Daughter Numero Uno sent my birthday prezzie today, which is yet another Big Book on Arts & Crafts furniture. The book is “A & C Furniture” by John Andrews and contains a lot of English A&C items that I’ve not seen in any other publication.
Now, being the unoriginal little design-thief that I am, a number of pieces or aspects of them will be lifted and transposed from the pieces within this new book into my own ‘umble butcherings. I normally have no trouble figuring out how a piece was made (or could be made) from a photo. However, there is a very nice item I would like to have a go at in this book (P.95/95) which I cannot understand or extrapolate the construction of.
The piece is a “serpentine macassar ebony secretaire by Mervyn Macartney made for the Barnard Inn, Holborn, in 1891”. There are two pics of it in the book – one open showing it in desk formation with cubbies, drawers et al; and one closed up.
It’s a curvy wee thing but the details of its carcase construction are obscured by both the dark colour and its curvy nature. The inside is in a much lighter wood so the details of that are relatively easy to see and understand.
The piece will be a challenge for little ol’ rectilinear me; but I likes it; and so will the grand daughter Holly May, should I manage to make one for her. (Of course, it will not be in that ebony).
I am hoping to scan and post the pics here so you can all have a gawp and tell me how to make the outside carcase of the thing. 🙂
But is that legal (the photocopying and publishing here, not the copying of the design into a piece of my own furniture)?
Lataxe, a copcat.
Edited 3/18/2008 3:35 pm ET by Lataxe
Replies
Is it this one?
"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster
R,
That is indeed the very rascal! You must tell me where you obtained that fine photo; also, are there more - perhaps inclusive of a detailed plan with measurements, cutting list and a source for macassar ebony at $2.89 per board foot? :-)
Now, what I wants to know is how that casework is constructed. I can probably figure out the lid and the innards; but how are the legs attached and where are the lopers, one wonders? I am thinking that the back and sides are sculpted from thick planks then mitred on the corners. Perhaps they are held together with biscuits there. :-) More likely, some splines? Secret blind DTs?
And how are those legs attached? They seem to be butt-joined on their ends to the carcass but that would not be a strong joint, unless there is a big, deep dowel in there.
In fact (and as you can see) I am guessing wildly. Any hard facts, educated speculation or informed guesses welcome.
And thanks to Mr Berger for tacit permission to put in a scanned photo or two. I'll be doing them tomorrow and will make them Big so there's some chance of seeing any detail. I wasn't too worried that the narks would take me off to the Bridewell but one wouldn't wish to see the lawyers knawing at FWW staff; even Nap would turn away with a grimace of sympathy!
Does anyone else like it? It has taken my eye.
Lataxe
It is indeed a beautiful piece! Here is the site I found it at.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/h3/h3_2006.4.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/eurv/hod_2006.4.htm&h=190&w=150&sz=20&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=R1HbFZTLo1iq1M:&tbnh=103&tbnw=81&prev=/images%3Fq%3DMervyn%2BMacartney%2B%2B%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dopera%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster
You need only find a source for mahogany and macassar ebony at a reasonable price point, it appears from the description the piece is veneered. A second mortgage should cover it! Here in the colonies Woodcraft has the veneer for a mere $671.99 for a 4x6 sheet!
http://www.woodcraft.com/family.aspx?FamilyID=8662"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster
Edited 3/18/2008 6:54 pm by rsaunders
Does anyone else like it? It has taken my eye.
I absolutely love it. It sort of reminds me of Jaques Ruhlman with the use of the ebony.
FWIW I just paid $3.00/sq ft for some of this:
View Image
Lee
Edited 3/18/2008 9:46 pm by mapleman
Wow. can you tell us where you got it?"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster
Wow. can you tell us where you got it?
Well, I could, but then I would have to kill you....... he he he ;)
Tell you what - if Lataxe isn't interested then I will give you first dibs on the source. The price was actually $4.50 but I bought a good little bit and the seller reduced the price to $3.00. Mine should be coming in within the next few days. The thickness is .4mm
Lee
Lee,
That veneer almost meets my price criteria. :-) But 0.4mm! I find 0.6mm rather snappy, even with less inherently brittle timbers than ebony. Have you managed to use any? Is it a contrary little beast?
Getting a grasp of veneering (I've done very little and no large areas) on top of learning to make a curvy thang would be a bit much at this stage, especially as the veneer must clasp the curves. So, solid black walnut will be the timber used, as I have a lot of nice 4/4, 8/4 and 12/4 lumps from that generous wood-fairy of mine. It may not look as exotic as the ebony but careful grain selection should provide something of the aer of the original.
