I hope no on has a heart attack upon reading this…but I will be turning in the completed manuscript for the long-promised Dutch Tool Chest book by the end of this month. This year. In two weeks.
Why is it so late? I am definitely the problem. I’m not great anymore at working 18 hours a day like I used to. And after a full day at work, well, I just want to go home and weed the garden (temperature allowing) – not stare at a screen. Or sit on the couch with my cats and read a book. But…that’s really no excuse. I’ve to some extent made myself busy during the day; Chris would absolutely have let me work less at the office and work more at home on the book. So there is no one to blame but me. I’ve become a lazy git. (See also: My house renovation is not done.) But the shame and pressure are now outweighing the laziness – on the book, not the house.
With that mea culpa out of the way:
I’m including a gallery of pictures from other makers that shows as many different interesting and effective layouts as possible of the interior. Cool adaptations for a specific set of tools. Cool adaptations for a non-specific set of tools. Interesting use of the spaces in the bay (or bays). Clever rolling bases. Wacky oversized (or undersized) chests. Mind-blowing uses of the back of the fall front and or/underside of the lid. You know – anything that is nifty and sets it apart from the basic interior shown below.
(Mind you, the basic interior works quite well. I like its flexibility, because my tool needs change depending on the class I’m teaching (this chest travels with me if I’m driving). In theory, anyway; 90 percent of my time on the road, I’m teaching either the ATC or DTC.
Never forget to pack your hair clip.
All images used in the book will, of course, be properly credited – and I’d love to include a sentence or two about your inspiration, and/or why you did what you did. I need high-resolution (at minimum, 300 dpi at 5″ x 7″), non-blurry, decently lit images. It would be great to have an overall shot of your chest open and closed, and detail shots of the clever bits. Please also include your name (as you wish it to appear) and your phone number, in case I am in desperate need of contacting you (though I’ll use email first…who talks on the phone anymore?!). The deadline for your submissions is June 7.
Here’s an excellent example of a clever idea…though a bad photo, hurriedly snapped by me during a class in our shop (it’s too close up, and without the context of more background, it’s a little hard to immediately understand that you’re looking at the side wall of the chest, outfitted with storage for large-diameter tools (how is it attached?!) and a clever pencil box. (Olivia, if you’re reading this and have time to send me better pictures…)
Please send pictures to me at fitz@lostartpress.com. (If the file sizes are too large to email, I can send you a WeTransfer or Dropbox invite – whatever you prefer.)
Detail shot of cleverness inside Olivia Bradley’s tool chest.
And thank you to those who’ve already sent submissions – I do still have them!
The last year has been chaotic here at Lost Art Press as we doubled in size, bought a warehouse, fixed it up and launched new ways of teaching people the craft. This blog entry is a brief update on… everything. But especially the “teaching people the craft” part.
First let me say that printing good books will always be my No. 1 priority. Right now we have so many books backed up on our printing schedule that we are a bit frustrated. Printing schedules that are out of our control have stalled three books that should – by all rights – be out right now.
We have poured that frustration into other worthwhile projects. Most of that effort has been with our three “Substacks.” Substacks are just fancy blogs. They allow you to charge a subscription fee, and Lost Art Press gets the lion’s share of the money. What we like about Substack is that we can offer a good balance of free and paid content. We want everything to be free, of course, but we also have six stomachs that now rely on this business.
If you have missed our Substack stuff, here is a rundown.
This is my unfiltered self. It’s PG-13. And yes, it’s all about woodworking, but it also delves into other issues – mostly deconstructing the BS that permeates our craft. I also post entire chapters of my forthcoming works. Plans, drawings, everything. Readers there have already read my next book “American Peasant” (and have helped to make it better). Right now we’re building a Hobbit Chair together.
You can subscribe for free or pay $5/month. About half my Substack posts are free. And about half of each paid post is available to free subscribers to read. There’s a lot of stuff to read – more than 260 posts. And it’s some of my writing that I dislike the least.
