Christianity QA » Islam Christianity » A Neanderthal speaks out
Question:
From the wobble dado vs stack set string…. From the economist(2-5-94) review of "The Man in the Ice" For the non-archaelogist the fascination lies in the glimpse of the sophistication of Stone-Age life. The axe, for instance, <snip Arguably, Otzi had a greater variety of equipment on hin than the couple that found him….
Which demonstrates just how versatile hand tools are. In the hands of a Taken from the dado blade string: From the economist(2-5-94) review of "The Man in the Ice" For the non-archaelogist the fascination lies in the glimpse of the sophistication of Stone-Age life. The axe, for instance, <snip Arguably, Otzi had a greater variety of equipment on hin than the couple that found him….
Which demonstrates just how versatile hand tools are. In the hands of a competent workman theyre infinite and potent. In the mind of the dubber they’re useless. Theyre compact, efficent and portable. Not only was the ‘Ice Man’ a skilled workman but he also knew the best type of wood for the job at hand. But hey, he’s a Neanderthal what could we possibly learn from him? With our superior technology what would we need with the tradition of past civilizations and generations. After all we feel quite self assured that the speed, volume and uniformity with which our machines produce give us the right to indulge in a bit of snobbery. It makes no difference whether the product is of inferior quality. We imagine that if the old geezers were alive they’d join right in with a hearty Amen. They’d even grovel at our feet hoping for a tidbit or two of our vast knowledge. We call ourselves woodworkers but our dependence on machines have, of our choice, caused a disconnect between medium and worker. We’ve become skilled in all the peripheral subjects of the trade — cutters, jigs, machine setup, the newest labor saving ‘thing’ — to the exclusion of understanding the material and how its best worked. After all, our machines dont care about grain and all those complicated subjects our dreary primitive cousins cared about why should we. Our machines have freed us from those trivialities all we need do is turn them on and off and keep them well fed. What could tradition possible teach us? JimG
Response:
[snip snip] It makes no difference whether the product is of inferior quality. We imagine that if the old geezers were alive they’d join right in with a hearty Amen. They’d even grovel at our feet hoping for a tidbit or two of our vast knowledge. We call ourselves woodworkers but our dependence on machines have, of our choice, caused a disconnect between medium and worker. We’ve become skilled in all the peripheral subjects of the trade — cutters, jigs, machine setup, the newest labor saving ‘thing’ — to the exclusion of understanding the material and how its best worked. After all, our machines dont care about grain and all those complicated subjects our dreary primitive cousins cared about why should we. Our machines have freed us from those trivialities all we need do is turn them on and off and keep them well fed. What could tradition possible teach us?
Man, you don’t give up, do you? Using power tools does not, by any stretch of the imagination, preclude understanding the material. You keep making this leap from "use of power tools" to "unthinking, insensitive wood butcher." While there are any number of power tool users who do take the "uncaring" approach, one does not follow from the other. I’m sure there are plenty of hand-tool users producing crap. It just takes them longer 
As others have already stated, this thread would be a lot more valuable if the unfounded opinions were left behind and we stuck to discussing the best methods given a particular tool. Change "hand tool" to christianity and "power tool" to Islam, and these posts would fit in quite nicely to alt.religion.narrow-minded. Dave — Disclaimer: These opinions are not those of Informix Software, Inc. "I look back with some satisfaction on what an idiot I was when I was 25, but when I do that, I’m assuming I’m no longer an idiot." – Andy Rooney
Response:
Dave, Goodness gracious you sure did reply fast! :^) Man, you don’t give up, do you?
Well…I guess I dont. However I have a reason — few have payed attention to what Ive said. Instead theyve commented on what they thought I said. Using power tools does not, by any stretch of the imagination, preclude understanding the material.
On the other hand it certainly doesnt include it either. I would said that most powertool — no lets call them tradition ignorant — dont know any better or are looking for quick and mindless. Its to the former group that Im talking. The question is not power or hand but rather are you ignoring the tradition of the trade. Tradition sets a clear framework of instruction about the use of tools, material, design and technique. This is based on the material, economy of labor and the effect on the final result. Certainly powertools can fit within that frame work. As an example take something as basic as working with the grain. Youll never get this down until youve worked wood with handtools. They *require* you to understand the run of the grain to get good results. When you flub they let you know. You get plenty of real time feed back. Contrast this to the random orbit sander. It requires no understanding of the material. You just turn it on and grind away leaving a surface muddied with a sea of scratches. A pity since a planed surface is much superior. On the other hand theres no great reward for dimensioning stock by hand if you dont have to. The powerplaner is a great boon. You keep making this leap from "use of power tools" to "unthinking, insensitive wood butcher."
