The Northeastern Woodworker's Association's September Meeting may be of
interest to folks here...

Thursday, September 11, 2008, 7:00 pm
Shaker Heritage Society Meetinghouse
Albany-Shaker Road, Albany, NY

What Is Shaker Furniture?

By Jerry Grant

Jerry Grant is the Director of Research and Library
Services at the Shaker Museum and Library in Old
Chatham, New York. His professional training is as a
librarian with a specialty in rare books and archives.
Jerry has been on the staff of the Shaker Museum and
Library since 1987 and has worked in jobs related to the
history and practices of the Shakers for nearly thirty
years. He is the co-author with Douglas Allen of Shaker
Furniture Makers and Noble but Plain: The Shaker
Meetinghouse at Mount Lebanon. While choosing a career
in research and rare books, Jerry has worked both as a
curator and as a craftsman - making replicas of Shaker
oval boxes.

For years there have been debates about what is or
is not Shaker Furniture. Jerry will present an illustrated
lecture on changing opinions of what is included in the
phrase, "Shaker Furniture." Early writers on the Shakers
focused on a very limited number of pieces of furniture
that met their stylistic criteria for being included in the
category of Shaker furniture. Over the years the definition
of what is Shaker has broadened, but Jerry believes
it has begun to once again contract. He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.
Members of the Shaker Heritage Society have been
invited to join us at this meeting.

Wow, what a great meeting!

As a newsletter editor of our local club is there
a way I could get a copy of his presentation?

MJM

wrote in message
...
Wow, what a great meeting!

As a newsletter editor of our local club is there
a way I could get a copy of his presentation?


Interesting question... I'll ask if they plan to video tape the presentation
or otherwise make the presentation available.

John

John Grossbohlin wrote:

The Northeastern Woodworker's Association's September Meeting may be of
interest to folks here...

Thursday, September 11, 2008, 7:00 pm
Shaker Heritage Society Meetinghouse
Albany-Shaker Road, Albany, NY

... snip

Interesting. Someone had given me some magazines that he inherited by his
father, I'm scanning through them and cataloging those articles that
interest me. I didn't finish completely reading it yet, but an interesting
article on differences among the various shaker community styles can be
found in Popular Woodworking February 2006 pp 72

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
John Grossbohlin wrote:

The Northeastern Woodworker's Association's September Meeting may be of
interest to folks here...

Thursday, September 11, 2008, 7:00 pm
Shaker Heritage Society Meetinghouse
Albany-Shaker Road, Albany, NY

... snip

Interesting. Someone had given me some magazines that he inherited by
his
father, I'm scanning through them and cataloging those articles that
interest me. I didn't finish completely reading it yet, but an
interesting
article on differences among the various shaker community styles can be
found in Popular Woodworking February 2006 pp 72

That is an interesting article....

I've been to the museum and library from which the speaker hails and there
is certainly a lot of stuff there to study! That's the place where I took
the photos of the Shaker stationary woodworking tools that I posted a couple
years ago...

John

schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?

B.

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)

--
Keith

krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish among us while
there are no longer any Shakers.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish among us while
there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality, not
quantity.

B.

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality, not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?


--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Somebody wrote:
Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality, not
quantity.

"J. Clarke" wrote:

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

You obviously never lived in Amish country.

Lew

In article IKmuk.124$sq3.17@trnddc07,
says...
Somebody wrote:
Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality, not
quantity.

"J. Clarke" wrote:

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

You obviously never lived in Amish country.

You have a really warped sense of the world. ...and before you ask,
yes I have.

OnTopic: They make great furniture too. Bought a dining room and
bedroom while I was there...

--
Keith

Lew Hodgett wrote:
Somebody wrote:
Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality,
not
quantity.

"J. Clarke" wrote:

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

You obviously never lived in Amish country.

That is not an answer.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J. Clarke" wrote:

That is not an answer.

It very definitely is a definitive answer.

Think limited gene pool.

Lew

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality, not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

What part of "inbreeding" did you not understand?

B.

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote:

That is not an answer.

It very definitely is a definitive answer.

Think limited gene pool.

If in fact they are lacking "quality" then that might be a reason for
it, but it does not demonstrate the lack of quality. What "quality"
that you believe they should possess are they lacking?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality,
not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

What part of "inbreeding" did you not understand?

