This has got to be my all-time favorite BP thread. I could devote the rest
of my life to responding to the posts, but then I would miss the July 4th
fireworks in Wiscasset.
>At the risk of attracting loads of semi-fermented fruit being hurled in my
>direction (by the way, fermentation is the world's oldest chemical
process)
>I will play devil's advocate on this issue of "the good old days" of great
>workmanship.
>First of all, I see nothing wrong with standardization. In an increasingly
>complex technological world, standardization facilitates the timely
>achievement of levels of human activity that are unparalleled in previous
>times.
Agree, and it is also "advanced" economies like ours that produce enough
surplus capital that the system can afford the luxury of supporting our
preservation sub-culture. Or even needs to. I suspect that the value
attached to artifacts and talents of a more individualistic past increases
in direct proportion to the degree with which a society immerses itself in
a standardized material culture.
>Now, here comes the rotting fruit. With regard to tradesman, I would
>suggest that the goal of all of us who work in the area of technological
>development is to eliminate or reduce to the absolute minimum society's
>reliance on craftsmanship.
Don't agree. I think, rather, that most intelligent inhabitants of these
pre-millennium days see the necessity of a coexistent alternative to the
products of technological advancement. For instance I belong to a listserv
devoted to the lore, technology and use of hand tools. Many of our
subscribers find it comforting and productive to extremely limit the
application of powertools in their craft. There are currently over 800
subscribers (we won't talk about the workload of keeping up with the
posts), seventy percent of whom are employed in the computer or advanced
communications industries.
The unfortunate aspect of this constant is that it is essentially elitist.
In the same way that the post-Reagan establishment seems hell-bent on
confining the advantages of higher education to a small elite of a mostly
already privileged class, assumptions about the value of craftsmanship
(except, of course among us poor craftspeople) are mostly confined to the
more advantaged classes, who want to keep it pretty much that way.
Appreciation for and acquisition of the products of craft and preservation
has become a badge of attainment.
Or, to put it another way. I ain't got too many poor customers, or even
middle-class ones, even though some of my products are quite competitive
with even the less expensive products of mass production.
>And I would argue that most tradesman like it
>that way. Is the tradesman repairing that historic masonry building
happier
>or less happy if he can do it effectively with a patching product that
>requires little or no wet curing, as opposed to say, 3 or 7 or 28 days wet
>curing?
Can't talk about the mason, but I'm a good deal happier if I can go a year,
as I often do, without turning on either my table saw or planer. I think
that you have to distinguish between those tradesmen who outgrow their
romantic notions and those who, like me, never do. And, yes, it is possible
to earn a living while remaining one of the latter.
> If we can advance technology to make it easier for less skilled
>people with less training, less dedication and less artistic ability to
>achieve durable and aesthetically acceptable results, how many restoration
>contractors out there are going to complain?
All the ones I know. Their devotion to restoration is to the continuum
which, by definition, stands parallel to mainstream technologies. Devoted
as they are, they are looking for hearts to win over and hands to train.
That is as much their, and my, raison d'etre as is the service they sell.
The reality is, if we don't
>make it easier for less skilled people to do the job, we are going to be
>put out of business, and the contractors are going to be hard-pressed to
>find people who can get the work done.
Hogwash. It is a truism, at least in my case and those of my colleagues who
restore early New England houses, that the self-image of those who buy our
services and products need to feel like they are getting something special
and redolent of ancient craftsmanship. I'm not above taking advantage of
that vanity to get a chance to get to do the work that what I want to do.
There is a mystique to preservation and crafts that leaves room for
craftsmanship where it is rarely valued elsewhere.
As an MBA student, a long time ago, I was taught that the secret of
McDonald's marketing success was that they could train anyone to do any
job, producing a consistent product (albeit a not-so-great one) within 15
minutes. If we look at the turn-over rates in today's marketplace, that has
to be seen as visionary, even if we wish they had set a higher standard for
the finished product. As a much younger chemical engineer, 20 years ago, I
had the nerve to suggest to Swiss chocolate makers that some of their
processes were too dependant on skilled laborers, as American chocolate
makers had reduced a one-week, 900 pound batch Swiss process that required
intensive hand labor, to a fully automatic 25 hour, 2500 pounds-per-hour
process. Expert tasters couldn't tell the difference. Technology achieved
its objective, though we can lament the craftsmanship of the "good old
days" and a tradition that endured 400 years before being rendered suddenly
obsolete.
My clients can tell the difference between a hand made piece of furniture
and its manufactured simulacrum. And they can tell the difference between a
new house designed as a modern, modularized skeleton with a sheathing
copied from old models and an early house or a craftsman-built new one.
>A mass-produced nail is better than a hand made nail. It's cheaper, more
>consistent and can be held to a tighter standard.
Not by a long shot. Cheaper, yes. Better. Hell no. Tests of the holding
power (the essential job of nails) show consistently that the failure rate
increases as technology goes from hand-forged to machine-cut to
wire-formed. Only in the sense that a modern nail can be applied faster,
with a power tool, is it "better". At doing its job it stinks. Which could
be said to be a major part of the whole indictment of modern technology;
that it is devoted to getting the job done quickly and cheaply without
reference to providing long term satisfaction or security to its consumer.
The price and quality of
>nails today don't prevent anyone from building anything they choose to
>build.
Not so. If they choose to build a product of quality then they find an
alternative to nails. I know a contractor who builds very high-end homes up
around Bar Harbor who fastens everything but trim with screw fasteners.
Society benefits. Save the craftsmanship for the endeavors that
>warrant craftsmanship. Let's face it-- we all want cheaper and better, and
>we just have to make sure we are good consumers so that we actually get
>what we bargained for.
Questionable assumption. We may want cheaper and better, but we know that
that's an oxymoron. And THEY want better and are happy to pay the price
(see above).
Bruce
|
