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:
John Callan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
"Let us not speak foul in folly!" - ][<en Phollit
Date:
Tue, 15 Apr 2003 06:55:10 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2839 bytes) , text/enriched (3447 bytes)
Hmmmm. Yup.  I would agree.  But must point out that the magic soup is 
nice to have around when its a particular piece of wood or stone that 
has significance...perhaps a date carved in it, or graffiti from the 
owner or builder, or perhaps the last verifiable piece of wood from the 
original construction of a historic vessel.  But Mike's magic soup is 
not replacing an entire system of wood or stone, it is making a repair. 
  Repairs are good.  Well, good repairs are good.  Fair repairs are 
okay.  Poor repairs should be done over.

Kenneth Uracius?

-jc

On Tuesday, April 15, 2003, at 06:35  AM, Kenneth Uracius wrote:

> So do we look at patching material for stone the same way (no offence 
> Mike E)
>
>  
>
> Ken U
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Let us not speak foul in folly!" - ][<en Phollit 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf OfJohn 
> Callan
> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 11:00 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Nailite?
>
>  
>
> Strange which emails I hang onto thinking that I'll return to them 
> when time permits. Stranger still the ones I actually get around to 
> responding too...long have their relevance has faded into oblivion.
>
> As well you know, what is wrong with it is that it is not history. It 
> relates neither the craft of the tradesmen, nor the good sense of the 
> designer or owner, let alone the lumberman and the millwright. It is 
> an impression. You may as well build a foam core box and glue photos 
> of a cozy farmstead of yore, if all you want is something that looks 
> like something to folks who never saw the real thing in the first 
> place.
>
> I got nothing against petrochemicals...when they become historic I'll 
> deal with them...and perhaps even learn to appreciate the skills of 
> the installers...if things have deteriorated to that point. If these 
> things gain significance, if they become the elements of material 
> culture that express our time, that will be their value. They will 
> have value for this time.
>
> But! To replace wood siding or slate with plastic is an abomination.
>
> (Falsetto) Oh! but it looks the same and its affordable and isn't it 
> lovely to save these old buildings! And it makes us all feel 
> sooooooooo good that we didn't have to tear down old Mr Macgruder's 
> place. BS! Save it or do not save it, but don't go providing cover and 
> warm fuzzys to folks who haven't the spheres to do it right and bare 
> the costs, or tear it down because it could not be done economically.
>
> I gotta go.
>
> -jc
>
> On Wednesday, April 9, 2003, at 12:17 PM, Ken Follett wrote:
>
> Replica siding.  Don't get me started.
>
> What's wrong with it John?
> It can't be any worse than plastic slate, can it?
> You got something against using petrochemicals in histo presto work?
> I like it when you get started... don't stop, please, we need you.
>
> ][<en ;-)
>


ATOM RSS1 RSS2