In the majority of cases thats exactly right. However, it doesnt have to be that way. Like I said in a previous string theres a time and place for powertools and that dictated by tradition. While there are any number of power tool users who do take the "uncaring" approach, one does not follow from the other.
True, the tendancy is much greater to do so though whether by ignorance or purpose. I’m sure there are plenty of hand-tool users producing crap. It just takes them longer
;^) As others have already stated, this thread would be a lot more valuable if the unfounded opinions were left behind
Pray tell what is unfounded: That most nontrad powetoolers are hacks? The evidence is against you…a single viewing of NYWS will settle that. Then look at the vast numbers who ape Norm to some degree as someone who knows what hes doing. and we stuck to discussing the best methods given a particular tool.
Its not completely clear that we’re to that point yet. If you have a specific question there are a number of us Neanderthals who could answer. Change "hand tool" to christianity and "power tool" to Islam, and these posts would fit in quite nicely to alt.religion.narrow-minded.
I doubt it. Trads/handtoolers are no more narrow minded that normie hackers. Its all depends on which side you view the ‘conflict’ from. :^) To say we’re some how over opinionated is rather blind. Anyway thanx for your reply…JimG
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -From the wobble dado vs stack set string…. Which demonstrates just how versatile hand tools are. In the hands of a Taken from the dado blade string: From the economist(2-5-94) review of "The Man in the Ice" For the non-archaelogist the fascination lies in the glimpse of the sophistication of Stone-Age life. The axe, for instance, <snip Arguably, Otzi had a greater variety of equipment on hin than the couple that found him…. Which demonstrates just how versatile hand tools are. In the hands of a competent workman theyre infinite and potent. In the mind of the dubber they’re useless. Theyre compact, efficent and portable. Not only was the ‘Ice Man’ a skilled workman but he also knew the best type of wood for the job at hand. But hey, he’s a Neanderthal what could we possibly learn from him?
I don’t think anyone disagrees with this. Hand tools are veratile, and they are quite useful in the hands of someone competent to use them, and they aren’t worth a hoot in the hands of the unskilled. So what? Power tools are the same (some aren’t as portable though). With our superior technology what would we need with the tradition of past civilizations and generations. After all we feel quite self assured that the speed, volume and uniformity with which our machines produce give us the right to indulge in a bit of snobbery. It makes no difference whether the product is of inferior quality.
Wait. I don’t believe that there is any connection what-so-ever between the quality of the finished article and the tools used to get it there. You can do poor craftsmanship with both (at least I can). We imagine that if the old geezers were alive they’d join right in with a hearty Amen. They’d even grovel at our feet hoping for a tidbit or two of our vast knowledge. We call ourselves woodworkers but our dependence on machines have, of our choice, caused a disconnect between medium and worker. We’ve become skilled in all the peripheral subjects of the trade — cutters, jigs, machine setup, the newest labor saving ‘thing’ — to the exclusion of understanding the material and how its best worked.
Again, I don’t think that’s true. I don’t think you can build a quality piece without understanding the wood going into it. I don’t think that means you have to build a piece to suit the wood, only that you need to understand how the wood will react to stress, joints, time, use, etc. That needs to happen whether you form the piece with hand tools or power tools. After all, our machines dont care about grain and all those complicated subjects our dreary primitive cousins cared about why should we. Our machines have freed us from those trivialities all we need do is turn them on and off and keep them well fed.
Wow – we’re on a roll aren’t we? This statement seems to indicate that with power tools, you can ignore grain. Whether you are ripping, planing, jointing, dovetailing, etc., the machine may not care (hey – neither does the plane or the backsaw), but the operator better care. What could tradition possible teach us? JimG
I understand many of your points Jim. I agree with many of them. But I don’t think it’s correct to assume that if someone uses power tools, they don’t know and don’t need or care to know about the wood itself. People do things differently, for many reasons. If you prefer hand tools, great. If someone else shuns them and prefers power tools, great. Many of use use both, whichever we feel is best for the current job and skills we have. But, if it will make you feel better, I’ll use hand tools to cut the bisquit slots when I edge-glue my cutting board that I’m making from alternating wood and plastic strips. Regards, Jeff Chumbley
Response:
JimG sarcastically writes …After all we feel quite self assured that the speed, volume and uniformity with which our machines produce give us the right to indulge in a bit of snobbery.