Megan Fitzpatrick and I have collected a lifetime of knowledge about tools. We reviewed them for magazines. We see hundreds of student tools. And we – weirdly – still keep up with the industry out of habit. Our knowledge is mostly useless for publishing books. Spitting out model numbers and details of how certain motors work isn’t useful in a book. It becomes quickly outdated.
But what we know is great for a Substack. So Megan and I are opening our veins and offering our opinions on tools and other products without the threat of any flack from manufacturers. We don’t take free or discounted tools. We don’t do affiliate programs. The tools we own we paid full price for. And I’ve been at this since 1996.
Like “The American Peasant,” about half the posts are free. Paid subscriptions are $5/month.
Our third Substack is the most unusual writing exercise I’ve ever been involved in. This year we hired Kale Vogt, an aspiring chairmaker, to work here. And I’m about to take Kale on as an official “apprentice.” This Substack is journal entries written by me and Kale (and sometimes Megan) about the process.
It’s messy. Sometimes difficult. But also a chance for everyone to grow.
The Substack covers a lot of ground, from how to teach the basics to the economics of running a furniture shop to …. Who knows?
“The Anarchist’s Apprentice” is the start of something that I suspect will be important. Or it will crash and burn. Either way, you can be ringside. Half the posts are free. The rest are $5/month.
So Why?
A few people have asked us why we don’t just post all this stuff here on the Lost Art Press blog?
Well, it would be too much – multiple posts a day. And the tone of the blog would flop all over the place. We would chase away readers with my foul mouth, and we would enrage manufacturers with our tool reviews (which I’m actually OK with).
This blog is about straight-ahead woodworking. I’ve moved my personal stuff to “The American Peasant” (much to the relief of some of our readers). The three Substacks are a way for you to pick and choose what you like. Subscribe to all three for free, and you will get a huge amount of information. Pay if you want more.
News About This Blog
This year has been a technical pit of quicksand for this blog. To remedy the problems, we have moved the blog to a self-hosted site (long overdue) and switched our email notification system to Mailchimp (also long overdue).
I promise we are not trying to make things worse for you, or add layers of advertisements and marketing. We just need to be able to send an email to you and know that it went out. That’s what this is about.
So email notifications about new blog entries will come from Mailchimp instead of WordPress.That’s really the only change.
OK, time to sign off on this administrivia update. And get back to the bench.
1) The Workshop, including the design and construction of workbenches, tool chests and wall cabinets. There’s also an entire section devoted to “appliances,”which are workshop accessories such as shooting boards.
2) Furniture & its Details, includes a discussion of all the important Western furniture styles, including their construction, mouldings and metal hardware. This section also includes the construction drawings for many important and famous pieces of furniture examined by Charles H. Hayward during his tenure at The Woodworker magazine.
3) Odds & Sods. In addition to offering its readers practical information for the shop, The Woodworker also asked it subscribers to think about the craft and its place in modern society. We have included many of our favorite philosophical pieces in this final section.
Although a back may not call for the high finish that is necessary for, say, a cabinet door, it needs to be strongly made and of a type to suit the particular job. “Craftsman” discusses here some of the points to be considered when deciding just what kind of back a job is to have. —Ed.
I am afraid that many of us are inclined to let the backs of our cabinets take pot luck, as the saying goes. We make a job, say, in oak, possibly putting in oak drawer sides, and backs, but hesitate before going to the expense of oak for the back. The reason (or excuse, however you happen to look at it) is that it is seldom seen, has little or no wear to withstand, and that, since the cheap back answers the purpose just as well, it is clearly a waste to spend money on an expensive one.
Well, it is logical enough up to a point, and, providing that it is merely the material that is cheapened and not the method that is worsened, no great harm is done. In fact, there are many pieces of quite light woodwork in which a heavily built back seems almost out of place. Still, it is nice to have a piece of work in which nothing has been skimped, and the argument that a cheap back answers the purpose as well as a better one may not necessarily hold good, as we shall see later. The safe plan is to consider each piece on its merits, and give it the best back that it is worth.
