charlie b wrote:
Enoch Root wrote:

In any event, there's nothing unalterable about a programmed series of
cuts and the soul or liveliness of a piece can be found in the
craftsman's involvement in its making. Whether that be through the
handles of a spokeshave, or the fingerpads of a keyboard, it is still
transmitted to the wood.


But the fingerpads give no tactile feedback FROM the wood TO the
hands
of the person on the keyboard. And with a machine whirring and a
cutter cutting, it's hard to hear when the sound of the cuttiing edge
changes that subtle little bit that warns of the beginning of a
problem.
The machine driven wood removing device also can't see when the
nice grain begins appearing and indicates "screw the plans, I'm
stopping here to keep this look of the wood!"

Jim Krenov's isn't the only approach to doing lasting things in wood.

Lately I've been collecting images of backsaw handles for a project.
(Bob Brode's pages have been a big help.) Handles of that era embody a
craftman's influence on the final form, whereas more modern ones do not.

They were also made in a factory setting, with an emphasis on
production. But modern saw handles, even the really good ones, don't
match them in character and distinction.

I don't think it is because of the tools being used to make them that
they don't measure up.

I think it is because the maker is less involved in their production,
and because less thought is being given to their form, their fit, and
how they will be used.

Well, maybe that is similar to Krenov's way in some respects. But where
his design goal emerges from an evolving process, the final form of
those handles is not. All the factors that contribute to the handles'
design and execution are known prior to the making. And yet, they feel
excellant.

er
--
email not valid