Ah, so the power toolers are the snobs, not the hand toolers. Thanks for clearing that misconception up. ;^) We imagine that if the old geezers were alive they’d join right in with a hearty Amen.
They did join right in – I think it was called the Industrial Revolution. After all, our machines dont care about grain and all those complicated subjects …
So, you ascribe feelings to your hand tools? Do you talk to them as well? When using my thickness planer I care about grain direction, when using my router I care about edge sharpness, and when using my tablesaw I care about internal wood stress. I care about similar things when I hand plane, saw, scrape, and chisel. What could tradition possible teach us?
That it’s better to learn from the past than to live in it. – Bennett Leeds Just say Sister Tabitha must be the devil incarnate for inventing the circular saw.
Response:
Using power tools does not, by any stretch of the imagination, preclude understanding the material. On the other hand it certainly doesnt include it either. I would said that most powertool — no lets call them tradition ignorant — dont know any better or are looking for quick and mindless. You keep making this leap from "use of power tools" to "unthinking, insensitive wood butcher." In the majority of cases thats exactly right.
Ok, stop right there and show me your *proof* for these assertions. The "majority" of power tool users are unthinking, insensitive wood butchers? Get real! How many do you personally know (and your *must* know they are unthinking etc., you cannot assume so)? What percentage of woodworkers is that? Like I said in a previous string theres a time and place for powertools and that dictated by tradition.
This is truly laughable: tradition states when you can and cannot use a particular tool. As I have already responded to you, power tool use is becoming its own, new tradition. You can’t argue that hand tools are superior because they have the weight of a long history of use when you are comparing them to tools that do not have an equivalent history. Using that argument, I could say horseback is a better mode of transportation because there is a longer history of horses used for transportation. As others have already stated, this thread would be a lot more valuable if the unfounded opinions were left behind Pray tell what is unfounded: That most nontrad powetoolers are hacks? The evidence is against you…a single viewing of NYWS will settle that. Then look at the vast numbers who ape Norm to some degree as someone who knows what hes doing.
NYW does not represent the norm (no pun intended) amongst woodworkers. It is only in *your mind* that all (ok, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, most) power toolers are hacks. I think a better model to go by is any of the many ww’ing mags out there, FWW, American Woodworker, etc. Why do you assume Norm’s viewers "ape" him? Based on my ww’ing friends and myself, I’d venture that most of his viewers watch just to see some ww’ing on the tube, and to play "spot the new tool". And believe it or not, Norm occasionally has some good ideas (mostly when it comes to jigging). But just watching Norm doesn’t make one a hack. Heck, it sounds like even Patrick watches once in a while (if for no other reason than to make fun of the bearded beer-belly wonder ). Dave — Disclaimer: These opinions are not those of Informix Software, Inc. "I look back with some satisfaction on what an idiot I was when I was 25, but when I do that, I’m assuming I’m no longer an idiot." – Andy Rooney
Response:
Well I’ll tell you that I am a handtooler. For a variety of reasons. First, since most of my work is boatbuilding, I have less need to have right angles than most WW’ers. Second, the boat is at the boatyeard and my shop is in the cellar and they are about a 6 mintue walk apart. Third, my cellar shop is of limited size: Presently 8×8 feet. It will grow in one direction by about 8 feet but that’s still pretty small. I simply don’t ahve the room for lots of power tools. Absolutely no room for the table saw, band saw, joiner, and planer others deem indispensible. Fourth, I don’t have the money for all of those power tools. Fifth, I would probably choose to go with hand tools anyway even if the previous 4 points were not an issue. Why? Well that’s hard to explain but let me start by sayign that my boat is a 75 year old wooden boat. Anyone who owns one of those is going to be somewhat tradition minded to begin with. Which isn’t to say that the "tradition" involved didn’t include power tools: 75 years ago (1919) the Herreschoff company used power tools. But they were into production. Still and all I chose specifically to go with hand tools. I am also a firm believer in the phrase: Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Which is a snobbish way of saying that the development of an entity is a sped up version of it’s evolution. Which is only a slightly less snobbish way of saying that I think we all too often discard the "OLD" traditional ways of doing things because we think that the new way is better and faster. When in fact, we may be wrong because we simply don’t understand the old way well enough. This happens all the time, in all kinds of endeavors. So I decided to work my way up from the "simpler more natural" times ;^) As a starting point I decided that Roy Underhill was too far in the other direction for me. I buy metal planes ;^) I don’t want to start with the tree ;^) But Norm is too far in teh other direction. I read Scott Landis’ Workbench Bok and really liked the thought behind the Roubo bench and the Kirby Bench. I respect Frank Klausz and his skill, but what Kirby had to say struck a stron resonance with me. That the bench has to be simple without a lot of fancy hold downs