# Interesting pieces of furniture - 4



## Anonymous (21 Jan 2007)

Hi all

The fourth piece of furniture in what I hope will be a regular series over a long period of time.


This one was another suggestion I received from a member in my 'inbox'

He says:
Here is a suggestion for your design thread. I don't like much of David Savage's work to be honest, but I think he hit the sweet spot with this table.
I love how deceptively simple it seems, but I would imagine that making it would be a challenge because of the chamfer which changes in angle as it travels along the length. I might find out, anyway, as I would really like to attempt to make a table like this when I've cleared my to-do list! I'll use black walnut for mine, though, rather than £1000 worth of Rosewood. 














More info may be found here


All are welcome to comment on the pieces and *please pm me with links to any photos that you would like featured here and a few lines explaining why *


I will copy all items of furniture I post here into a single sticky thread in the Design Forum, thus creating a pictorial 'list' of interesting furniture here


----------



## MrJay (21 Jan 2007)

ooh, I like that. What is it?


----------



## David C (21 Jan 2007)

Extravagant use of scarce materials?

David


----------



## Anonymous (21 Jan 2007)

MrJay - follow the link in the post and all will be revealed by the maker.


I like this one a lot - a beautiful and elegant bench with interesting wood and quite sensual curves. 

Thanks for the suggestion

Next piece will be postd wednesday or thursday 
:wink:


----------



## Anonymous (21 Jan 2007)

beautiful piece, personally I think its fairly simple to make even with the curves, the difficult part is finding the customer with the funds to commission such work.


----------



## Paul Chapman (21 Jan 2007)

Absolutely stunning - this sort of work takes woodworking to a new level 8) 8) 

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Anonymous (21 Jan 2007)

I like this simple form. It doesnt shout for attention like a hyperactive child does. It looks almost like a fragment of wrought iron. It reminds me of sculptures by philip King or Eduardo Paolozzi, a 70's Royal college of art sculpture school feel about it, yet it doesnt seem dated or tired. Looking at the other photo's, theres something of Henry moore's reclining figure sculptures in this piece. I like the way the table edge has chamfer's and facets rather than a bog standard square edge, and reflects light in assymetrical ways. I'd like to see some bigger close up's of the sections where the horizontal top bends into the vertical legs, to see how the wood was joined to make the cuved section's, staves or whatever?? It _apears_ tecnically acomplished. I agree with David it seems wasteful of rosewood, but then that probably wont be a problem to someone in a position to buy pieces by anish Kapoor to decorate their trendy studio in hackney or Deptford or whatever, money no object art for arts sake type scenario. I supose it _could_ have been done with venner on chipboard? :lol: Maybe the scandinavians do such a one for about £120?


----------



## Anonymous (21 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## mr (21 Jan 2007)

Bet that took a big roundover bit.
It looks luvverly and shiny in the picture though the top is supposed to have an imperfect finish according to the article - that would be interesting to see and more importantly touch. As for extravagant use of scarce materials would it be better to use the materials for "accent" work elsewhere? The problem for me is that it doesn't look real, it looks more like a large lump of veneer at first glance - because of the profiles on the legs, because of the scarcity of materials etc. 
Cheers Mike


----------



## Fecn (21 Jan 2007)

I like this one very much. Simple, Stylish and Sooooo expensive


----------



## Jake (21 Jan 2007)

I like it, or I like the idea. I love Henry Moore and Barbara Hepworth, who seem obvious influences Rosewood is difficult, very conspicuous consumption, it looks bling, the rich man's zebrano. Ignoring that, the curves bother me a bit, the idea is sinuous and sleek, but the curves just don't look quite elegant enough to me. This is being highly picky though, I do like it much more than 1, 2 or 3.


----------



## wrightclan (21 Jan 2007)

Nope, Don't like it.

