BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mark Rabinowitz <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
BP - "Is this the list with all the ivy haters?"
Date:
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 09:16:51 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (14 lines)
I had a request for information about a spec. calling for "bush hammered
bronze" finish.  As far as I could figure out this was a use of a stone
working technique in metal working.  (Anyone out there better enlightened
than me on this?)  I'm guessing that this is a chased and matted finish or a
rough planished finish but I started thinking about the miss-use of old
technological terms.  The phase "cast in stone" is constantly in print,
there was a recent Wall Street Journal article with that in the head, but,
naturally, stone isn't cast it's carved or cut.  I have seen carved in
stone, set in stone, set in concrete, cast in concrete,  and once I think,
carved in bronze all in print.   Should this idiom be crushed under hand or
held up over head?

Mark

ATOM RSS1 RSS2