because without them you knew for sure you were using the plane correctly. I LIKE using a bench hook. It is supremely simple and wonderful. No more work slopping around. I even liek the simplicity and grace of Klausz flip up bench hook at the end of his bench. Brilliant. I like those things and that’s what gives me pleasure. Simplicity, capability, and quiet…. Which is the last reason I don’t like power tools. As I get older and my teenage daughter gets noisier I find I can’t take as much noise as I used to. I can’t listen to music while I work with power tools. So instead of buying a Record quick release vice I am building a leg vice. Instead of a table saw I have saw horses, rip and crosscut saws and planes. I DO have some hand power tools: Makita skillsaw, sabre saw, router, electric drill. But I drive al screws with a brace and bits and would never consider otehrwise as I don’t want to lose the feel of the stress on the woodscrew: in boatwork you screw silicon bronze screws into oak and it doesn’t take too much to twist the screw right apart. Well, I wrote this so as to get teh discussion out of the flames and maybe` give some insight as to why I abhor power tools. ;^) Gregg
Response:
[snip] | On the other hand it certainly doesnt include it either. I would said that most | powertool — no lets call them tradition ignorant — dont know any better | or are looking for quick and mindless. Its to the former group that Im talking. Jim, one of the reasons this thread is going nowhere is that you keep on making implications that many, myself included, find offensive and unsubstantiated. What’s wrong with the above ? (1) You state this as fact, not an opinion. If this is your opinion, say so. Use "IMO" or equivalent. If this is fact, the burden of proof is on you. (2) How do you corrolate "tradition ignorant" to "know[ing] any better" or "looking for quick and mindless" solutions ? Not knowing tradition or history need not lead to woodworking ignorance nor does it imply mindlessness. There are a lot of self-taught craftpeople, with absolutely no knowledge of tradition or historical perspectives out there who would take great offense to your assertions that they are mindless just because they are "tradition ignorant". | The question is not power or hand but rather are you ignoring the | tradition of the trade. Tradition sets a clear framework of instruction about | the use of tools, material, design and technique. This is based on the | material, economy of labor and the effect on the final result. While the above may be valid, it does NOT have to be NECESSARILY true in order for someone to do woodworking. The so-called framework are fine, but not necessary. For example, one does not have absolutely have to have a lesson in how the Vikings built ships to know how to build one today. It may not hurt, and may even help, but it’s certainly not a prerequisite. In fact, the "materials, economy of labor" are vastly different today than they were years ago, so any tradition built on top of them could very well be useless in our time (I’m not saying they are, just that it’s not a given that it’s valid). | powertools can fit within that frame work. As an example take something as | basic as working with the grain. Youll never get this down until youve worked | wood with handtools. They *require* you to understand the run of the grain to | get good results. There’s a great difference between understanding the basics of woodworking (such as grain, movement etc) and understanding the perspectives of woodworking traditions and methods. You seem to be confusing the two. ! When you flub they let you know. You get plenty of real time | feed back. Contrast this to the random orbit sander. It requires no | understanding of the material. You just turn it on and grind away leaving a | surface muddied with a sea of scratches. A pity since a planed surface is | much superior. On the other hand theres no great reward for dimensioning | stock by hand if you dont have to. The powerplaner is a great boon. The above statement makes a third set of observations, namely the asthetic appeal of the results obtained with power and hand tools. If this is an arguement for tradition (your initial comment in this post) and for woodworking basics (your second), then you are now confusing three different areas. | You keep making | this leap from "use of power tools" to "unthinking, insensitive wood | butcher." | In the majority of cases thats exactly right. However, it doesnt have to be that | way. Like I said in a previous string theres a time and place for powertools | and that dictated by tradition. This is true only if one believe your earlier assertion that tradition forms the basis for doing woodworking. The fact that you confirmed that above link between wood butchering and use of power tools is just one great slap in the face to a lot of us. If you mean to be offensive to those of us who use power tools, fine; say so, and don’t hide it behind a veil of "tradition", "grain" or proper "time and place" arguments. | As others have already stated, this thread would be a lot more valuable | if the unfounded opinions were left behind | Pray tell what is unfounded: That most nontrad powetoolers are hacks? The | evidence is against you…a single viewing of NYWS will settle that. Then | look at the vast numbers who ape Norm to some degree as someone who knows | what hes doing. What does watching NYWS have to do with unfounded opinions on the net ? And yes, your opinion on powertool hacks is still unfounded. You seem to forget or ignore a lot of what has been said on this newsgroup over the last few months. Let’s take a look at some : (1) Many watch Norm ’cause it’s entertaining. They know he’s not perfection personified. They just like to watch