Handworkfan
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 80
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm picking up a conversation started on the new veritas plane thread. For those who haven't been following it, the issue is about whether the use of jgs and power tools means that something is not 'hand made'.
I use a few machines and a number of jigs - mostly home-made. I reckon, for example, the mitred corners on my boxes - shot with a shooting board and a bird-house jig - are genuinely hand made since I made the jigs, planing the slopes on teh bird-house freehand to precise angles in both planes. The result is that the joint is child's play to make, but wouldn't have been without the skill to make the jigs in the first place.
Some power tools take the hard work out of things without necessarily reducing the skill level involved - and it must be right that the maker should receive credit for the hand skills involved.
A distinction is made in the original conversation between 'the workmanship of risk' (hand work) and 'the workmanship of certainty' which is interpreted at the extreme to include using a plane as opposed to an unsupported blade. However, there's a big gap here between 'risk' and 'certainty' as anyone who's ever planed a workpiece badly with a good plane will testify! With the best plane in the world there's no 'certainty' about getting timber true and smooth - and many a maker will testify to the 'risk' of taking up a hand-plane to clean up a lovingly-made piece.
I wonder what others think about it?
I use a few machines and a number of jigs - mostly home-made. I reckon, for example, the mitred corners on my boxes - shot with a shooting board and a bird-house jig - are genuinely hand made since I made the jigs, planing the slopes on teh bird-house freehand to precise angles in both planes. The result is that the joint is child's play to make, but wouldn't have been without the skill to make the jigs in the first place.
Some power tools take the hard work out of things without necessarily reducing the skill level involved - and it must be right that the maker should receive credit for the hand skills involved.
A distinction is made in the original conversation between 'the workmanship of risk' (hand work) and 'the workmanship of certainty' which is interpreted at the extreme to include using a plane as opposed to an unsupported blade. However, there's a big gap here between 'risk' and 'certainty' as anyone who's ever planed a workpiece badly with a good plane will testify! With the best plane in the world there's no 'certainty' about getting timber true and smooth - and many a maker will testify to the 'risk' of taking up a hand-plane to clean up a lovingly-made piece.
I wonder what others think about it?