Brad


----------



## Anonymous (21 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## Jake (21 Jan 2007)

A 'designer' favourite of a year or two ago - a coarse looking stripey yellow and brown tropical hardwood - it was very 'now', I think it has had its moment:

http://www.imor.es/images/noticias/zebrano.jpg

It was or is often (ab)used in a conspicuous statement way, like rosewood - but more affordable for your average mortal.


----------



## Paul Chapman (22 Jan 2007)

Mr_Grimsdale":3nwz60l1 said:


> PS wos "zebrano"?



http://www.tdveneers.co.uk/zebrano.htm

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Matt1245 (22 Jan 2007)

I think this table looks fantastic. The shape, finish and choice of wood all appeal to me. I would agree with what some have said about using such an endangered species, but just because it's endangered doesn't mean it doesn't look nice.



> PS wos "zebrano"?





> A 'designer' favourite of a year or two ago - a coarse looking stripey yellow and brown tropical hardwood - it was very 'now', I think it has had its moment:
> 
> http://www.imor.es/images/noticias/zebrano.jpg
> 
> It was or is often (ab)used in a conspicuous statement way, like rosewood - but more affordable for your average mortal.



https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=13256

Uh hum :lol: 

Matt.


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

I love it!

This is a beautiful piece of work - as much about sculpture as cabinetmaking. The design and craftsmanship are inspiring.

What about movement though? I don't know much about rosewood, but isn't there going to be a tendency for the 'legs' to move away from the perpendicular? Perhaps there's some steel angle brackets in there somewhere. At ten grand I be a bit miffed if my table looked p***ed after 6 months!

I was overjoyed to read the guff about this piece on the maker's website. Somebody please tell me that there is at least a hint of ironic self-parody in this arty-farty ponciness.

Somehow though, I suspect he's deadly serious!

Still, he's the guy with clients who'll blow 10k on a coffee table!

Cheers
Brad

PS I've got a 10' length of 10" x 2" zebrano in the shop. I might just have a bash!


----------



## Philly (22 Jan 2007)

Stunning! Give Savage his due, he can knock out breathtaking furniture!
As to the choice of timber, it looks amazing (but maybe my conscience wouldn't ) A great finish, to. Shellac, if I remember. This piece was in Good Wood when Mr S used to have his monthly column.
Keep 'em coming, Tony,
Philly


----------



## Alf (22 Jan 2007)

Well you could make an awful lot of plane handles out of it; otherwise, er, no, I don't think so.

Isn't it extraordinary that the scarcer timber becomes, the more fashionable it is to use great big thick chunks of it? I suppose not so extraordinary, if it's in order to demonstrate wealth. 

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

Tony":29ap6kp7 said:


> He says:
> I would imagine that making it would be a challenge because of the chamfer which changes in angle as it travels along the length



Nah,

My old green Bosch jigsaw cuts chamfers which change angle without even being asked to! :lol: 

Cheers
Brad


----------



## DomValente (22 Jan 2007)

Spot on ! Love it
It would work in a number of woods, the form is beautiful and would probably be somewhat impractical but if you can afford it who cares, you have the space to display it


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

Hasnt it always been the way that furniture making has been driven by the very wealthiest clientel? There are great pieces from the 17th and 18th century the golden age of furniture creation etc. But that was only aplicable to the people who could afford the extravagance and get top trophy designer maker's to create pieces as a way to show off their wealth (inherited, new industrial whatever) Did the hordes of tradesmen employed to create these trophy pieces that were used to show off wealth, influence, and reinforce the top heavy social order, have nice veneerd rosewood and mahogany chairs and table's?? Even the modernist/socialist utopian stuff from the early 20th century which was "for the _masses_" is now marketed as exclusive style statements for the _wealthy_.


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## innesm (22 Jan 2007)

Eugh. A shiny tasteless lump of flashy ostentation.

Just my opinion


----------



## StevieB (22 Jan 2007)

Well the write up on the website is certainly pretentious, although possibly what the well healed like to feel the craftsmen they employ put into the work they do. As to the table itself, either the top did not come out like the write up describes it or the photography is not designed to show it off - it simply looks like a polished surface to me.