it. By comparison, lots of people watch soap operas, and they also recognize that it’s not Academy material. It’s just entertainment to them (2) Not everyone who builds things with wood is seeking for that perfectly made creation. Not everyone wants, needs, or cares for a perfectly assembled and finished piece. You or I or anyone else may have our own opinions on what is "correct" furniture, but the context of that piece must be considered. Now somewhere out there are real powertool hacks who do believe that they are creating a masterpiece. And you know what ? To them, it is, and they are proud of it. Some of us may shudder at the thought of Norm-like pieces spread out across the States, but so what ? To those people, it’s something to show their friends and kids. Creations don’t have to be perfect to have personal value, and I’ll take an imperfect piece I made over a perfect you make any day. Why ? Because I made it. The bottom line is that we all have our opinions on the methods to use in our woodworking. And as long as we’re each comfortable with our own skills and methodologies, that’s fine. But let’s not blanketly criticize a large population without proof, and let’s not put down many others just because they choose to use different tools than you. Your abilities with hand tools and others’ abilities with power tools all serve the same purpose, even if they have different results. The key is that the "purpose" is defined by the individual use, NOT YOU ! In your reply to someone else’s post you said on the outset : | Well…I guess I dont. However I have a reason — few have | payed attention to what Ive said. Instead theyve commented on what they thought | I said. Well, I have read your reply VERY carefully, and unless you mean something very different from what you have written, there’s no misunderstanding here. Someone recently asked why there seemed to be a lack of humor on this newsgroup lately. Maybe if we stop labeling others as "tradition ignorant", "mindless" and stop using inferences like "ape Norm", we’d all enjoy things a bit more. This newsgroup used to be fairly small – no more than 50 messages per day. Now it’s not uncommon to find 130 messages each day. And all those nice suggestions and ideas people used to post, all those helpful hints, have now been replaced with seemingly snobish remarks. It’s all in the delivery – instead of saying "try doing it this way", people now say "I can’t believe you’re such moron and not doing it the RIGHT way like this". The signal/noise ration has dropped. Too bad, ’cause this used to be one of the best mannered newsgroups. Sigh. All this, IMHO. -lou — Louis Lung – Senior Software Engineer Oki Advanced Products Division, 100 Nickerson Rd, Marlborough MA 01572 All disclaimers apply
Response:
From the wobble dado vs stack set string…. From the economist(2-5-94) review of "The Man in the Ice"
<snip – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Which demonstrates just how versatile hand tools are. In the hands of a competent workman theyre infinite and potent. In the mind of the dubber they’re useless. Theyre compact, efficent and portable. Not only was the ‘Ice Man’ a skilled workman but he also knew the best type of wood for the job at hand. But hey, he’s a Neanderthal what could we possibly learn from him? With our superior technology what would we need with the tradition of past civilizations and generations. After all we feel quite self assured that the speed, volume and uniformity with which our machines produce give us the right to indulge in a bit of snobbery. It makes no difference whether the product is of inferior quality. We imagine that if the old geezers were alive they’d join right in with a hearty Amen. They’d even grovel at our feet hoping for a tidbit or two of our vast knowledge. We call ourselves woodworkers but our dependence on machines have, of our choice, caused a disconnect between medium and worker. We’ve become skilled in all the peripheral subjects of the trade — cutters, jigs, machine setup, the newest labor saving ‘thing’ — to the exclusion of understanding the material and how its best worked. After all, our machines dont care about grain and all those complicated subjects our dreary primitive cousins cared about why should we. Our machines have freed us from those trivialities all we need do is turn them on and off and keep them well fed. What could tradition possible teach us? JimG
We users of modern hand-tools also rely a lot on technology, particularly materials science. I am thinking about things like reasonably priced, mass-produced steel that takes and holds a keen cutting edge, or the man-made abrasives used to create that edge. Our glues are better too. (I don’t think I’ve heard anyone here claim to make his or her own hide glue from scratch…. yet 
.) Sometimes I wish I had the time to apprentice as they did 200 years ago and make my own tools of the trade, but, alas, that is not to be. The more I learn about (hand) woodworking tools and why they designed to be the way they are, the more I learn about wood, and what others have learned before me. I do disagree with you on one point, though. Power tools do care about grain. At this point the skill and knowledge (and maybe even willingness to switch to handtools for finishing) of the user of the power tool come into play. Debbie Deutsch
Response:
Debbie Deutsch writes:
stuff deleted: We users of modern hand-tools also rely a lot on technology, particularly materials science. I am thinking about things like reasonably priced, mass-produced steel that takes and holds a keen cutting edge, or the man-made abrasives used to create that edge. Our glues are better too. (I don’t think I’ve heard anyone here claim to make his or her own hide glue from scratch…. yet .)