BACKS OF OLD FURNITURE If one goes back into the past one comes across some curious anomalies. Many of the antiques of the Queen Anne and mahogany periods of which we think so highly had wretched backs. I myself spent a good many years in a repair shop, and I can speak feelingly of the hours I devoted to gluing strips of canvas across gaping splits in panels and across open knot holes. I have seen a mahogany chest of drawers of the Chippendale period with magnificent show work—serpentine shaped drawers, fine carving, and so on—with a back consisting of pieces of 1/4 in. pine nailed across. An extraordinary inconsistency. Apart from its having no strength, the whole thing was bound to shrink and split.
Yet when we come to that much abused period of Victoria, we find exactly the reverse. Probably no finer cabinet backs have ever been fitted into furniture. Open the door of one of those huge Victorian wardrobes (there are plenty of them knocking about in seaside boarding houses). You will find the mirror back more strongly made than many a modern wardrobe door, and the carcase back a finely panelled framework often with moulded stiles or flush panels.
Perhaps one reason why there has been a tendency to fit lighter backs since Victorian times (apart from the all-round cheapening of materials and construction) is the introduction of plywood. It seems such an obvious use for ply, a material which is free from shrinkage and obtainable in such large sizes. Undoubtedly it is perfectly suitable for the purpose, providing the carcase is strong in itself, and does not rely upon the back to make it rigid.
TYPES OF BACKS There are various considerations that affect the choice of a cabinet back. There is, for instance, the question of size. A single sheet of 3/16 in. plywood might make an excellent back for a little cupboard, say, 15 ins. high, but would obviously be absurd for a wardrobe. Apart from this, however, the first consideration should be: does the job rely upon the back for strength, or will the back serve merely to enclose a space? Fig. 1 shows the idea. At A the back is needed to prevent racketing and to stiffen the carcase generally. At B, however, the carcase is already strong, and only a light back is needed.
In the latter connection, of course, it is sometimes an advantage to build in the back with the carcase. Items such as sideboards are often made in this way. As a general rule, however, it is better to make the back separately, because it simplifies the subsequent fitting-up.
THE PANELLED BACK For a thoroughly strong back the panelled type is undoubtedly the most satisfactory. It is perfectly rigid and is free from all shrinkage complications. It should always be used for pieces such as cupboards with large, heavy doors, which are particularly liable to distortion unless provided with a stiff back.
Fig 2 shows the usual form. The whole thing is put together with mortise and tenon joints, and the panels are grooved in. One point to note is that if there is a shelf in the cupboard, the middle cross rail should be arranged opposite to it if possible. It may not always be practicable, of course, but the advantage is that it gives a level surface against which the back of the shelf can face (see B, Fig 3). If this is not done there will be gaps opposite the panels as shown at A.
The same difficulty sometimes occurs in a bookcase or similar item, but owing to the large number of shelves it is not practicable to arrange for many horizontal rails. The better plan is that in Fig 4, in which the panels are flush with the framework at the inside. It necessitates fairly thick panels, of course, but it gives a far neater result than cutting out the back edge of the shelf to fit.
MUNTIN BACKS A somewhat distant relative of the panelled back is the muntin type. It is nowhere near as strong, and is rather a doubtful member of the family. Like some relations, you can’t deny them (and they are useful sometimes), but you are a little shy about mentioning them in the best circles. It consists of a series of uprights, say 3/4 in. or 7/8 in. thick grooved at the edges to take thinner panels, as shown in Fig. 5. The ends of the muntins are cut away as shown inset, so that the panels can be fixed directly to the back of the carcase. Now, as the panels are generally about 9—10 ins. wide, and of deal, it is inevitable that a certain amount of shrinkage will take place. Consequently it is a mistake to drive in nails right across the width because the wood would split in the event of shrinkage. The better plan is that in Fig. 6 in which nails are driven in near the centre only. The edges extending into the muntin grooves are free so that they can draw out. Note that the heart side is outwards so that the free ends are pressed tightly against the carcase by the natural twisting tendency of the wood.
If, owing to the presence of a number of shelves, it is desirable for the back to be entirely flush on the inside, the muntins can be rebated instead of grooved as shown in Fig. 7. The beads along the rebates are not entirely decorative, but they serve to render the gaps less noticeable in the event of the panels shrinking. All these details about shrinkage apply only when solid wood is used, of course. In the case of plywood it does not matter.
Speaking of plywood brings us to another variation of the muntin back. In its simplest form the plywood back is nothing more than a sheet of plywood nailed or screwed in a rebate. For quite light jobs this is satisfactory enough, but to give a neat finish the back in Fig. 8 is better. A series of grooved and rounded horizontals is screwed on. They can be arranged level with the shelves as shown. The plywood panels fit between them in the grooves. For a flush effect the rails can be rebated instead of being grooved (see D).
FIG. 9. DRESSER BACK WITH TONGUED BOARDS FIXED DIRECTLY TO CARCASE.
DRESSER BACKS These are really in a class by themselves, for although they could be applied to pieces such as wardrobes, they are not so strong as a panelled back. One of two methods can be followed. That shown in Fig. 9 has the advantage of simplicity. The back is really a series of matched boards, tongued one into the other, with either a bead or a V worked at the joints. The boards are screwed or nailed directly to the top and shelves, and at the bottom to a rail specially fitted for the purpose. In the second method, Fig. 10, wide grooved rails are screwed at top and bottom and the matching fitted in the grooves. The wide rails give rigidity, the matching merely filling the space, so to speak. It can be either very thin as at A, or it can be stouter, the ends being tongued as at B.
FIG. 10. DRESSER BACK WITH TONGUED BOARD FITTING IN GROOVED RAILS.
Incidentally, a detail applying to all backs of any thickness is that the rebates in the ends should slope as shown at A, Fig. 11. If this is not done the projecting portion is liable to curl as shown at B.
FIG. 11. DETAIL APPLYING TO ALL BACKS. At A the rebate is cut at an angle. This avoids risk of the projecting lap curling away as shown at B.
If I leave the cat treats behind, I can fit the rest of my ATC into this Nanuk hard-sided case. Right?
I find this difficult to believe…but it must be true. Chris and I have never flown to a place to teach concurrent classes. Or flown concurrently to different places to teach classes. But it is finally happening: Chris and I are both presenting at the London International Woodworking Festival (London, England – not London, Ky.) on Saturday, Nov. 2, and we’re both teaching classes before the festival…which means I had to break down and buy my own hard-sided case in which to pack my tools for the flight. No more borrowing Chris’s Pelican. Or his tools while teaching, as our courses run at the same time.
What follows is a broad overview of historic styles, by Henry R. Birks, who was an instructor in cabinet work t Regent Street Polytechnic in London. He earned City and Guilds first-class honors in cabinet work. This article is from Vol. IV (which covers Furniture and the Workshop) of our compilation of “The Woodworker: The Charles H. Hayward Years.” It was first printed in The Woodworker in 1938.
Modern furniture fashions and current production methods have obscured from the young cabinet-maker much, if not all, of the wide traditional background of his craft.
At various periods during the history of this country, circumstances, and the skill of the craftsman, have combined to produce furniture and interior woodwork of distinctive styles, surviving examples of which are to be seen in museums and elsewhere. The artistic merit of much of this old work appeals to the taste of many people, who appreciate the use of its features in furniture and interiors, even in these days of novel design and ample choice.
Reference to the City and Guilds syllabus for cabinet-making shows that the student is required to have a good knowledge of these period styles and their characteristics, as well as an acquaintance with the related influential French designs.
It should be remembered that the City and Guilds examination questions are variously framed. For example, the characteristics of a period may be outlined and the sudent asked to supply the approximate dates thereof—or perhaps the name of the reigning monarch. Another type of question requires a description of the style or styles in vogue at a given date. The subject should, therefore, be studied from all possible angles, particular attention being given to the following:
Period dates: Period Characteristics.
Timbers and materials used: Reigning Monarchs.
Prominent personalities (Architects, Craftsmen, and Designers): Related French Styles.
The following list gives the approximate dates of the various periods. By memorising these the student will have at his disposal a convenient and logical framework for his enquiries.
ENGLISH PERIODS 1500-1603 Tudor. 1603-1649 Jacobean. 1649-1660 Cromwellian. 1702-1714 Queen Anne. 1714-1727 Early Georgian. 1660-1685 Charles II. 1689-1702 William and Mary 1745-1780 Chippendale. 1760-1792 Adam. 1760-1790 Hepplewhite. 1790-1810 Sheraton.
FRENCH STYLES 1589-1610 Henry IV. 1610-1643 Louis XIII. 1643-1715 Louis XIV. 1715-1774 Louis XV. 1774-1793 Louis XVI. 1799-1814 Empire.
It should perhaps be explained that the importance of the French styles lies in their influence upon the English craftsmen and designers, many of whom were obviously thus inspired.
GOTHIC Prior to the fifteenth century furniture, such as there was, seems to have been very primitive. It had little of independent style, but borrowed its characteristics from the ecclesiastical architecture of the time. Surviving examples are recognisable by these Gothic features.
It is in the work that was produced at the end of that century that evidences of changing style are noticeable: nevertheless, it is difficult to differentiate decisively between furniture of the later Gothic, and the work of early Tudor dates. English oak provided the timber for this early woodwork.
TUDOR The Tudor period was largely an expression of the Renaissance spirit. Beginning in Italy this “new birth” of the Arts spread across the European continent and finally became an inspiration for our own craftsmen. With the reign of Henry VIII partly advanced there was a noticeable development of style. Gothic characteristics persisted, but were enlivened with what was essentially Tudor treatment. Oak was still the exclusive material and embellishment took the form of freely used chip carving, and a limited use of rather primitive inlay.
The furniture itself consisted mainly of chests, coffers, stools, trestle tables, etc., all of which, in the early stages of the period, were simply and rudely made. With the advance of the times there was improved craftsmanship and elaboration of design. The carpenter was now able to produce such articles as the court cupboard and draw-leaf table—both of which were in evidence during the Elizabethan age. Heavy turned legs—of bulbous shape—with strongly carved designs, are a feature of this later period, and it was at this time that the huge four-poster bed became a prominent item of furniture in the wealthier houses. Haddon Hall and Hampton Court may be instanced as providing examples of Tudor craftsmanship.
JACOBEAN Jacobean furniture—product of the years which were spanned by the reigns of James I, Charles I, and the Cromwellian Commonwealth—is differentiated from the Tudor by its minor details rather than by any fundamental changes. In fact, individual pieces are very similar to those of Elizabethan design. Oak continued to be the wood from which the bulk of the work of this period was fashioned. Ornament, in addition to already familiar curved forms, consisted of split turnings, diamond shaped tablets, and simple frets. Mouldings were applied to outline geometric shapes on panels and elsewhere. This feature was commonly used in the embellishment of drawer fronts—drawers having now become a recognised addition to furniture construction. Thus the simple chest of earlier times became a chest of drawers. Turnings for legs, balusters and similar purposes were used liberally, but were of slighter design and more varied in detail than Tudor turnings.
RESTORATION The influence of Jacobean and Cromwellian design persisted through the reign of Charles II, as did also the use of oak. There were, however, certain changes. One of these was the appearance of the gate-leg table; a lighter alternative to the heavy tables of Tudor inspiration. Chairs became less severe in form, and often were carved and pierced. They had taller backs than the chairs of earlier date, to which caning was sometimes applied.
Another feature of the period was a free use of spiral or twist turnings. They were used for chair legs.
It was during the Restoration times that the use of walnut, as an alternative to the hitherto exclusively used oak, took place; and its employment became so general in the William and Mary era that this period is known as the “Age of Walnut.”
WILLIAM AND MARY Furniture styles now underwent considerable change. Dutch influence is a marked feature of the period. Such items of design as the smooth surfaced cabriole leg, carved cabriole knee, club foot, ball and claw foot, etc., characterise the period. Twisted legs and scrolled Flemish legs were used, and marquetery was introduced and applied to the decoration of table tops, doors and drawer fronts. Dutch inspiration was apparent in the Dutch chair; while the typical chair of the age was high backed and elaborately carved, or in some cases inlaid with designs of vases of flowers and birds, etc.
It was during this period that the renovation and alteration of Hampton Court Palace was undertaken. Sir Christopher Wren and Grinling Gibbons were intimately associated with this work, the latter being responsible for some of the fine carving which survives.
QUEEN ANNE The William and Mary tradition was carried forward into the reign of Queen Anne. Walnut displaced oak more or less completely. Marquetry at this period was freely and effectively used. Cabriole legs became a general feature and found a place in the designs of all kinds of furniture—the shell pattern carved upon the knee is typical, but later work displays more elaborate treatment. Chairs gained considerably in shapeliness and comfort, the latter being due to the development of upholstery as an established furniture craft.
Easy chairs, sofas, stools, and the Windsor chair are to be found among examples of the period.
EARLY GEORGIAN The early Georgian period is notable to the student of furniture first because it was the beginning of the mahogany tradition (about 1730), and secondly because of the fine carving, with which the craftsmen of the time richly embellished both furniture and interior woodwork. The new wood was used not only for furniture but for the various interior needs also.
CHIPPENDALE Carved treatments of furniture and the use of mahogany continued with Chippendale, who, besides being a master of the carver’s art was also a skilful designer and draughtsman. The furniture which he produced was intended to have a wide appeal; it varied from pieces of comparative simplicity to the elaborately carved designs which are most often regarded as being representative of his style. His ideas were freely copied and adapted by his contemporaries in the furniture trade, and, no doubt, his book The Director was to some extent intended to serve this end.
Among Chippendale features were the ribbon designs for chair backs; the cabriole, ball and claw foot, the use of frets and fretted overlays and various carved mouldings. Chinese Chippendale furniture is of distinctive design and readily recognised. In much of the more elaborate work French influence is apparent.
ADAM Robert Adam, creator of the interior and furniture style that bears his name, was an architect who, through the medium of travel, had acquired a rich classical background for the inspiration of his work. A strong leaning towards unity in design and treatment caused him to undertake the planning of interiors and furniture for his buildings, thus the Adam style demonstrates a pronounced departure from Georgian tradition. An innovation which is attributed to Adam is the use of composition ornament, applied as a substitute for carving in the solid wood. He also designed furniture and interiors in which a painted finish and decoration was used. Among his artistic collaborators were Angelica Kauffman, Pergolisi, and Antonio Zucchi.
Typical ornamental details of the Adam style were festoons, swags, vases, drapery, and rams’ heads, etc., all of which were used with distinctive delicacy of treatment. Other features were cupids, caryatides, wreaths, and honeysuckle designs. Marquetry also was used.
HEPPLEWHITE Furniture of the Hepplewhite style is notable for its restrained ornamentation. By comparison with the typical Chippendale product Hepplewhite designs are inclined to severity, but lightness and elegance were obviously intended and ornament was subordinated to this end. Chair work of the period displays considerable merit, the clever use of novel designs in the backs—including the shield shape and the oval shape—being found in association with unusually satisfying lines in the individual chair as a whole. Practically every type of furniture was made in this style. Various bandings were inlaid into the Mahogany. Carving was used sparingly.
There were numerous small pieces intended for the use of the ladies of the day in parlour and boudoir. French influence is apparent, and is attributable to designs of Louis XV and XVI origin.
SHERATON Last of the eighteenth century designers — a contemporary of Hepplewhite — was Sheraton. There is much of similarity between the work of these two men. It is in chair work that Sheraton is perhaps most distinctive, his designs being characterised by a lowering of the height of the backs and a novelty of detail. The bulk of Sheraton style furniture was made of mahogany and inlays of satinwood, amboyna, box, and stained woods were used for decoration.
For this latter, such designs as festoons, fans, scrolls, and flowers were used, but such was the variety of this embellishment that it is difficult to particularise. Typical pieces are to be found in such categories as bureau bookcases, writing tables, sideboards, and china and other cabinets.
Both Sheraton and Hepplewhite, as well as Robert Adam, abandoned the use of the cabriole leg in favour of various tapered, turned, square, and shaped legs, usually of light design.
