Are we in the “Industrial Revolution” style of furniture?

[Mike Henderson]

Welcome to the forum, Brian.

Mike

[Peter Quinn]

I don't know what period we are in now but there are several very successful furniture makers in my town and more in my area that have pieces in museums presently, and there are scores of local custom cabinet shops that make built ins of furniture quality (I work for one), none of which I have seen in line at the local soup kitchen. As further evidence of wood workings present health there was a show recently on a national cable network featuring a fine furniture maker you may have heard of, David Marks, who trained and inspired (and continues to) countless furniture makers. Perhaps there is a freedom now to work in any style or combine styles in a way that defies easy definition as was possible in the cloistered ages past? Go back a bit in history and all the early styles are defined by the tastes of the crown and their courts. Very small closed circuit, easy to define. Yes, now is not the worst time in history to buy a quality piece of furniture in any of a myriad of styles.

I think if you watch too many antiques road show episodes you start thinking every citizen owned a house full of Philadelphia or Sheraton furniture in the colonial period when in fact most people had little furniture in there homes and what they did have was junk cobbled together from scraps. Most people were operating on a subsistence level and fine furnishings were not in their range. Custom furniture commissions were the domain of the wealthy just as they are mostly today. Fact is more people can afford quality furniture today than at any time previous in history, but this doesn't mean every body can. Even in the roaring 1920's most people could not afford a piece by Ruhlmann and few can today.

I agree with Mike, inexpensive furnishings are not a plague destined to ruin things for custom furniture makers. Factories have provided an option since the late 1800's for those that would otherwise have had nothing. My wife and I have a house occupied by simple quality furniture, none if it the wallmart/ikea ilk, but mostly factory made hardwood construction. It took us years to go from a mostly empty house to something resembling a decorated home. We went through a round of IKEA pieces in our first NY apartment, and frankly they were a nice upgrade from the milk crates we had been using, connected with tie straps to form bookcases and dressers! I do find the quality of some of the offerings on the bottom of the furniture quality scale regrettable but I don't begrudge those that find this stuff meets their needs.

It has always been difficult to open a furniture shop and develop a solid business, it has always been a long road from apprentice to self employed master, and it has never been the highest paying business. Used to be you had to apprentice with a master to even be able to open a shop, today any yokle with a TS can hang a shingle and take his or her shot at wood working. Even well established quality shops struggle in lean times. A living can be made but is nor has it ever been guaranteed.

My own parents saved for years to be able to afford factory made furniture that as a child I though to be of the highest quality but as an adult in the wood working business I now understand to be very pedestrian factory made stuff. It is made of wood, has lasted 30 plus years, and sure beats the stuff it replaced and the stuff they could not afford.

[Warren Clemans]

Great topic. I side with Neal in this debate--I think the majority of furniture in most peoples' houses today is crap. Abject, depressing, ugly crap. That goes for Restoration Hardware and Pottery Shed and the other stores that try to be a step up from Ikea. I don't buy for a second that it's all people can afford. People shop at Ikea and Target because they don't care--they place a low value on furniture relative to other things that they spend money on. They would rather spend the money on a big-screen TV, $100 a month for cable, fashionable clothes, jewelry, more cars than they need, etc. It's all about priorities. Personally, if I couldn't afford a nice solid-wood coffee table (either bought from a decent maker or made myself), then I'd rather have a pine board over a couple of milk crates. At least the milk crates are honest work, whereas the Ikea table is fake. Yes, this makes me an elitist, but so are all of you who build (or are at least interested in building) your own furniture when you could buy it more cheaply.

So, to address the original post, I suggest:

Jacobean (1600-1690)
Early American (1640-1700)
William and Mary (1690-1725)
Queen Anne (1700-1755)
[etc]
Arts and Crafts (1880-1910)
Art Nouveau (1890-1910)
Scandinavian Contemporary (1930-1950)
Metal and naugehyde (1950-1980)
Cheap (1980-present)

[Jim Mattheiss]

Road side furniture - LOL

The first "furniture" I made was a stand for our microwave oven. I built it while I was whiling away the time during the LOML's Bridal Shower.

Some years later we lent it to Grandma to hold her microwave. When she was done with it I as moving it back to my house in the open trunk of my car.

Of course it fell out and skidded along the rode for 30 feet or so. I picked it up, put it back in the trunk and completed the journey. For about 60 seconds it was "road side furniture".