I’m planning on it. Been saving parchment scraps/shavings (I make parchment/vellum, don’t raise the goats myself though . Anybody got a good recipe for making glue from parchment scraps? Sometimes I wish I had the time to apprentice as they did 200 years ago and make my own tools of the trade, but, alas, that is not to be. The more I learn about (hand) woodworking tools and why they designed to be the way they are, the more I learn about wood, and what others have learned before me.
If you’ve got the time and the inclination, there’s no reason you couldn’t make at least some of your own tools. Of course, smithing is a whole ‘nuther craft to learn, with a whole ‘nuther set of tools to collect. Nice thing about smithing is that once you’ve got the basic tools you can make the rest. Course, you need a place where you can set up a forge (my current dilemma). There are some pretty decent books out there that outline the basics of blacksmithing and forge settup. Cheers, Rick C.
Response:
Debbie Deutsch writes: glues are better too. (I don’t think I’ve heard anyone here claim to make his or her own hide glue from scratch…. yet .) I’m planning on it. Been saving parchment scraps/shavings (I make parchment/vellum, don’t raise the goats myself though . Anybody got a good recipe for making glue from parchment scraps?
I recall reading a hide-glue recipe somewhere that used hooves.. or was that gelatin? Almost the same stuff, I think… Then again, Toshio Odate’s rice glue is trivial to make, and you can eat the leftover ingredients… — /_ _ Dave Tardiff Phone: (508) 436-4537 / //_/ Hewlett-Packard Co. Telnet: 436-4537
Response:
Debbie Deutsch writes: I’m planning on it. Been saving parchment scraps/shavings (I make parchment/vellum, don’t raise the goats myself though . Anybody got a good recipe for making glue from parchment scraps?
OOOOOOHHHHH, do you sell parchment? Sometimes I wish I had the time to apprentice as they did 200 years ago and make my own tools of the trade, but, alas, that is not to be. The more I learn about (hand) woodworking tools and why they designed to be the way they are, the more I learn about wood, and what others have learned before me. If you’ve got the time and the inclination, there’s no reason you couldn’t make at least some of your own tools. Of course, smithing is a whole ‘nuther craft to learn, with a whole ‘nuther set of tools to collect. Nice thing about smithing is that once you’ve got the basic tools you can make the rest. Course, you need a place where you can set up a forge (my current dilemma). There are some pretty decent books out there that outline the basics of blacksmithing and forge settup.
Each time I decided to start carving I looked at the price of carving tools (about $20 each) and decided to do something else. In the mean time, I had to learn smithing to make my own repro antique hardware. Sure, you can buy all the Americana repro you want, but it is impossible to find repro 1300 English hardware. The next time I thought about carving, I starting making my own tools. This is not only cheaper (if you count your time as FUN and not as $20/hour), but you can also make almost anything you want (okay, I can’t make narrow veiners yet). For example, I am doing some Gothic tracery panels right now, and I need a set of very narrow chisles to clean out the grounding on the fiddley bits where two circles come together (about 20 degrees). Also, as I learn more and more about carving, I am customizing my tools to suit the way I do it. I am primarily using slightly spooned fishtail gouges now, instead of the long uncurved gouges that seem so much more common today. Interestingly enough, woodcuts of the period show the same sort of tool as the most common. I know the fishtail is ground out sooner, and the long flute is easier to machine forge from bar stock. I wonder if modern carvers are using tools of lesser utility due to the exigencies of the manufacturing process. Tom (Neanderthal with an attitude)
Response:
| Debbie Deutsch writes:
| | glues are better too. (I don’t think I’ve heard anyone here claim to | make his or her own hide glue from scratch…. yet .) | | I’m planning on it. Been saving parchment scraps/shavings (I make | parchment/vellum, don’t raise the goats myself though . Anybody got | a good recipe for making glue from parchment scraps? | | I recall reading a hide-glue recipe somewhere that used hooves.. | or was that gelatin? Almost the same stuff, I think… | | Then again, Toshio Odate’s rice glue is trivial to make, and you | can eat the leftover ingredients… | | — | /_ _ Dave Tardiff Phone: (508) 436-4537 | / //_/ Hewlett-Packard Co. Telnet: 436-4537 Hide glue is a gelatin that has a higher density than your off the shelf gelatin. You can use unflavored gelatin as a glue and it’ll work pretty well. I also recall that it is made more from hooves and horns rather than skins, but if so then why call it hide glue? Rice glue isn’t very strong, and is pretty brittle (I’ve never tried it, just passing on what I’ve heard). The real problem is that the leftover ingredients aren’t exactly the best texture for eating. Hmm, maybe they could be fried into patties on the side of a hot jointer motor. But what will the hand toolers eat? B^) B^) B^) B^) B^)
Response:
Tom writes: OOOOOOHHHHH, do you sell parchment?
