I really enjoyed your discussion with Adam King.

There is a real and difficult interface in artistic crafts, like woodwork, between technique and design. David Kindersley, an excellent British stone carver, put it this way:

“As the apprentice grows in mastery, so can his craft, like a cup, receive more and more stimulus poured into it in the form of contemporary life. If the cup is not good enough, it will break”.

The same book that contains this statement (M Gayford, D Kindersley and LL Cardozo Kindersley, Apprenticeship, Cambridge 2003) also describes the educational advantage of apprenticeship over more academic educational processes, in part in terms of this symbiotic relationship of technical skill and artistic ambition. The apprentice learned both technical skills and design skills at the same time and as his technical skills increase so also does his ability both to recognise good design, realise such design and to invent new designs of his own. This view of apprenticeship is borne out by the discussion of the apprentice’s development and the role of education in it in The Joiner and Cabinet Maker.

For the amateur woodworker of the early 21st century, this represents a real challenge. Most of the modern masters do not run workshops and most of us do not have the time or resources to become apprentices like Thomas. I think that most of us can come up with pretty good design solutions, and it helps now that people like Neil Lemans, George Walker, Adam King, Shannon Rogers and yourself are talking about design questions and solutions. However, the feeling that we need a new tool before we can progress to our next project is, in my view, an indication that most of us feel lacking in technique. Many of us undoubtedly are less skilled than we would like to be. But there is only one way to rectify that – keep building new projects. It is only by making more things (and more mistakes) that we will acquire the technical skill that will enable us to realise our designs and, once we have done that, to open our horizons to new design solutions. Technique and design march together, but technique is the foot you have to put forward first.

In my opinion, Adam’s most helpful suggestion was to keep on making things and, from time to time to go back and re-make things that you have made before. When you make something for the second, third or fourth time, it will be different from each preceding time. Even if it uses the same materials and the same joinery techniques, you will make it differently – dovetails will become more accurate and have a different spacing, tenons will fit into mortises with shoulders tight to the mortised face and finish will be smoother and more complete. Further, as you contemplate starting the project, you will inevitably bring in new design solutions as well as new technical solutions to the project.

My greatest concern with talking about a need to immerse ourselves in learning design, is that we run the risk of becoming constipated by that design knowledge. For the amateur woodworker, that constipation often leads to the woodworker being too intimidated to start any project.

I have a real example of this from my personal knowledge. A woodworking friend of mine, Scott, greatly admired Sam Maloof and his rockers. He read everything that he could on the subject and bought every plan published that he could find. He was determined that the rear joints were beyond his capacity to produce. At a very jovial lunch, I told Scott to stop thinking about it and just to build the [expletive deleted] chair. Fortunately he took my advice and it was good advice. The rocking chair was built and won prizes at the Timber and Working with Wood Show in Sydney. In this case, Scott already had the necessary techniques to achieve his design goal, he just didn’t know it. The cup was good enough to contain that design. Having realised that design, of course, Scott’s technical skills improved. He made another rocking chair and he solved the design issues in somewhat different ways, reflecting his enhanced technical ability. Not only did that chair win prizes, Scott was able to sell it for a premium price.

It was interesting to hear Adam’s comments about considering a client’s existing environment before designing a piece, and your reaction to his comments. This is something I’ve always done, and just assumed most people did as well. Part of the reason I do this is because I like to have a relationship with my clients. I feel like I’m putting a lot of myself in every piece I make, and so it’s very personal. Likewise, I want my clients to have an understanding and respect for that idea, and part of that process is making a connection with the client and their space.

I’m in for the mail thing, too – plan or no plan. It would be a great way to consider the nuances of style we all have as wooworkers, craftsment, artists, etc., because even with a specific plan, we all have our own work styles, like a painter, sculptor, etc. Doing it for a charitable end is even more appealing. It sort of reminds me of an art project a guy I met at the studio where I work made. Check out Cody Vanderkaay’s “Mail Box”: http://www.codyfornow.com/drawing/drawingMailbox.html

Also, just tweeted to both you guys about hand tools. I use hand tools for lots of stuff, but wouldn’t consider hand planing and squaring, say, a bunch of rough cut walnut. I’d be interested in learning more about things like that.

Great show!