So are they bleeders, do they commonly have two heads, in what way
does this "inbreeding" manifest itself so as to constitute a lack of
"quality"?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality,
not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

What part of "inbreeding" did you not understand?

So are they bleeders, do they commonly have two heads, in what way
does this "inbreeding" manifest itself so as to constitute a lack of
"quality"?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish
among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality,
not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

What part of "inbreeding" did you not understand?

So are they bleeders, do they commonly have two heads, in what way
does this "inbreeding" manifest itself so as to constitute a lack
of
"quality"?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

The question is not whether they are inbred or what inbreeding means,
it is how this is manifested among them in a way that can be
reasonably percieved as lack of "quality", and so far you have come up
with absolutely nothing.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish
among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of quality,
not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

What part of "inbreeding" did you not understand?

So are they bleeders, do they commonly have two heads, in what way
does this "inbreeding" manifest itself so as to constitute a lack
of
"quality"?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

The question is not whether they are inbred or what inbreeding means,
it is how this is manifested among them in a way that can be
reasonably percieved as lack of "quality", and so far you have come up
with absolutely nothing.

Apparently you have comprehended absolutely nothing. Click on the link, your
answer is in the bulleted list under the heading "Results of Inbreeding".

B.

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
schnip

He will show examples
of this change and give his opinion on what it is
that makes something not only a piece of Shaker furniture
but an exciting piece of Shaker furniture.


Kind of a contradiction of terms, idn't it?


Those Shakers are an exciting group!

To the Amish... G

Not true. The Amish have sex. ;-)


... and that, boys and girls, is why there are still Amish
among
us
while there are no longer any Shakers.

Yeah, but with all that inbreeding, it's a question of
quality,
not
quantity.

Huh? In what way do you consider the Amish to lack "quality"?

What part of "inbreeding" did you not understand?

So are they bleeders, do they commonly have two heads, in what
way
does this "inbreeding" manifest itself so as to constitute a lack
of
"quality"?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding

The question is not whether they are inbred or what inbreeding
means,
it is how this is manifested among them in a way that can be
reasonably percieved as lack of "quality", and so far you have come
up with absolutely nothing.

Apparently you have comprehended absolutely nothing. Click on the
link, your answer is in the bulleted list under the heading "Results
of Inbreeding".

You have not comprehended that we are discussing the Amish, not
inbreeding. If in fact the Amish exhibit these results in such a way
as to lack "quality", show some evidence to that effect.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
You have not comprehended that we are discussing the Amish, not
inbreeding.

Wrong. We're discussing both.


If in fact the Amish exhibit these results in such a way
as to lack "quality", show some evidence to that effect.


I already have. However, your problem now seems to be that the
referenced article was general and does not specifically mention the
Amish. Apparently you're the only one unaware that inbreeding is
rampant among the Amish. Here's another link:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...genetics_x.htm.
If that's not enough, DAGS on "amish inbreeding". There's more than
16000 additional articles for you to ignore and deny. Knock yourself
out.

Finally something substantive. But doesn't really demonstrate any
lack of "quality", unless one kid having to have a special diet
indicates lack of "quality".

As for "knocking myself out", sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
You're the one making the assertion that the Amish lack "quality" so
it's up to you to prove it.


--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

In article ,
says...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
You have not comprehended that we are discussing the Amish, not
inbreeding.

Wrong. We're discussing both.


If in fact the Amish exhibit these results in such a way
as to lack "quality", show some evidence to that effect.


I already have. However, your problem now seems to be that the
referenced article was general and does not specifically mention the
Amish. Apparently you're the only one unaware that inbreeding is
rampant among the Amish. Here's another link:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...genetics_x.htm.
If that's not enough, DAGS on "amish inbreeding". There's more than
16000 additional articles for you to ignore and deny. Knock yourself
out.

Finally something substantive. But doesn't really demonstrate any
lack of "quality", unless one kid having to have a special diet
indicates lack of "quality".

As for "knocking myself out", sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
You're the one making the assertion that the Amish lack "quality" so
it's up to you to prove it.

At least to say what it means.

--
Keith

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
You have not comprehended that we are discussing the Amish, not
inbreeding.

Wrong. We're discussing both.


If in fact the Amish exhibit these results in such a way
as to lack "quality", show some evidence to that effect.


