yep will do just nicely in changing the odd light bulb too :wink:
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
yep will do just nicely in changing the odd light bulb too :wink:
This was mine. For me, it is the work of a mature designer who has no reason to shout about his 'talent'. For me, in comparison, the peacock chair is aptly named, a clumsy noisy shouty attention-seeking horrid thing.
This chair is restraint. Nothing is done for sheer show, there's no pomp or circumstance. No frills, no pretension, no belief that one man can reinvent the idea of a chair (etc). No attempt to try and make something to prove that a material can be be bent to any man's will whatever that is. It is simply, an maybe boringly, a very brilliant man's hyper-careful reinvigoration of a classic form, done with lightest of touches to make a classic form with a very very modernist twist. It's the work of someone who know he doesn't have have to try too (obviously) hard, because actually it is in the detail, not the extremity, of what you can achieve.
This chair is restraint. Nothing is done for sheer show, there's no pomp or circumstance. No frills, no pretension, no belief that one man can reinvent the idea of a chair (etc). No attempt to try and make something to prove that a material can be be bent to any man's will whatever that is. It is simply, an maybe boringly, a very brilliant man's hyper-careful reinvigoration of a classic form, done with lightest of touches to make a classic form with a very very modernist twist. It's the work of someone who know he doesn't have have to try too (obviously) hard, because actually it is in the detail, not the extremity, of what you can achieve.
Dad
Established Member
I like the design both of these a lot. Do agree with the comment that the arms on the peacock chair not gelling quite right. Wouldn't mind a set of the Moller chairs round my dining table at all - (presumably there's a version without arms for the side chairs) & a couple of the peacocks in the conservatory... (in my dreams :lol: )
A
Anonymous
Guest
The close up of the peacock chair is telling.
Theres a lot I dont like about this chair.
Its fussy, too complicated, structurally suspect.
Eg the wedged tennons on the legs are done wrong, the wedges should be at 90 degree's to the grain of the wood with the mortice in it, not 45 degrees. They look nice but will effectively become a weak point of the construction that could prematurely split the leg socket's. I also think the scarfed back bow is asking for trouble, its another built in weak spot. Wegner uses a much better finger joint on another of his chairs (cant think of the name right now) The arms on this one must be relying on mechanical fixings at one end at least instaed of the simple logic of traditional post and rung construction where components are fixed with wedged M&T's or one passes through another. The arm arrangement looks clumsy. I'm not sure about the armpost's extending down to the stretcher's, it looks suspect like the ercol method. Theres confusion with the profiles of the components, simple round bow, skittle legs, intricate armposts, no consistent theme. I dont like the big step down in thickness of the top and bottom halves of the arm post's. I do like the flat's on the spindles though, executed very well (as it would have to be to work, one even slightly out of line or proportion would ruin the over all effect)
Theres a lot I dont like about this chair.
Its fussy, too complicated, structurally suspect.
Eg the wedged tennons on the legs are done wrong, the wedges should be at 90 degree's to the grain of the wood with the mortice in it, not 45 degrees. They look nice but will effectively become a weak point of the construction that could prematurely split the leg socket's. I also think the scarfed back bow is asking for trouble, its another built in weak spot. Wegner uses a much better finger joint on another of his chairs (cant think of the name right now) The arms on this one must be relying on mechanical fixings at one end at least instaed of the simple logic of traditional post and rung construction where components are fixed with wedged M&T's or one passes through another. The arm arrangement looks clumsy. I'm not sure about the armpost's extending down to the stretcher's, it looks suspect like the ercol method. Theres confusion with the profiles of the components, simple round bow, skittle legs, intricate armposts, no consistent theme. I dont like the big step down in thickness of the top and bottom halves of the arm post's. I do like the flat's on the spindles though, executed very well (as it would have to be to work, one even slightly out of line or proportion would ruin the over all effect)
I suspect that the 45deg wedges may be because if the wedges were the right way round the stresses produced would act on the (fairly) short grain towards the front (in the case of the front legs) of the seat, risking that section of the seat from popping out. If set parallel to the grain then of course you would risk splitting along the grain, so this is a compromise, sharing the stress between the long and the lateral grain.
What gets me is how the weaving is done. I haven't managed to work it out yet. Any offers?
What gets me is how the weaving is done. I haven't managed to work it out yet. Any offers?