Do I like it? In all honesty I don't think I do. Its clearly expensive just from the timber used, but that doesn't make me want one. To me it is neither a functional table nor a piece of sculpture. In fact at first from Tony's photograph I though it was a bench  Its a little too modern and a little too 'arty' (for want of a better word) for my tastes I think.

Steve.


----------



## Neil (22 Jan 2007)

Well, I suggested this piece to Tony. A very interesting (polarised) response!

I don't think that using Rosewood is critical to the success of the piece, although I think it would have to be a dark wood to work well. Also I think it needs a high shine on the bevelled edge.



senior":2xee1p8n said:


> personally I think its fairly simple to make even with the curves


I'm relieved to hear you say that, although having seen your work I suspect that what is easy for you wouldn't be easy for me  :lol: How do you think you would do the bevel? The only way I can think is to get close by some means (bandsaw before glue-up, Arbortech etc.) and then use a drawknife/spokeshave/lots of sandpaper, with templates attached top & bottom to provide a reference. I would guess that it would have to be close to perfect to look right.



Brad Naylor":2xee1p8n said:


> What about movement though? I don't know much about rosewood, but isn't there going to be a tendency for the 'legs' to move away from the perpendicular? Perhaps there's some steel angle brackets in there somewhere


Wood movement was a concern I had too. If I remember correctly, I think he just used double splines at the joints. Maybe he was very confident in the drying...David, if you're reading this, it would be great to hear your comments!

Love him or hate him, half of the pieces in Tony's threads thus far have been connected directly or indirectly with DS!

Cheers,
Neil


----------



## woodbloke (22 Jan 2007)

Hmmmmm....very tasty, I like it muchly, allot - Rob


----------



## AndyBoyd (22 Jan 2007)

Wonderful huh, but I just keep staring at it and thinking how in earth would I make those beveled edges to that depth!

I'm really scratching my head at the moment on how to do it for an 15mm plate as the back rest of my version of his love chairs, and it's that that's causing my lack of progress on that project at the moment (that and not having any wide thin London Plane pieces to use in the inner lamination process - and having no vacuum press too now I come to think about it, and living in 2 countries and the kids etc etc)

I just love his bravery though, and the skill of his people


----------



## Philly (22 Jan 2007)

Andy
You could dry fit the bench together, mark the bevle and then dissemble. You then could rough out each part separately before the final glue-up. This gives you the rough shape with all the hard work done for you on the bandsaw.
Hope this helps
LazyPhilly


----------



## AndyBoyd (22 Jan 2007)

Philly":2rsm6klz said:


> Andy
> You could dry fit the bench together, mark the bevel and then dissemble. You then could rough out each part separately before the final glue-up. This gives you the rough shape with all the hard work done for you on the bandsaw.
> Hope this helps
> LazyPhilly



I see that Philly but finishing it to look that square is just  

I guess a spindle moulder with a template and a tilting arbour might help but gee, still seems difficult to me.

Oh well, but isn't it just so uplifting to be inspired to have a go at this yourself. 

(Mind you a few mistakes on 1000 UKP worth of Rosewood would make you timid to be brave again in the future, huh? :roll


----------



## Jake (22 Jan 2007)

> Uh hum :lol:



Your table isn't what I meant. 

I meant, say, a whole kitchen's worth of veneer, to get the really in your face look that is supposed to scream expense in a Beckhamite way. Anyone who has stayed at the Radisson hotel at Stanstead may have an idea of what I mean, for instance.


----------



## MikeW (22 Jan 2007)

I have always liked this table. It's bit of complexity in building vs. the apparent simplicity of the design is what has always intrigued me. Like much furniture of an artistic design, it simply wouldn't look good in many homes, but it would in some depending on the environment it would be situated.

