda? They definitely do, if they write about something in a blog or venture into the minefields of forums. We excuse ourselves usually by asserting "that's just my opinion" and I am willing to accept that from most and sometimes say it myself. However, in many cases it is disingenuous to think we have no agenda , since one would simply say nothing for that to be true. I assure you I have an agenda in my ideas and convictions on how you approach this craft and the topic of work and artisanship in general. I however do want to allow for the distinction between agenda, opinion, and true indifference in anyone's statements on a topic. But we have to be honest with several things... 1, true indifference is quite rare, 2, our opinions usually have a chunk of "life" hiding behind them, and 3, an agenda based on sincere convictions can be a good thing. I'm willing to play if you are as long as we allow for this in each other's ideas and statements. What is repulsive to me is an agenda based on purely selfish motives, pure profiteering, and misrepresentation or denial of facts. I sometimes wonder, sarcastically, if modern woodworkers have only one agenda (or project), THE SHOP, with things made occasionally in it only to attempt to justify its existence. I may now be speaking OF YOU, but that's ok. I've been there and done that, Thankfully I've gotten past that stage. I care at least marginally more about the work, than the shop. It's ok to land in the stage of being consumed with THE SHOP, just don't get stuck there. (oops, I just expressed a strong opinion, or God forbid, an agenda.)
No comments:
Post a Comment