I already have. However, your problem now seems to be that the
referenced article was general and does not specifically mention the
Amish. Apparently you're the only one unaware that inbreeding is
rampant among the Amish. Here's another link:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...genetics_x.htm.
If that's not enough, DAGS on "amish inbreeding". There's more than
16000 additional articles for you to ignore and deny. Knock yourself
out.

Finally something substantive. But doesn't really demonstrate any
lack of "quality", unless one kid having to have a special diet
indicates lack of "quality".

As for "knocking myself out", sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
You're the one making the assertion that the Amish lack "quality" so
it's up to you to prove it.

Here are some "non-proof" quotes from the article:

"...children, who are disproportionately afflicted by rare and sometimes
fatal genetic-based diseases because of 200 years of inbreeding."

"The Amish have higher rates of inherited disease caused by bad, recessive
genes that are diluted in the general population but remain captive in
closed societies. That increases the odds that distant relatives that are
each carriers of a rare disorder will marry and produce afflicted children."

"...a rare enzyme deficiency that if left untreated, as it was for many
years in the Amish community, will lead to mental retardation."

Just because you choose to ignore the proof doesn't mean it hasn't been
proven.

B.

Buddy Matlosz wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
You have not comprehended that we are discussing the Amish, not
inbreeding.

Wrong. We're discussing both.


If in fact the Amish exhibit these results in such a way
as to lack "quality", show some evidence to that effect.


I already have. However, your problem now seems to be that the
referenced article was general and does not specifically mention
the
Amish. Apparently you're the only one unaware that inbreeding is
rampant among the Amish. Here's another link:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...genetics_x.htm.
If that's not enough, DAGS on "amish inbreeding". There's more
than
16000 additional articles for you to ignore and deny. Knock
yourself
out.

Finally something substantive. But doesn't really demonstrate any
lack of "quality", unless one kid having to have a special diet
indicates lack of "quality".

As for "knocking myself out", sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
You're the one making the assertion that the Amish lack "quality"
so
it's up to you to prove it.

Here are some "non-proof" quotes from the article:

"...children, who are disproportionately afflicted by rare and
sometimes
fatal genetic-based diseases because of 200 years of inbreeding."

"The Amish have higher rates of inherited disease caused by bad,
recessive
genes that are diluted in the general population but remain captive
in
closed societies. That increases the odds that distant relatives
that
are
each carriers of a rare disorder will marry and produce afflicted
children."

"...a rare enzyme deficiency that if left untreated, as it was for
many
years in the Amish community, will lead to mental retardation."

Just because you choose to ignore the proof doesn't mean it hasn't
been
proven.

I see. By that reasoning Stephen Hawking is of low "quality" because
he has a rare and usually fatal genetic disorder.

Perhaps this would go better if you defined "quality" in regard to
human beings.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 00:35:09 -0400, "Buddy Matlosz"
wrote:


"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Buddy Matlosz wrote:
You have not comprehended that we are discussing the Amish, not
inbreeding.

Wrong. We're discussing both.


If in fact the Amish exhibit these results in such a way
as to lack "quality", show some evidence to that effect.


I already have. However, your problem now seems to be that the
referenced article was general and does not specifically mention the
Amish. Apparently you're the only one unaware that inbreeding is
rampant among the Amish. Here's another link:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...genetics_x.htm.
If that's not enough, DAGS on "amish inbreeding". There's more than
16000 additional articles for you to ignore and deny. Knock yourself
out.

Finally something substantive. But doesn't really demonstrate any
lack of "quality", unless one kid having to have a special diet
indicates lack of "quality".

As for "knocking myself out", sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
You're the one making the assertion that the Amish lack "quality" so
it's up to you to prove it.

Here are some "non-proof" quotes from the article:

"...children, who are disproportionately afflicted by rare and sometimes
fatal genetic-based diseases because of 200 years of inbreeding."

"The Amish have higher rates of inherited disease caused by bad, recessive
genes that are diluted in the general population but remain captive in
closed societies. That increases the odds that distant relatives that are
each carriers of a rare disorder will marry and produce afflicted children."

"...a rare enzyme deficiency that if left untreated, as it was for many
years in the Amish community, will lead to mental retardation."

Just because you choose to ignore the proof doesn't mean it hasn't been
proven.

B.


We see downs syndrome and autism in open society breeding. Are we to
stop breeding in open society because "defectives" are happening. Heck
US grade school and high school test scores are going down. Now we are
breeding stupid kids. Oops, pretty off topic not worthy of a response.