Would I like it in my home? No. Simply wouldn't do for who I am nor where it would live. But I have had clients where it would fit into the overall setting of their homes quite well.

As regards an earlier comment regarding the use of material, my feeling is it is an extravagent use of any timber in solid form. Once past that, solid would be how I would approach it. It would need to be a wood which would take a high polish, a wood which had clarity of grain and tone.

Take care, Mike


----------



## Johnboy (22 Jan 2007)

I like it. Maybe the use of rosewood is a bit OTT but I love the simple lines.

John


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

Mr_Grimsdale":9yz46nco said:


> mr spanton":9yz46nco said:
> 
> 
> > Hasnt it always been the way that furniture making has been driven by the very wealthiest clientel?
> ...



Yes Jacob but the whole point was that the peasants _werent_ left to their own devices and _werent_ given even a _quarter_ of a chance to do what they pleased. That was why their skill's, energy, time etc _were_ apropriated to build nice lacewood and mahoggony things for the gentry while _they_ had to make do with a coarse stool or a stick chair. When I mention "furniture making" I'm talking about the "high end cutting edge exclusive trophy designer envelope pushing" type of furniture making, not normal every day utilitarian peasant country furniture. Like you I have a great admiration for vernacular styles of architecture, furniture etc etc (in fact you already know that). But I honestly dont know where you get the puddled idea that city styles of sophistication originated with a few salt of the earth honest bumpkins and their "betters" saw their efforts and thought oh I say thats simply wonderful, ripping stuff, employ that chap, or at least get Mr Chippendale to copy him :roll: :lol: . Like it or not (the modernists definately _didnt_ like it) "sophistication" for want of a better expression has it's roots in greece and egpypt, they always return to those so called classic origins sooner or later. Every form originates somewhere and its a fact theres a limit as to how sucessful any one can be in inventing totally new original one's. The early 20Century furniture seemed bold and new because it used new industrial manufacturing methods which lent itself to new forms. But even the barecelona chair has greek klismos inspired legs.


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## joesoap (22 Jan 2007)

Now where best to fit the vice ???


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

Jacob with all due respect you havent given me much foo for thought

If you read carefully what I posted you would understand that I dont necessarily regard the classical greek/egyptian standards thing as something I agree with, but that, like it or not, those _are_ the benchmark standards that people eventually hark back to, thats why NEO classicism resurfaces every now and again. I'm not saying that this is a good thing, OK? I also dont believe in euro centrism, as you will have understood from other posts I have made in other thread's if you read them. But the fact still remains that the trends are set in furniture making (as everything else) by RICH people, even if that means creating a lucrative fashion amongst themselves for a modern/post modern/primitive/ethnic _anti_-classical art or including non clasical influences in other area's of culture, some of which you mentioned. Wether you accept those trends is an entirely different matter.

I must say I am at a loss as to know how impressionism was born out of peasant art?? Most if not all "art movements" are born out of a reaction against classical values pertaining to subject/representation/perspective/scale etc, to a greater or lesser degree. Thats why they often apear so esoteric and irelevant to the average person. The impressionist painters had a very simple preoccupation-they liked to paint outdoors and capture the fleeting moment of a light effect or some similar thing. The subject matter (peasant related or otherwise, they werent fussy) really wasnt that important. If you think it _was_ your missing the point of what impressionism was about. They were trying to "paint" an _invisible_ thing-ie a mood, they wernt creating something _new_ so much as creating in a _reaction against_ the salon classicism that had stifled spontaneous creativity as they understood it where you worked for days or weeks with a "sitter" or "still life" in a studio. Its the same with Picasso. People make much of his use of african masks in montmartre; its true he studied and observed various non western european cultural elements in his formative pre-cubist phase, but he _still_ needed classicism as a benchmark to bounce off so that he could say "here look at MY work its SO different from your regular CLASSICAL view" _You_ (in the academy school) say theres only _one_ vanishing point (view) in a picture, _I_ say theres as many as I like there to be.