The pics you found, R, are the same as in my book. I've scoured these pics with my eye but the construction details are still something of a puzzle. Perhaps the only way will be to begin and make experiments? If I carve the curves of the sides and drop-front from thick planks, that will probably work. Leg attachment is still something of a puzzle as is an apparent absence of lopers. And I wonder if the top is coopered from many bits or has a central plank carved from a thicker one? It also seems to be breadboard-ended with a curved BB that may be steam or laminate-bent.
In all events, the piece is on my to-do list, after half a dozen other pieces for which I hear an ever-approaching clammer. The desk will be my summer/autumn piece, I think.
But meanwhile, if anyone has any thoughts on its construction I would be very happy to hear from them.
Lataxe, who has been resawing and shaping teak and iroko for what seems like hours, for Adirondack chairs (they're curved - sorta).
Lataxe,
Well, when you decide to take the plunge, you run right off the end of the dock, don't you?
As for the design, my momma would say, "There's just no accounting for some folks' taste." Looks like a toad on a racehorse's legs, to me. Now, if they were more curveaceous, wit' claws holding ballocks...
Construction. I'd guess the legs are attached via a pair or three tenons into the bottom of the case. Large dowel would work too. Perhaps the hinges are like those on butler's tray leaves, that is, self supporting? Seems a lot to ask of the little fellers though. That lid'll be heavy. But there don't seem to be any lopers, as you say. How could they lope, and fit under that shaped lid? Locating the hinges, and the edge of the surface they are attached to, and the edge of the apron beneath the lid, will be a bit of a challenge, geometry-wise, if you wish the front of the lid, when closed, to be flush with the edges of the case, and tight to the top of the front apron (and you will). You may find that the lid needs to extend beyond the hinges, and swings under the writing surface via a rabbet or some such, when the lid is dropped, so as to make a nice joint along the apron when it is closed. Might want to make a full size drawing, and a mock-up, of this one!
I wonder if a solid wood lid and top will be stable enough to stay flat, well, true, after a few seasons of heat and humidity, to remain workable? If the top panel shrinks at all, it will not fit the curves of the cases top edge, nor will it meet the edge of the lid (tumbler of the lock) when closed.I bet that the piece is veneered and clamped (breadboarded) to prevent/ stabilize such movement. Maybe your climate is such (always humid?) that this isn't of much concern?
Excelsior!
Ray
Looks like a toad on a racehorse's legs, to me.
Snicker, snicker, snicker. Methinks he's workin up the courage for some scuttle legs, eh? Who knows, mebbe he'll put some claws on the end o them legs; or perhaps some o them upside down trumpets with the bollocks on top!
Actually I think he's beside hisself not hissin at Charles for a long time.
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Edited 3/19/2008 2:26 pm ET by KiddervilleAcres
Ray, you said, "Looks like a toad on a racehorse's legs, to me."
That's true, but it also reminds me of the writing style Lataxe uses from time to time-- a bit over the top and, er, frou-frou, unlike the examples of the furniture he likes to make, which tend to be pared down and lightly adorned, ha, ha. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Richard,
Come, come sir! Everyone do know that you yoursen' are a natterjack!
As to the frou-frou accusation, shurely shome mishtake? That nice little Macartney thang is like one o' them long-lagged girls I remember from the 1960s, a most attractive sight - simple, curvy and elegant unless running for the last bus home with 7 vodkas & tonics aboard (her, not the bus). That desk is hardly likely to run for a bus; or drink vodka!
Also, there is not a gadroon or a claw anywhere to be seen on it. I even likes it's little round toes.
Lataxe, croaking in a semi gleeful way at his find.
Natterjack I may be, but I was surprised to see you say you like the piece in question. To me there is something ungainly about it. The legs don't seem to belong and give the appearance of being an afterthought, as in, "Darn, I've got a pretty box here. Not handy to write on if its base sits on the floor. I'd better get it up at writing surface height somehow. Uh'm,... er, ... stuck for ideas here? Oh, I know. I'll stick it on some legs, ... and these'll do." Slainte.
Richard Jones Furniture
Edited 3/22/2008 5:37 am by SgianDubh
Richard,
The trouble is, I like toads. :-) And in fact, you are not one, at least of the natterjack variety, despite your stated desire to develop the tendency. Still, I know you like the nomenclature and have ambtions in that direction. But let's face it, how will you ever match Charles in croak or wart?
Anyway, you are right that that piece does have a certain ungainly look which I would try to improve, one way or another. One could imagine legs that more reflected the sinuous curves of the body - but this would risk metamorphisis into a scuttle-leg! Aaaagh, it has become monsterous and may chase me for an ungodly purpose of its own!!