Yes. Well vellum actually. I’ve sent you email in response. If you Cheers, Rick C.
Response:
| Just say Sister Tabitha must be the devil incarnate for inventing the | circular saw. The jury is still out on that one, Bennett. There are those that claim it was the English dudes who were using it before them Shakers was. I’ll consult someone more knowledgable than moi, this weekend, and give you the straight poop next week. Stay tuned. — Patrick Leach Just say Sometimes you can’t always believe what you read. etc.
Response:
| | Debbie Deutsch writes: | | | | glues are better too. (I don’t think I’ve heard anyone here claim to | | make his or her own hide glue from scratch…. yet .) | | | | I’m planning on it. Been saving parchment scraps/shavings (I make | | parchment/vellum, don’t raise the goats myself though . Anybody got | | a good recipe for making glue from parchment scraps? | | | | I recall reading a hide-glue recipe somewhere that used hooves.. | | or was that gelatin? Almost the same stuff, I think… | | | | Then again, Toshio Odate’s rice glue is trivial to make, and you | | can eat the leftover ingredients… | | | | — | | Hide glue is a gelatin that has a higher density than your off | the shelf gelatin. You can use unflavored gelatin as a glue and | it’ll work pretty well. I also recall that it is made more from hooves | and horns rather than skins, but if so then why call it hide glue? Horn (as distinct from antler which is bone), and I guess the outer shell of the hoof is made of pretty much the same thing as hide. There is a fine grade of hide glue used in art work call ‘rabbit skin glue’. I’ve seen old/medieval recipes for glue made from hide/parchment, but they’re not always easy to interpret. Rather than useing one of those as a starting point and doing the old trial and error, I thought someone might already have a tried and true recipe to recommend. Cheers, Rick C.
Response:
Attaboy lou.. J.R.
Response:
Patrick Leach writes: Bennett Leeds writes: | Just say Sister Tabitha must be the devil incarnate for inventing the | circular saw. The jury is still out on that one, Bennett. There are those that claim it was the English dudes who were using it before them Shakers was. I’ll consult someone more knowledgable than moi, this weekend, and give you the straight poop next week. Stay tuned.
According to my copy of "The Modern Carpenter Joiner and Cabinet Maker: Legacy of Wood and Woodworking" (for which none other than Roy Underhill was a consultant): "The first use of the circular saw, in this country at least, has been ascribed to Samuel Miller of Southampton, who, some time around 1700 A.D., brought out an ‘entire new machine suitable for sawing all kinds of timber’." I believe "thin country" did in fact refer to England. Dave — Disclaimer: These opinions are not those of Informix Software, Inc. "I look back with some satisfaction on what an idiot I was when I was 25, but when I do that, I’m assuming I’m no longer an idiot." – Andy Rooney
Response:
| | | Just say Sister Tabitha must be the devil incarnate for inventing the | | circular saw. | | The jury is still out on that one, Bennett. There are those that claim | it was the English dudes who were using it before them Shakers was. I’ll | consult someone more knowledgable than moi, this weekend, and give you | the straight poop next week. Stay tuned. | Got the straight poop about the circular saw blade. Sister Tabitha did not, nor did any other Shaker, invent it. The English were using it long before, well back into the 1700’s. This fact is definite and irrefutable. A friend of mine, who has authored several tool-related books/articles, has tried over and over to point out the error to the so-called Shaker experts. They don’t listen; how could a low-life toolie possible know more than they do? These Shaker experts really make me chuckle. Case in point – one Mr. Hosea Edson. Hosea was a member of the Harvard (MA) Shaker community during the late 1700’s to early 1800’s. Before that, he was busy fight- ing a Revolution. There are roughly 10 planes extant with "HOSEA*EDSON" "HARVARD" stamped on each toe, in two lines. The planes have a distinct style of their own, very different from the typical style plane made in the late 1700’s. Said low-life toolie (above) did some research on this guy, and found he was a Shaker, appearing in many records of the commmu- nity, and that he is buried in the Shaker cemetary. The Shaker experts still refuse to believe or acknowledge this low-life’s research since Shakers categorically did not sign their work (except some clock makers), oe something like that. Imagine that, he wasn’t a Shaker even though he’s mouldering under his grave marker in the Shaker cemetary! Any of you peoples going to visit Shaker museums in the future can really cheese the tour guides off by telling them that they are full of it when they spew the circular saw claim. — Patrick Leach Just say It is to laugh. etc.