----------



## Good Surname or what ? (22 Jan 2007)

...again wonderful design as a piece of sculpture. Would I put my G+T on it or even worse my socked size 10s? I wonder how the owners treat it? My fear is it becomes dated/unloved in 10 years time. A great waste then of wood and craftsmanship.

That said, as a form I love it - as I do much of Savage's work. But then I do like scupture/abstract art as well as furniture

PS - you could commission a small room full of furniture from David Savage for what this painting fetched last time it changed hands. Personally I'd sell all my furniture and have a bare room with this one painting on the wall! SWMBO would not approve.


----------



## Anonymous (22 Jan 2007)

No its no good, I've read and re read this page but I think I lost the plot at the end of page 2

Somebody tell me how it ends. Did sparticus or grim win, and what happened to the savages?


----------



## greybeard (22 Jan 2007)

As a piece of sculpture yes; as a piece of furniture no.

Simple prole that I am 'my' furniture has firstly to be functional, it's the (perceived) statement of function that is interpreted, good or bad, by the design. 
So I can be pleased/enchanted by Shaker/Edwardian/Egyptian(of the ancient kind!)/whatever, or just as equally not moved.

For me this piece is too 'designed' (arty?) first, with functional a long way second, wrong priorities! - my boat is not floated!

As for the origins of design, so ably disputed and discoursed upon further up this thread, it reminded me of the observation (anyone know the source?) that there are only 12 original jokes in the world, including the one about cheese, and all the rest are just variations......but perhaps I dismiss the human capacity to invent too readily?!


----------



## Matt1245 (23 Jan 2007)

> Your table isn't what I meant.



I know Jake, i was just having a giggle. I have seen it used for wall panelling in shops etc, and agree that so much is OTT.

Matt.


----------



## Alf (23 Jan 2007)

greybeard":2akbhs93 said:


> ...it reminded me of the observation (anyone know the source?) that there are only 12 original jokes in the world, including the one about cheese, and all the rest are just variations.....


Don't know it, but I like it.  I'm also relieved I'm not the only one who thinks function is a priority. If it doesn't work well, how can it possibly be well designed?

Cheers, Alf


----------



## woodbloke (23 Jan 2007)

Can feel myself having a little dip into my David Pye books later on ..... - Rob


----------



## dedee (23 Jan 2007)

Looking at the level of interest each one of these threads has produced it is safe to say that they have all been Interesting Pieces of Furniture.

Is one allowed to like a design without liking the wood used to execute it?

Andy


----------



## Anonymous (23 Jan 2007)

Alf":3sc0ri16 said:


> greybeard":3sc0ri16 said:
> 
> 
> > ...it reminded me of the observation (anyone know the source?) that there are only 12 original jokes in the world, including the one about cheese, and all the rest are just variations.....
> ...



I know what you mean, you couldnt exactly chop carrots or bread on it comfortably, or use it as a dining table, or let the kids draw on it. But with respect, I think that this design _was_ a sucess and _did_ satisfy the client's vision. (According to the web site at any rate) 
Quote:-

"Daniela loved the resulting table, it fitted her space, matched her colours, took ones eye to the lovely Kapoor sculpture as planned and was a piece of quality work that could sit in the same space and not feel ashamed of itself."

So it did fit the purpose for which it was intended, unconventional as that may seem to many of us, as a sort of sculptural/altar/table living space statement.


----------



## Roger (23 Jan 2007)

> you couldn't exactly chop carrots or bread on it comfortably, or use it as a dining table


Maybe because it's a Coffee table :wink: 

But I agree with you totally:



> "Daniela loved the resulting table, it fitted her space, matched her colours, took ones eye to the lovely Kapoor sculpture as planned and was a piece of quality work that could sit in the same space and not feel ashamed of itself."
> 
> So it did fit the purpose for which it was intended, unconventional as that may seem to many of us, as a sort of sculptural/altar/table living space statement.


