I remember the first time I saw a great looking Highboy. In that television discussion, the focus was on the upper case to lower case ratio. I remember seeing other Highboys in frame, and their commentary was accurate. The Highboy in discussion was better designed than others in the room, and the aspect from lower to upper case was why, along with the height and shape of the legs.

I wish we had great period furniture here in Texas to study. I think at the time these “Masterpieces” were created, Texas wasn’t even a thought!!

One of my interests is how the the Design Process is being discussed/presented to the internet woodworker. I find alot of the presented thought, lacks depth of experience and therefore becomes scattered when presented to the blog-following woodworker. Everybody presents as an expert and I believe, the presentation of furniture design has been fogged.

I’m looking forward to your posts.

Neil

My definition is in no way limited to solely to period furniture. In fact, connoisseurship defines the modern masters. When you look at Maloof’s and Nakashima’s work crticially you discover why it rises to the top. After the contest ends, I’ll see if I can drag Mr. Hogarth in for a visit and we’ll continue the discussion. With a little luck, we’ll al discover a few ways to critically look our work and make it better… from a design standpoint.

Chuck

This design interest on the internet must get awfully confusing to the current woodworker trying to find an understanding.

The idea of being a connoisseur is interesting. Out of curiosity, is your definition restricted to period reproduction work or the entire genre of “furniture design”???