So the straight legs must stay. Perhaps they need a bit of fat or a slight change to the lean? I will apply the coloured pencils to bits of paper, as I am old-fashioned. Hopefully a thing of beauty will emerge with batrachoid tendencies in the wane and the elegant racehorse genes dominant.
This is all part of the fun, apparently, as you know better than me.
Of course when it is done, later in the year, you may develop your natterjack procedures by having-at it, pointing gleefully to the proportional faux pas and inelegant protrusion. I think of this as a free design lesson from A Master.
Lataxe, toad-fancier (not from Roysten Vasey, please note; I do not imbibe micturation although I do take it when goaded).
Well, here's a one minute idea worked up in a five minute sketch that gets rid of those dopey spindly legs-- drawn so fast I got the perspective a bit wonky, particularly the rear left leg, but it'll have to do. It's not a design I'd spend much time on I must admit. The top bit still looks like a funerary ash casket that ought to be in a crypt, ha, ha.
If it were me I'd start from scratch by working out what tasks I want a desk to do, and then start doodling until things begin to fall into place. I've never been much of a fan of direct copying of other peoples' ideas. I'm inspired by what other people have done and do, but I just can't do near replicas. It's not in me to be that way. Slainte.
Edit. I reworked the drawing a bit and scanned in the new version. Fixed the out-of-perspective leg a bit and added a bit of colour. I had to retrieve the original sketch from the bucket where I'd tossed it, hence the creases. Sorry about that-- well, not really, ha, ha.View Image
Richard Jones Furniture
Edited 3/23/2008 10:18 am by SgianDubh
Wow, I really like those legs in contrast to the pad feet on the "original". The desk no longer looks like it will topple.
That's why I do reproductions of 18th c. American pieces--I don't have the talent to be so inventive.
Steve, I didn't think it was particularly inventive. The original legs are plug ugly and look like an afterthought, which I'd guess they really were. The first thing that came to mind-- within 2 seconds actually, was to give it an appearance of growing from the bottom up, and a bit of a sense of unity between the base and the carcase.
It's still an ugly beast. I wouldn't give it house room, but even my simple change to the form I think makes it aesthetically more pleasing than the original-- the suggested change makes it merely ugly in my opinion: but it doesn't matter what I think as Lataxe likes the original and that's that. Slainte. Richard Jones Furniture
Richard,
That is very helpful indeed. I already worked out that the little toes hadta go but those splayed curves in the legs you've drawn make an even larger impact for the better.
Funny you should mention the casket thang. The ladywife has also been curling her lip a bit at the piece and opined that it looked like a container for a dead thang. As it's small, the thang would be one of the small varieties she doesn't care for, such as a spoilt and noisy child or even that corgi as once bit her when she went to pet the ingrate.
As to usage: the grand daughter Holly May will be the lucky recipient. She is 7 going on 18 so we cannot know what secret activities she will perrform with the desk. But if it's dark, curvy, full of little drawer thangs and perhaps a secret cubby, it will suit.
Thank you once more for that fine and practical suggestion. Next: the top bit! :-)
Lataxe the grateful.
Lataxe, here's the basics of a very non-traditional construction. Veneered MDF on the inside, some 1.5 mm bending ply on the outside and a plug of layers of MDF that could go all through or just at either end where you could biscuit/dowel/ loose tongue (tenon), or whatever the carcase sides to each leg. That still leaves some decisions to make on how you shape the leg and veneer over the top of that and the bending ply without getting structure telegraphing through the veneer.
The rest is up to you, ha, ha, as I've thought too much about this ugly thing already. Slainte.View ImageRichard Jones Furniture
Riichard,
Plug ugly!? - cuh! You obviously lack C18th sensibilities and sophistication. I am sending you a periwig as it may bring a glimmer of understanding concerning the unholiness of MDF.
Your suggestion for the composition of the top is .... contemporary! However, I am fixated on solid black walnut, partly because it is a kind of substitute for that dark macassar (so sultry and exotic) and partly because I've got loads. Then there is my fear of veneering, which I must address one day but not on this piece. (It would be the hammer for me, not them no-gas bags).
***
It's nice to see you enjoyin' yoursen. :-)
Lataxe
Well, if you're going to go the solid wood route you could let the legs run to the top and you could attach the sides and the back with interrupted sliding dovetails much as illustrated. Assembly is to insert the sides and back perpendicular into the housing worked into the legs, then slide each panel down until the dovetail catches in the mating sockets in the leg. Just glue the top sliding dovetail and allow the bottom edge of the side and back panel to float.