Anyway - The only "heirloom" furniture passed along to me from my parents was my "rustic oak" bedroom set. Desk, upright dresser and twin bed. The bed frame is in the attic but the other pieces are in my son's room. He can take it when and if he wants it.

This conversation reminds me of the SK/Snap-On versus cheap hand tools discussion. There are the buy quality versus but commodity people - regardless of the commodity.

Just my thoughts.

Cheers

Jim

[Mike Henderson]

This conversation reminds me of the SK/Snap-On versus cheap hand tools discussion. There are the buy quality versus but commodity people - regardless of the commodity.

Just my thoughts.

Cheers

Jim

The thing I would argue, Jim, is that the factory made furniture IS quality furniture. The definition of Quality is "Meeting the needs of the customer". For those people who find factory made furniture to be exactly what they want, they have purchased "Quality furniture".

Mike

[Sonny Edmonds]

More like the slam-bam-throw it away man, era.
I enjoy making quality furniture. It ain't cheap, but it is nice stuff.

[Danny Thompson]

Maybe the "Compost" era?

The "newest" and most exciting furniture I've seen lately is all whimsical:

http://www.thisnext.com/item/9700D74...etalworks-Tree
http://www.thisnext.com/item/329E6FBE/branch-shelf
http://www.dustfurniture.com/

or deconstructed:
http://thecool-listkids.com/?p=172

Best furniture designs: I still love the clean lines of the Italians.

[Bob Parker]

So this is the end of fine furniture....I always come in at the end of great things

[Bob Parker]

If you apply everything we are saying to a painter, then you can see that technology has also made it so we can mass produce art, but that doesn't put the artist out of business because people still instinctively know that an actual painting is more precious than a print. People don't seem to be able to tell the difference between the two when it comes to furniture. Is furniture "art"? I like what Tage Frid says.. "Congratulations. You've just figured out the most complicated way to hold a board 30 inches off the floor."

[Andrew Joiner]

Great topic.
After Scandinavian Modern I say it's something like:

Mid-Century Modern 1950 to 1965

"Designer Furniture" 1965 to present

If it's based on what is sought after as the "highest standard" or what's really cool and "in" for the time period. My parents could not afford true Scandinavian Modern but they bought cheap copies because it was the "style to have ".

Designer Furniture could be on the list. It may have been helped along by consumers paying more for Designer approved clothes. Many furniture lines branded with a Designer name had more status associated with them. Less wood more chrome and glass. Mixed materials other than wood could be seen in all the design magazines starting in the 60's.

Now and the future:

Green Eco-Friendly 2000 to ?

You tell me what the consumer and marketing will decide on here. Wood has a lot of green going for it. The design of commercial furniture is heavily influenced by it since the LEED standards. Green marketing is a driver for people with purchasing power. Thus we may see bamboo printed particle board furniture for the masses, real bamboo for the upper class.

I love to study the history of furniture design. Over the years from
Chippendale to Nakashima and Sam Maloof I've seen one thing. You gotta have a gimmick!
How did the very first ball and claw foot detail get sold?

Granted, quality is important. But it us, the designers and makers of furniture, that show the consumer what we think is cool, or the best. The consumer say's they believe us if they plunk down the cash.

[Neal Clayton]

this makes me an elitist, but so are all of you who build (or are at least interested in building) your own furniture when you could buy it more cheaply.

that's another peeve of mine. the ignorant and tasteless calling anyone who isn't "elitist" but that would be a 10 page thread that'd get us all banned so i'll skip that

i don't have anything against machines, i have lots of them. and not every piece of furniture in my house is custom or antique, it's about half and half (i do have all original art, though, i prefer stuff from promising local artists rather than buying prints, but we're lucky enough to live in an area where a local artist can make a living, that's more difficult than furniture, imo, and not possible everywhere).

but what gets me are the people who come walking out of ikea with a cheap set of kids beds they'll spend a day putting together with the excuse of "i can't afford a good one" when there's a vastly superior alternative on craigslist for 50 bucks that needs the same day of work (only stripping the green paint and refinishing rather than assembling).

on the upside, more and more people i think are realizing this. the turnover of used items on our local craigslist has gone up quite a bit even in the last couple of years.

[Rick Fisher]

Its a matter or recognizing two different markets. There is still a market for custom furniture and its growing.