Response:
Patrick Leach writes – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (Patrick Leach) writes: Leeds) writes: | | | Just say Sister Tabitha must be the devil incarnate for inventing the | | circular saw. | | The jury is still out on that one, Bennett. There are those that claim | it was the English dudes who were using it before them Shakers was. I’ll | consult someone more knowledgable than moi, this weekend, and give you | the straight poop next week. Stay tuned. | Got the straight poop about the circular saw blade. Sister Tabitha did not, nor did any other Shaker, invent it. The English were using it long before, well back into the 1700’s. This fact is definite and irrefutable.
OK. That’s for getting our facts straight (that’s what I love about r.ww). Just who did invent it, why wan’t it more popular, and why do the Shakers get all the credit? Wasn’t somebody in Italy supposed to have invented the radio a year before Marconi in the US? – Bennett Leeds Just say I wonder if 200 years from now people will think Norm invented the biscuit joiner.
Response:
| OK. That’s for getting our facts straight (that’s what I love about r.ww). | Just who did invent it, why wan’t it more popular, and why do the Shakers | get all the credit? Tough one to answer, Bennett. It’s kinda like trying to pin the wheel’s invention to a particular dude. I was told that there are accounts of the circular saw’s use in England by 1760, and that it’s probable that it was used before then. As for its popularity, I suspect that it was such a finicky beast to make and operate back then, that it was sorta ahead of its time. Not sure on this point though. And why the Shakers? Maybe they were the first to use it in America, or spread its popularity, or maybe it’s the first urban legend in USofA. — Patrick Leach etc.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – | OK. That’s for getting our facts straight (that’s what I love about r.ww). | Just who did invent it, why wan’t it more popular, and why do the Shakers | get all the credit? Tough one to answer, Bennett. It’s kinda like trying to pin the wheel’s invention to a particular dude. I was told that there are accounts of the circular saw’s use in England by 1760, and that it’s probable that it was used before then. As for its popularity, I suspect that it was such a finicky beast to make and operate back then, that it was sorta ahead of its time. Not sure on this point though. And why the Shakers? Maybe they it’s the first urban legend in USofA. Patrick Leach
Sorry, I believe Bennett is correct here. I have read an account which gives the credit for the invention of the circular saw to one of the women in the Shaker community. I will dig up the reference and bring it in tomorrow (assuming I find it that quickly, I am still working to finish my daughters doll cradle.) By the way, does anyone have an idea of what a General drill press should run. I only had a quick look at it. It appears to be fairly old and a bench top model. However, It is the biggest damned bench top model I have ever seen. It has a main post the size of Generals floor model (diameter), but only about as tall as most bench model drill presses. I suppose it is possible that someone cut down a floor model. Anyway, anyone familiar with General drill presses I would like to hear from you. — Raymond E. Flanery Jr. | Go BROWNS !!! ORNL, MSS, EP&M | 1977 MGB (ALICIA II) P.O. Box 2008, Bldg. 6012 | (615)574-0630 FAX: (615)574-0680
Response:
| Sorry, I believe Bennett is correct here. I have read an account | which gives the credit for the invention of the circular saw | to one of the women in the Shaker community. I will dig up | the reference and bring it in tomorrow (assuming I find it | that quickly, I am still working to finish my daughters doll | cradle.) Ray, your reference will no doubt be taken from some book dedicated to Shakers, written by a Shaker scholar. In fact, I have several of them my- self, and could also type in the false reference. It has been pointed out, over and over again to these authors, that their claim that a Shaker sister invented the circular saw blade is wrong. I’m going to try to find a copy of the EAIA rag, The Chronicle, which debunks this myth. Patrick Leach Just say A falsehood which became true, despite efforts to correct it. etc.
no comment untill now