Then make a separate carcase to house all the pigeon holes and stuff. Do the lid as a frame and panel and cooper the panels to follow the curve.
You probably won't find walnut at the width and thickness you need in clear pieces, so you'll probably have to stack narrower sections one above the other to get the width (ie, the height.) That would also save some wood as you can stagger the width of each piece to suit the bumps and profiles in the carcase sides.
A gift of a periwig won't make me thpeak with a thuitable lithp and wave my laith hanky about in an effiminate Georgian manner for you-- sorry about that.
And the piece is still plug-ugly. Slainte.
View Image
Edit. Next day afterthought. Here is a simpler bare bones line drawing and version of the 'interrupted' sliding dovetail, which excludes the tongue between the dovetails. It should make it easier to see the mechanism.
There are two parts to the sliding dovetail. One at the top and one at the bottom of the 'rail'. The one at the top is just a regular shortish sliding dovetail. Cut a mortise to let the dovetail at the bottom of the 'rail' enter the 'leg'.Then cut a dovetail socket at the lower end of the mortice. Insert the rail into the leg and slide it down to lock it in place. I illustrated just two sliding dovetails, but you could use three, five, seven, or whatever is needed depending on the width of the locking part, or rail in this case.
View Image>
Richard Jones Furniture
Edited 3/24/2008 5:23 am by SgianDubh
Richard,
Were you watching The Holy Grail, Monty Python mebbe? :>)
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
You mean the casket for holding the Holy Grail itself, Bob?
No. It's just that it looks a bit like a casket for putting someone's ashes in. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Lataxe, At the Blairman & Sons Ltd website http://tinyurl.com/3c6ndm there's a photo of a clone of the desk that appears to offer a better view of the transition from the leg to the body. Dan
Egads! You're right. I didn't realize that .4 mm was roughly equal to .016 - I'll let you know when it comes in. Some of what I bought was .6mm - but it looks like what's left is .4mm
It sounds as if this wood fairy has taken good care of you. The piece should be nice even in black walnut.
Lee
I would guess that the source is B&B Rare Woods in Denver. Very good source for veneer.Tom.
Wow. can you tell us where you got it?
Sorry to get back to you so late. Tom77 was right - B&B Rare Woods in Colorado. I actually checked what I got in yesterday with a dial caliper and it measures out at .024 - .025 I did also get some indian rosewood and it measured a hair over .018
Lee
I belive it is ok because you are not selling it, and telling the name of the manufatures, and if it is illegal, then the mods will move in and delete it.
hmmmm, your post perplexs me
Selling it has nothing to do with whether it's legal or not. For example, it is certainly illegal for you to copy a music CD from your favorite group and give it to your friend for free. That's how all those college music sharing folks got in such trouble recently.
As far as the OP is concerned, publishing excerpts of copyrighted works may (or may not, depending) be considered to fall within the "fair use" exception in the law. Most publishers would want to take the safe road and obtain the (C)-holder's permission for such use, but that's pretty much unheard of on the Web. I doubt publishing one or two pics, in connection with a review of the book, for example, would be cause for worry.
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
ok, I was thinking of something else. never mind :)
hmmmm, your post perplexs me
Hey Lataxe. Thought I'd chime in here since Fine Woodworking has a lot of copyrighted photos that end up out on the Web.
We allow our photos to be used elsewhere on the Web as long as the site credits us and the photographer, and we ask for a link back to the page where they got the photo. If there is no credit, we'll ask for credit or ask that it be removed from the site.
Legally, it's a hazy subject. Technically it is copyright infringement to publish a copyrighted photo online. But this would be extremely difficult to enforce or monitor. There's also a fair use rule that says you can use excerpts of copyrighted material for things like published reviews (this is how newspapers get away with publishing photos from books). There's an argument that your post could fall under that.
Anyway, I see it as free publicity when our photos get used elsewhere as long as there's a linkback.
- Matt
Edited 3/18/2008 4:28 pm ET by MBerger
Copying the photograph and copying the underlying piece of art are different.
The underlying work was "published" in 1891 and the designer died in 1932, more than 70 years ago. As I read about UK copyright law, that should make the furniture itself part of the public domain.
The photograph itself is of more recent vintage and whether it falls within the fair use or fair dealing provisions is a bit more complicated I think. I'd say copying with attribution for the purpose of discussing the design looks quite a bit like fair use, and certainly, given the lack of a deep pocket to go after, quite unlikely to be challenged.
Steve,
Already I am being poked into altering the design to avoid cries of, "toad, toad"! As to the photos, I would love to find more especially (as you say) their viewing and discussion at a website such as this would seem fair use, with nobody losing out thereby.