We have a mix in our house and I must say that the quality of the newer mass produced stuff is actually pretty darn good.

There will always be a market for custom goods.

[Ron Knapp]

Art Deco should probably be included on the list. Nice topic.

[Jay Knoll]

I've been away for awhile and then just lurking but this thread caught my interest.

38 years ago my in-laws gave us $500 "toward the wedding", we had a very small ceremony and my wife and I bought a Scandinavian Dining table, and six chairs. We're still using it today. But some of you would probably call it junk furniture, the top isn't solid teak but a veneer over a ply substrate. We've taken care of it and there have been a lot of wonderful memories created with that table.

Before we married my wife lived in NYC, she picked up a chest of drawers off the side of the street, one of those bleached oak numbers. The veneer was pretty beat up when I got my hands on it, but the carcass was solid, so wood putty, and a painted surface. Yep, still got that one too, we've lost count of all the different paint colors it has had, but I do recall stripping it down about 7 years ago for the latest paint job. But the design was good and it still fits into our contemporary style.

I am in awe of some of the furniture that people here can make, but the only stuff that really catches my eye are the Shaker inspired pieces, (and that includes the Moser and Mark Green designs) but that is just my taste. You couldn't pay me to have the "colonial" stuff that surrounded me from my childhood. I do have a small chest of drawers that was my grandparents and then in my Mom's home before she died. It is a great counterpoint to the rest of our stuff but only as an accent piece.

I installed a kitchen from IKEA stuff several years ago, I couldn't be happier with the result. And it was much cheaper than any other available alternative at, I think, equal or better quality. There are benefits to mass production! And I've learned how to build better stuff. But I don't think I could afford myself if I had to pay a decent hourly wage for the stuff I make for our family. But as a hobby it is a wonderful and sure beats the heck out of golf.

If I were 20 something and trying to make it in this competitive economy I don't think I could afford the luxury of building all the furniture for my house. My time would, I think, be better spent focusing on a career and family, forming a foundation for a better future. And then, the manufactured alternatives seem to make sense. But I wouldn't put IKEA and Restoration Hardware in the same category, the higher end IKEA stuff is clearly better (but that is just my design aesthetic)

It is really hard to train someone to understand the cost value relationship, in anything. How many people seem to "need" a specific item of clothing because of the logo that it carries. And furniture can be even more difficult because of the significant cost that quality demands. I think that quality custom pieces can be acquired over a lifetime as one's personal style evolves, in the meantime, the IKEA and Target, I think, provide a great design based alternative to some of the other stuff -- like that which Walmart sells which I would characterize as "junk".

Jay

[David Keller NC]

From the standpoint of the original post, that's a tough question. Most historians and scholars will tell you that, with the exception of Chippendale, Sheraton and Hepplewhite, furniture makers of the day didn't know they were producing "Queen Anne" or "Empire" furniture. Those were labels that historians and scholars applied after the fact, because humans find it necesssary to categorize things (no that that's a bad thing, it just is). Even makers of "Chippendale" didn't refer to it that way - they referred to furniture made "In the latest London style, in the neatest manner", though they were indeed taking most of their cues from "The Gentleman and Cabinetmaker's Director".

There is, however, a seismic shift in furniture made after the 1940's, there is no doubt about that. Most of that change has been brought about by technology, and could be categorized by three separate aspects:

1) The lines of most furniture are determined by a compromise between the designer's intention and the ability of said design to be manufactured almost exclusively by automated equipment. As technology has advanced, the "machine requirement" is becoming less and less of a limitation, but more and more of a necessity.

2) The surface aspects of modern, manufactured furniture has become of prime importance, because the underlying substrate is of man-made materials. The number and type of this surface finish has proliferated beyond all categorization as technology has advanced - many types of surface finishes, such as cracking/crazing, fly-speck, surface-streaking, etc..., is a direct result of modern chemistry and application methods.

3) The manufacturing of raised surface ornamentation and inlay work has all but disappeared as un-manufacturable. This is changing as the rapid development of CNC equipment and man-made, stable, and perfectly dimensional materials has advanced.

So, while my personal opinion is that "Industrial Revolting" might be an appropriate label for modern, "middle of the road" furniture, I suspect later historians and scholars may term it "early machine" furniture, or something similar, because it's mostly characterized by changes in materials, surfaces and designs that can be made by automation.