I have been asked by a book editor at a prominent publishing house to 
consider the viability of a book, or series of books that would present 
a how-to for traditional trades that would be of interest for architects 
and property (home) owners to read with it in mind that they would have 
access to better understand the role of traditional trades in historic 
conservation work and to bridge the ‘gap’ between trades and design. In 
respect of this I have been asked to ask my friends annd peers what sort 
of book they would like to read , and I presume purchase.

My perspective on what is needed insofar as to bridge the gap is way off 
from a series of how-to books focused on techniques. I see absolutely no 
use for more introductory level how-to books, or to replicate what 
Taunton (the example I threw out) already has a lock on, or that any 
practicing traditional trades if they have not already authored a book 
(Gerard Lynch comes to mind) would either be able to get a book together 
(inarticulate, adverse to speaking much let alone paranoid around 
letters, more busy wanting to make a living than write about it) or 
would want their hard-earned trade knowledge spread around in a book.

In the conversation we touched on discussing John Leeke and his how-to 
series of booklets… all of which I own and have used and studied. It 
seems John's work has created an inspiration in the mainstream 
publishing world.

I suspect there is a lack of understanding as to how John goes about 
putting his booklets together, or his motivations in doing so, or to 
what extent he is focused on them to enhance his marketing efforts to 
the very personal touch he has with the local communities that he works 
with. I have stood with John and watched him work with a level of 
engagement and patience with a client that I can only envy. My 
perspective on the book question --- as to what anyone would want to pay 
to read -- was that it would be more relevant… if one wants to bridge 
the ‘gap’ to write a human-interest profile of John Leeke (and others), 
to be sensitive to our individual eccentricities, and that it would be 
of more value to design professionals in histo presto to understand a 
restoration carpenter’s values, perspectives and world view as it 
pertains to the overall integrated team approach than to know just what 
tools and techniques they use to remove glazing from a window sash. 
[This week I found out what a hacking knife is by picking up the phone 
and expressing that I felt really stupid breaking so much window sash 
glass and needed help. It would have taken me too long to have found it 
in a book.... though possibly I don't recall that John explains hacking 
knives in his booklets, actually, he might have explained it in one of 
his wonderful online videos just I can't remember anything as well as 
when I really really need it.]

Besides, this technical information for any design professional involved 
with histo presto is readily available without the need for a new series 
of books, and the design professionals, as I see it, are more than 
casually responsible to seek out how the work is actually done in the 
practicing trades without need of introductory level written materials 
focused on technique. They should already know their business, and they 
should know how to know their business, is how I see it. And those 
design professionals who are not already informed in how to learn about 
technique, or inclined to interface with the trades on their project 
teams, likely would not be interested in or persuaded by a book focused 
on how-to technique with an idea to change their viewpoints.

A few years back I queried John as to an idea I had to do a sort of 
Studs Terkel, Working series of profiles of individual trades 
practitioners in historic conservation. At the time John seemed to think 
that was a good idea. I would think to combine it with a Foxfire 
approach for a little bit of non-controversial technique. Combine it 
with a background understanding of the preservation industry as it 
functions day-to-day and how trades practitioners see their role, how 
they act out their role in engagement with project teams and with design 
professionals. Combine it with the understanding and experiences gained 
through engagement with the PTN community. (With the editor we talked a 
good deal about the relationship between PTN and APT. I am wondering 
actually if the perception of a 'gap' is engendered in a sort of 
intellectual naivety, a being a few years behind the times in current 
organizational, community and network activities within the preservation 
industry. I don't see any gap. What I see is there are a few people that 
don't seem to like me and they keep their distance and it has not done 
me any concern that I can see for me to miss them. If that is a gap then 
I must really be missing out!)

There was also discussion if say a timber framer would be interested to 
read a how-to book about stonemasonry. I think it more relevant that a 
timber framer wants to know a stonemason, or two, and comes to that by 
knowing how a stonemason thinks (or drinks), than to ask a timber framer 
to pay close attention to technique in laying up a dry stone wall. I 
commented on how my spending 12 days wandering around Poland with a 
gaggle of timber framers drove me near nuts – all they look at is wood! 
and that on occasion I had to run outside of whatever sacred site we 
were climbing around the attic of in order to go look at some rocks in 
the landscape.

As to a series of how-to books I hope that I was direct in expressing 
that I do not feel in any manner qualified to judge if one technique is 
any better than another. I have zero interest in involvement with a 
how-to book or series. As I see it such a series is best led by an 
individual with an academic-research background and goes to the entire 
issue of jumping in feet first to integrity of information issues, in 
short that a non-trades person would not know what they were talking 
about when it comes to technique in practice. May not even suspect that 
they do not know what they are talking about. And I doubt that any 
self-respecting tradesperson would open up very easily to share any 
depth of knowledge of technique with a know-nothing researcher. But I 
suppose that could be turned into a book and sold to somebody before it 
got remaindered.

Kathy just brought up example of Joe Jenkin's self-published roof 
slaters book and it occurs to me why would anyone want to spend the time 
to replicate what he has already so competently accomplished in a truly 
useful how-to book?

The following was my initial e-mail response to the query:

I am particularly interested in the area of communications that occurs 
in the narrow focus between design professionals and the practicing 
trades as it relates specific to historic conservation. I have been 
involved on the trade side in historic work for near on to thirty years. 
I have spent many more years than that writing.

In my work I have often found the crux of a project was not so much the 
technical nature of the trade work, as it was to the issues around 
communications between the designers and the trade practitioners. The 
gap that you refer to is one developed over many years for reasons to 
account to both sides. On the one hand the architects in a need to 
promote the development of their profession distinguished themselves 
from the builder-designer with a tendency to alienate the trades. The 
development of an industrialized architecture, prefabrication etc. has 
also tended to portray the trades as an interchangeable commodity. The 
trades, in turn, having by nature a very tactile and process oriented 
approach to materials, and the physical world in general, often are 
perplexed at the impractical or otherworldly perspective exhibited by 
design professionals. Add to this that the trades tend to assume a 
higher than reasonable degree of intelligence in the design 
professionals, a given of the design professionals having had a formal 
education as opposed to the trades learning mostly from work experience 
in mentoring relationships. Add to this the intense focus required by 
degree design programs where young professionals are not particularly 
encouraged to engage with the trades in the physical building process, 
if not outright lectured to distrust the trades. Let alone that there is 
a fundamental difference in the neurological make-up of design 
professionals and trades insofar as how their intelligences work out in 
the world at large.

The other focus that I have is that the gap as it is perceived is based 
on a model of relationships that is highly conducive to new building. 
Historic conservation as an industry occurs within the larger context of 
all types of construction. When the current model of relationships is 
applied to the existing built environment it is no longer optimal and 
quickly breaks down. For example, the traditional trades who practice in 
historic conservation cannot be effectively approached as 
interchangeable commodities. To find a blacksmith with experience who 
will be willing and able to work in the NYC environment (where there is 
usually not much call for blacksmiths) with a knowledge and 
understanding as to how to cut threads onto existing wrought iron stair 
spindles is not going to be an interchangeable individual. Within the 
context and training of design professionals there is an emphasis on 
unique design creativity that precludes to a certain extent a comfort 
level with work on structures pre-existing, historic, and otherwise 
designed by someone in the past. Architects who work in historic 
preservation, as opposed to new design work, have an acknowledged 
problem with understanding their role within their own set of 
professional peers, let alone with understanding the dynamic of engaging 
and communicating effectively with trades on a project.

All of the above said, in a book that would address this gap, and the 
revision of the construction model of relationships, what danger I see 
would be to express the issues in the abstracted manner that I have 
presented above.

My suggestion would be one book that through example assembles a 
collection of the full range of professional trades, as you outline, and 
to endeavor to solicit from each set of trades practitioners their 
reflections in their words wherever possible on the nature of the gap, 
and in turn, to include perspectives of design professionals who see a 
need for a change in the model of relationships. There certainly is a 
perception that is held both by trade practitioners and design 
professionals that there is something seriously wrong with the manner in 
which the current model of construction relationships is applied to 
conservation of the built environment. What it comes down to in the end 
is that there is a strong commonality of values and end-goals between 
the perspectives of individuals on all sides of the gap. In a wider 
global perspective, and consideration of sustainable habitat, those on 
both sides have a much more vital and important role to play as team 
members with respect to common goals than may consciously be realized. I 
feel that any book that would open up avenues for increased 
understanding between design professionals and traditional trades would 
be of value.

][<en

>

--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>