Of course, what I'm still after is speculation, suggestions or even knowledge about how the thing is constructed.
Lataxe.
I enjoyed your post about how little utility my posts offer. I found that funny coming from you.
As to speculation about this piece (which I too find very ugly), I suspect this would be a fine example of what I was talking about in that other thread. My guess is this is a typical 18th c style horizontal carcass, half blinds in back, veneered inside. It appears this is the 18th c version of the interior which is typically inextricable from the carcass. If you go back through last year's PW, you'll find details of this sort of construction (except the case was vertical).
As to the joinery, I recommend cutting the back first. Its ends don't need to be square, right? You just cut the tails to what ever curve you have. I recommend nixing the 18th c style interior as this is fairly tricky to deal with. Use the 19th c case in a case style interior. Actually, If I'm right about the main carcass, that would mean the interior dividers would be trapped, not slid in from the back. The interior must be a separate case slid in from the front. I did the hammer veneering first, so I need veneer thickness under the interior. So watch for that. I was using 18th c style .100" veneers.
So looks like same ole same ole 18th c construction. And we saw desks on stands like this one in the late 17th, early 18th centuries. So neither its form nor its structure is particularly new. And I think this sort of makes my point (several of them, actually).
Adam
Adam,
It's nice to see you offer concrete advice rather than dissing some poor soul as a means to puff yourself up a bit. :-) Of course, I do raise my eyebrow at the idea that this Macartney piece is really just something from the C18th; until I remembered that all design popped into existence in 1708 and that nothing new has emerged since then. But I am just teasing you - again! That trumpet of yours that you're always blowing needs a new tune or two.
I will be making the interior as a seperate slide-in piece, as you suggest. Also, I'm avoiding the veneering until I get the skill through something more simple. The carcass and legs will be solid black walnut. I'll shape the profile of the carcase sides out of 8/4 or 12/4 stock (whatever it takes) with a bandsaw then ... well, it will probably have to be a goose neck scraper and a sanding sponge rather than planes with curved soles and irons to fair the curves and smooth the surface.
Do you think the back side of the carcase may be flat, to be half-blinded into the sides as you describe? There is no evidence from the pictures but I had assumed the back would have the same profile as the sides and front - that it would retain it's symmetry when viewed from the back? I was thinking of trying to use secret mitred DTs on the back-to-side corners, leaving plenty of meat on the outside mitre part to accommodate the curvy profile.
I was hoping to use one large quarter sawn plank to "wrap around" the carcase, to get something like that macassar ebony look. There may be such a beast lurking in my pile.
The legs - something like those Richard suggested - will be M&T'd into the carcase bottom. I'll be seeking to blend the transition but also find joinery to offer strength. No doubt there is an appropriate C18th technique? :-)
The drop front and its apparent lack of lopers is what bothers me most. Holly May is bound to sit on it and she is a muscular child..... Perhaps a chain or two from the inside of the carcase to the front corners of the dropped front? I will be rereading Ray's post for a clue or two. We goblins must stick together.
Your help is appreciated, especially since you have been my plaything.
Lataxe
I would think the back is flat or should be just so you can push it against a wall. But the contour of the back is irrelevant to the dovetails. I would think the full blinds would be a problem. I'm thinking of a FWW article about ogee feet. I think they simply mitered them or did half blinds as full blinds on the curve are tricky (and unnecessary).I think the legs would want to have an apron, even if that apron was cut away. I couldn't tell from the picture as I couldn't stand to look at it for very long.As to revolutionary structures, the late 17th c and early 18th c did indeed introduce new furniture structures. Dovetails may have been known to the ancients, but it took 17th and 18th c anglo-americans to turn them into complex dovetailed carcasses. Subsequent styles built on those structures. New structures have been introduced, but this piece does not appear to be one of them. I think a book on this subject would be helpful and FWW could do it with their design book.Back to the legs, there aren't many William & Mary pieces around any more. One reason may be that the leg joints really aren't great. I'm the last person to advise you to "avoid the mistakes of the past", but clearly some designs have survived better than others as any museum conservator will tell you. Adam
Lataxe,
Try this link ( http://www.bobvila.com/RoughCutShow/Podcast_007.html ); it is a great video on shaping the sides of a Bombe secretary. There is a second on shaping a wooden plane sole to match the curve of the sides, and then a third on final shaping & scraping. May answer your questions, may not...?
If the link doesn't work go to: http://www.bobvila.com/RoughCutShow/ and scroll waaaaaaay down to podcast #7.
Later, JM
JM,
That link is very informative - although at the minute I'm shying away from all them curved-sole wooden planes. I would feel obliged to make them you see. :-)
Lataxe
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled