 |
|
A
History of the Amateur Woodworking Movement
|
|
A Decade-by-Decade Narrative of Amateur
Woodworking in America From 1900 to 2000
|
Primary Sources: -- Documents of the Woodworking Movement
|
An Online Book -- Raymond McInnis
-- Amateur Woodworker
|
|
|
Document 8: On Skill-Hunger, or "How the Hammer, Saw and
Try-Square Can Satisfy ... " 1946
Click here to go directly to the "skill hunger" document.
From Popular
Science Publishing,
How to get the most out of your home workshop; all
the home craftsman needs to know about the use of hand
and power tools in his own home. Published
in 1946. In this book, the preface observes, "How the
Hammer, Saw and Try-Square Can Satisfy". More
significant, though, at least for me, is the
introduction of the phrase, "Skill Hunger".
(After quite a
bit of investigating, I have concluded that the
"coining" of the phase "Skill Hunger" by the is
the responsibility of the English theologian, Lawrence
Pearsall Jacks.
Lawrence Pearsall
Jacks was what we normally call a "colorful character",
because -- in a full lifetime -- he engaged in numerous
pursuits, all of which captured public attention. His
life evidently, was spent in both Britain and America.
Jacks was
born in
Nottingham,
England in 1860, and he
endured a childhood of poverty before he began working
as a teacher.
Both a storyteller
and religion writer -- who began writing when he was in
his late forties -- Jacks eventually
became drawn to Unitarian theology. He studied
theology first at
Manchester New
College, graduating in 1886,
but later received a scholarship to study at
Harvard
University. At Harvard he
acquired a reputation as a compelling public speaker.
Upon returning to
England, where he served as a
pastor at Unitarian churches in Liverpool and
Birmingham, and founded and
editied the Hibbert
Journal.
He eventually returned to his
alma matter,
renamed
Manchester
College, where he taught
philosophy from 1903 to 1915. He became principal of the
school in 1915, and he held that post until 1931, when
he retired from academia. But
continued to edit the Hibbert
Journal for another sixteen years.
Throughout an active life he published
numerous books, on a wide range of topics. Among his
many 1930s publications, Jacks continued to rail against
what he perceived to be the dehumanizing nature of
industrialized life. In the
1933 Hibbert Lecture, published as Revolt
against Mechanism, for example, Jacks decried
mechanized life as stifling, declaring that humanity
should appropriate machinery to promote spirituality and
creativity. (The link above is to a limited access to
the book's contents through Google Print.)
Jacks wrote
several articles -- indexed in the Reader's Guide
to Periodical Literature -- on Unemployment and
Leisure: "Today's unemployment and tomorrow's leisure",
Recreation 25 (December 1931) pages
478-82+'; "Outwitting the machine", The Survey
67 (October 15 1931), pages 74-75; "Leisure time, a
modern challenge" Playground and Recreation
24 (December 1930) pages 475-47.
In the box below
is one example of Jacks use of "Skill Hunger":
... Man is a
skill-hungry animal, hungry for skill in his
body, hungry for skill in his mind, and never
satisfied until that skill-hunger is appeased.
What a discontented miserable animal man is
until he gets satisfaction for this skill-hunger
that is in him! Self-activity in skill and
creation is the summary function of human nature
from childhood on.
This conception of man is not new. It was
announced by the philosopher, Aristotle. The
revival of it in modern times marks a profoundly
significant advance in the right understanding
of ourselves, of our children, and of our
neighbors. Unless I am mistaken, the
civilization of the future will be founded on
it. ...
Source:
Lawrence Pearsall Jacks, Education Through
Recreation. New York: Harper and
Brothers, 1932, pages 41-42.
|
Another
occurrence of the term, Skill Hunger, is a 1932
booklet, with the title, Adolescent Skill Hunger,
by T. Wingate Todd, of the Brush Foundation. The booklet
discusses what seems to be 1930s theory of adolescent
psychological development, including cognitive
development. Evidently the author seeks to integrate the
term "skill hunger" into his discussion of adolescent
cognitive psychology of the era, a meaning definitely
not related to amateur woodworking.
[see also 1931
editorial in NYT, still on opd - 3-4-07]
Early in the
1940s, and completely unrelated, Scott Graham Williamson
asks, rhetorically,
WHAT IS CRAFT?
WHERE does craft production stop and
industrial production begin? The answer is
not so easy as it seems. In the spirit of
this book we are not going to look upon
craft in any narrow sense limiting it
rigidly to hand production, or even to
production of an entire object, or even
production wholly controlled by the workman.
Such terms characterized the worthwhile, yet
relatively futile, "arts and crafts"
movement launched by William Morris in
England during the 19th century. We shall
take the bull by the horns and run the full
risks of controversy in our conception
of craft as consisting of the spirit in
which, rather than solely the means by
which, a production process is carried out.
This would appear to be the only conception
of craft and craftsmanship which can hope to
take root in this technologically advanced
age. Certainly we cannot promulgate theories
concerning the social and individual
desirabilities of craftsmanship if such
theories, fully realized, would imply the
rejection, to a large degree, of the
advantages and progressive aspects of
industrialism. A return to the
horse-and-buggy would be no more desirable
in production than in politics.
Complex an adjustment as it may seem to
be, people today are nonetheless eager for
an understanding of the possible role of
craft in modern life. We, in America,
have suddenly waked up to the richness of
our background. We have become "craft
conscious." Interest has revived in the
whole conception of "craftsmanship". A
score of advertising media are
instinctively, yet blindly, trying to
persuade us that craft flourishes now, in
the midst of industrial life.
Large automobile companies, in elaborate
advertisements, present their skilled
mechanics as "craftsmen," making a title of
the term. A certain absurdity, yet almost a
pathetic intensity, of this tendency is
revealed in the yearning for the myth of
individual handicraft betrayed by such
phrases as "Tomato Soup .. . . by Campbell."
General Motors still clings to the lost
carriage maker in the insignia and motto,
"Body by Fisher." Personal names for mass
products are at a premium. There is
commercial value in "Fanny Farmer" candies,
or "Mrs. Wagner's Pies." A sense of the
public psychology is revealed in these
oblique apologies by manufacturers for the
industrial standardization of their
products. This is not to imply that there
are not many commodities which industry
produces with better results than could the
individual. But it's worth noting that when
the sewing machine was first invented
especially high prices were charged for
clothing made on it. "Untouched by human
hands" was once the miraculous advertising
appeal for other milled or machined
commodities. Yet today, the label "hand
made" is worth an illogical amount in the
retail value of many products.
Source: Adapted from "Chapter 2: WHAT IS
CRAFT?" and "Chapter 13: Crafts Today",
Scott Graham Williamson The American
Craftsman 1940, pages 8-12, 177-188.
|
(Again, while no
direct relation exists between the Williamson quote
above and the theme here, "Skill Hunger", there is --
definitely an implicit one -- because of the linkage
between "craft", "creativity", and "spirituality",
points that I explore
here.)
Later in
the 1940s, Stanley tools came out with a similar
sounding book, The Joy of Accomplishment.
In 1951, the noted technical
writer, Henry Lionel Williams, published How to
Make Your Own Furniture. In the front matter of
his book, among other things, Williams declares,
There are few occupations for pleasure or
profit, as satisfying as working in wood.
And this satisfaction is nowhere more fully
realized than in shaping wood into things of
beauty and utility that add charm and
comfort to the home.
The
material itself is pleasant to handle and
easy to work; it is clean and tractable, and
almost anyone with the slightest mechanical
aptitude can acquire, without too much
difficulty, the necessary skill. Such is the
appeal of cabinet making, and the reason why
so many take to furniture construction as a
hobby or even turn it into a business.
It
is unfortunate that many amateur
cabinetmakers, in their haste to finish jobs
they have started, lose sight of the basic
essentials of good workmanship—patience and
care. They need to learn that the fullest
satisfaction comes only to the conscientious
craftsman to whom good workmanship is a
prime essential. To the amateur who make
that his ideal the rest will be easy. The
beginner does not need skill so much as a
capacity for taking pains. If he learns to
exercise care, skill will come soon enough.
Equally important is a capacity to
appreciate good design. After he has
examined and studied and made himself
familiar with really good furni-ture, the
serious craftsman is seldom interested in
the simple knick-knacks or the ugly and
rubbishy gewgaws that tempt so many
enthusiastic but mis-guided and impatient
beginners. The serious worker knows that
these elementary exercises are a waste of
time that could better be devoted to
producing furniture pieces that are not only
useful but well-designed and in good taste.
The
beginner needs to realize that the
difference between an amateur-looking and a
professional job, though important, is very
small. Often it is merely a matter of a
piece of moulding or a corner brace, or a
little extra sanding of the end grain.
|
Part of my quest for background material on this online
history of the amateur woodworking movement is a
page-by-page survey of all (I hope, at least)
periodicals that dedicated substantial portions of their
pages to woodworking. My first example of a foray into
woodworking periodicals is the Home Craftsman.
Published between 1931 and 1965, with the accomplished
editor and author of woodworking, Harry Hobbs, at the
helm, HC was in its own right periodical
of considerable impact.
Starting out as periodical to promote
Walker-Turner power woodworking tools marketed to the
homeshop, HC's ownership was later
evidently acquired by Hobbs and others, and quickly
turned into a six-times a year magazine with quite a
following -- in the 1950s it boasted over 200,000
subscribers -- and which featured articles by such
lights as Lester Margon, the distinguished illustrator
of museum pieces of classic American, Canadian, and
British antiques for amateur woodworkers to reproduce
and -- for its survival -- an increasing number of
manufacturers advertising a wide variety woodworking
tools.
In the letters from readers -- very
often proudly noting their capability of reproducing
Margon projects -- one definitely gets the feeling that
"skill hunger" ranges widely through the male
population. [Later I hope to upload examples of these
letters from HC readers.]&
"Skill Hunger" vs "The Joy of Accomplishment" Or, Is Woodworking: 'Process' or 'Product'?
Going Beyond the Information Given
In my almost
four decades of professional life, as academic
reference librarian and history professor, I had
many occasions a need to refer to the work of
psychologists, especially the cognitive
psychologist,
Jerome Bruner and the Cambridge University
psychologist,
Sir Frederic Bartlett. Two chapters by Bruner, in
particular, have touched me: "The Conditons of
Creativity" and "Going Beyond the
Information
Given", both appear in
Beyond the Information Given: Studies in the
Psychology of Knowing, and the paper,
"Frames of Thinking: Ways of Making Meaning",
published in David R Olson and Nancy Torrance, eds,
Modes of Thought: Explorations in Culture and
Cognition, 1996
Bartlett's
books, Remembering, 1932, and
Thinking, 1951, are seminal works in
psychology, but like many other great works, other
writers, using a different lens, have enlarged the
scope of the coverage Bartlett originally intended.
(Woodworkers
reading this material -- but not familiar with the
underlying psychology -- will undoubtedly claim that
making these connections is a "stretch", and perhaps
even question the appropriateness of the discussion.
For the time being, I ask only for patience. I will,
nonetheless, I am convinced, be able to make the
point, i.e., that woodworking is a creative act.)
Perhaps
skeptics will find solace to my peregrinations --
definitely in the figurative sense -- by following
this link to the piece I posted, by Mark Dugisnke,
ruminating about 'working system" in woodworking. in
particular where Duginske touches on
"ideas and concepts are seeds".)
Below,
reprinted in
Verdana italic
font
is an example.
The source of this evidence is Nancy Nelson's
Chapter 16: "Discourse Synthesis: The Process and
the Product," pp. 383-384, of
Discourse Synthesis: Studies in Historical and
Contemporary Social Epistemology, edited by
Raymond G. McInnis. Below, as you read Nancy's
discussion, please substitute "woodworking" for
"discourse synthesis".
Does my
analogy work? Only time will tell. It works fine for
me, but I intuitively know that woodworking is
filled with "realists", Further, inspite of my
knowledge that this analogy will be confronted by
skepticism, from more than just woodworkers, for my
own reasons, I'm leaving this material as it is, in
flux, because I need to think about it more myself.
...
Another distinction that discourse
synthesis challenges is that between
originating and deriving. To originate
is to create, to bring into existence,
to be the first to do or say something,
whereas to derive is to draw or receive
material from a source (one of the
definitions that my dictionary provides
for derivative is “not original”). With
respect to this binary pair, discourse
synthesis is both–and, instead of
either/or. It can be simultaneously
derivative and original. Often the
originality, or creativity, of scholars
comes through their ability to see and
to point out relations between two or
more sources or bodies of “received”
work. Their originality comes, not
through coming up with something “new”
(as if that were really possible),
isolated from prior work, but through
originating links and communicating the
synthesis persuasively to their readers.
It seems that the perception of
originality can often depend on how
claims are presented rhetorically—the
extent to which a person claims
authority himself or herself rather than
deferring to others.
The
originality–derivity issue has been
discussed by Frederic Bartlett, whom I
would describe as original (and
derivative) with his book Remembering
published in 1932. Through that work
he brought cultural issues, particularly
conventionalization, to the level of the
individual and to the concerns of
psychology. His studies and theoretical
explanations dealt with the problem of
how individuals remember cultural
artifacts, including texts, that come
from a culture other than their own. In
writing that book, he used, along with
other sources, some writings of his
Cambridge University colleagues in
anthropology and borrowed a theoretical
explanation from a colleague in
physiology.
Later
in 1958 in another book, Thinking,
Bartlett he provided an account of some
aspects of his own synthesis process in
writing Remembering. After describing
his reading and writing, he suggested
that what is considered originality is
many times a kind of synthesis: “Perhaps
all original ideas come from contact of
subject matter with different subject
matter, of people with different people”
(Bartlett 1958, 147). With respect to
originality in psychology, his own
discipline, he speculated: “The most
important of all conditions of
originality in experimental thinking is
a capacity to detect overlap and
agreement between groups of facts and
fields of study which have not been
effectively combined, and to bring these
groups into experimental contact” (p.
161). In my opinion, Bartlett himself
had created that kind of synthesis with
his book Remembering, bringing
into experimental psychology some
material and concepts from diverse
perspectives and disciplines....
|
Likewise,
because they tangentially touch on woodworking, the
philosophical speculations of the Hungarian-born
physicist, Michael Polanyi, especially as
articulated in his 1958, Personal Knowledge,
have long been of interest to me.
Among other
topics, these and other writings focus on the
psychological drive that urges us, as humans, to
create. "Skill Hunger", as articulated in the piece
below, is in my view a crude attempt to address the
creative passions that woodworking excites. Notice
that Chapter 15 is entitled
"Creativity and Woodworking: Is Woodworking
'Process' or 'Product'?" If everything works
out, I will be discussing these matters more fully
in Chapter 15.
In
considering issues about creativity, passions, and
woodworking mentioned above, for me many questions
remain unanswered, perhaps even "unasked".
Regardless, just considering them, deliberating
about them, is one of my "passions", so I intend to
address these matters more fully later.
Popular
Science Publishing:"How
the Hammer, Saw and Try-Square Can Satisfy: The Urge to
Make Things" 1946
EVERY
one of us is descended from a line of
ancestors who, for thousands of
centuries, used brain and muscle to work
out new ideas and to turn them into
actualities by the labor of the hands.
We
have, in short, an inborn skill
hunger, a deep-rooted desire to work
out new ideas, as our ancestors did, and
to convert these ideas into physical
being with our own hands.
Modern
civilization has made it difficult for
many of us to satisfy our inherited
skill hunger to a normal extent. Mass
production, de¬sirable because it makes
it possible for each of us to live
better than the kings of old,
unfortunately does not satisfy our skill
hunger.
Compare, for example, the process of
getting meat for dinner as practiced by
our ancestors and as we practice it. Our
ancestor pitted his skill in woodcraft
against the keen protective senses of
wild ani¬mals, and he got a real thrill
out of the triumph that brought the
animals to pot. We, on the other hand,
get our dinners because we stand in
front of machines and go through the
same motions all day long or sit at
desks and add up endless columns of
figures.
These
jobs have to be done right, of course,
but relatively few of them require
maximum mental exertion or any
considerable amount of initiative. To be
sure, some of our skill hunger may be
employed in fitting ourselves for better
jobs, but even that cannot completely
satisfy the urge.
How,
then, is it to be done? Considering the
limitations imposed by modern
civilization, how are we going to
satisfy our inborn desire to develop
ideas and turn them into something
useful?
This
growing desire to satisfy skill hunger
undoubtedly is the basic reason for the
perfectly astounding increase in
interest people are taking in all forms
of hobbies that revolve around the use
of various kinds of tools in the home
workshop. If you build a model coach,
for instance, you satisfy your skill
hunger just as thoroughly as did the
old-time coach maker who built the coach
you are modeling. If you make a fine
piece of furniture or a simple
workbench, you can revel in the
perfection of detail after detail, in a
completely satisfying way.
Do you, at
the end of the day, feel a sort of
vague, unsatisfied feeling lurking
around in the shadows of your brain? It
may be skill hunger and if it is, see
what happens to it after a session with
the hammer, saw and try-square!
|
Back to top