I'm having this moral dilema...

Cherry darkens with age but some folks just aren't patient enough to
wait and pursue means to hasten said darkening.

Alternatives include:
* exposure to sunlight
* lye solution
* stain (dye or pigment?).

My question is, why is it considered OK to darken with lye but not
stain? Philosophically, practically, or otherwise.

'Cause, ya see...

Horror of horrors, I'm, ever so slightly, considering, dare I say it,
Staining Cherry (ducking..., peering..., no lightning bolt yet...).

Seems like lye is nasty stuff and it also seems that lye and stain are
both artificial means of darkening the wood. Yet, one seems to be
"approved", the other greatly frowned upon.

I love the look of natural cherry, even before it darkens. I never,
never use stain ('ceptin' on decks and fences). But, the devil is
tempting me...

Unfortunately, for the project I'm undertaking, there are 2 issues.
1) The darker cherry is a better match to the rest of the kitchen
elements. 2) I'm impatient.

BTW, it's the UV in sunlight that hastens the darkening, correct?
So, I set a couple of pieces of cherry in a windowsill to test the
process (how long, how dark, etc.). Doesn't seem very effective.
Musta gotten a defective piece of cherry wood, right? ;--)
It finally dawned on me that these lovely new windows I had installed
have UV blocking as a feature.

Thanx
Renata