I find it a beautiful, luxurious piece - both a work of art, craftsmanship and sculpture.


----------



## Shivers (23 Jan 2007)

Not my cup of tea,the craftsmanship is nice although the project looks like an exercise in design,--looks like a bench (stroke) table,i like savage's furniture & i'm sure this fit the situation for the client,
what i also notice throughout savages' pages is him giving due credit to the excellent craftsmen he has assisting,this is big of him --as many others wouldn't do so,merely taking all the credit themselves.
I think its hard to pin down his influences as he seems to have full control of multiple themes.


----------



## Alf (23 Jan 2007)

Fwiw, my comment on function being part of design was a general one, not specifically aimed at this piece. I've been judging these things purely on the pic on the forum and haven't visited the maker's website for the justification schpiel (spiel? schpeel? whatever). I've been trying to find a piece I like for this series of threads and went through the designer/maker site (url escapes me at the mo') looking for it - if I have to click through endless artistic websites only to read yet another "philosophy", "mission statement" or general whitter about a piece of furniture I may scream...

But that's probably just me.

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Anonymous (23 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## Anonymous (23 Jan 2007)

Do I come over as sour and opinionated as Jacob Grimsdale does? If so  I offer a genuine apology to all reading this thread who I might have upset. I'm not trying to pick arguments for the sake of it.

Fine Jacob, you've set out your examples of popular culture inspired one way or another by non "classical" peasant/popular/ethnic inluence. When are you going to understand I'm not in disagreement with you on this :?: I have already said as much on more than one ocasion on the short time I've been on this forum, _genuine cultural diversity is a good thing_. Its the politically imposed artificial sort that worries me, wether inposed via greek/egyptian standards, Utopian socialist standards or whatever. Also I think we can agree that euro-centric ("centrist" as you put it) domination of cultural values has been a bad thing on the whole. 

BUT my original point was that wether you or I like it, accept it or approve of it, it is and always has been, the _rich_ people who have driven furniture style, innovation etc, they can afford to pay the makers to do it. And that includes taking (exploiting even) non western cultural influences and "adapting them" (another method of imperialism) to create new trends/fashions etc, reacting against the so called cultural norms, and making a lucrative new industry out of that. 
And again wether you or I like it, aprove of it or even accept it, classical formal standards _are_ the ones which people use as a yardstick, sooner or later. That _doesnt_ automatically imply that you have to abide by it If your diametrically oposed to that and like to operate outside of that (like picasso did), fine, continue as you are. But if someone else says Im fed up of all the cross cultural post modern stuff, I'd like some elegance and _they_ see it in classical/neo-classical forms then that's fine too.

Sorry Jacob If I caused you personal offense, its just too easy to get the wrong end of the stick on threads

cheers Mr S


----------



## Paul Chapman (23 Jan 2007)

mr spanton":1msy4ckw said:


> Do I come over as sour and opinionated as Jacob Grimsdale does? If so  I offer a genuine apology to all reading this thread who I might have upset. I'm not trying to pick arguments for the sake of it.



I think most of us lost the will to live several chapters ago :roll: :roll: :lol: 

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Anonymous (23 Jan 2007)

mr spanton":1d4pgkj2 said:


> , _genuine cultural diversity is a good thing_. Its the politically imposed artificial sort that worries me,



How can you tell the difference?


----------



## Anonymous (23 Jan 2007)

You must enter a message when posting.


----------



## Good Surname or what ? (23 Jan 2007)

Mr_Grimsdale":125btqki said:


> [I was referring to the notion that design innovation originates in cities (centrally) and diffuses out to be feebly imitated in the dreary provinces, and the colonies too



Jacob,

Perhaps you should study the evolution of the Windsor chair in America after it was first imported from the "mother country". I see few feeble imitations in America, more a thriving diversification and refinement, while the UK slipped into heavy unlovely mediocrity.


----------

