Originally Posted by Manuel
I agree as to the abandonment of traditional standards due to market requirements and obtaining more benefits and effectively, never because doing it another way results in better quality.
I can intuit even guess that DWII is an elderly person, (aged.... between 73-78) and anchored to a single system, so I understand him.
I think you need a better translation app, or more study because the language clearly is a problem here. If you read what I wrote, you would realize that I never intentionally criticized any of your work. As it actually happened, my response to another member of the forum regarding a YouTube video (unattributed) was a little critical (although most of the criticism was about Youtube videos in general). But at the time, I didn't know who you were or that you had made that video. And I apologized for my remarks.
Yes, I answered your defensiveness regarding "what are Traditional techniques" and your assertion that you don't use machines "never
." Almost entirely focusing on language. On the face of it, neither of my remarks were about your work. If anything, they were simply about an all too common lazy use of the words and thoughtless assertions.
A sewing machine is
a machine...is a machine...is a machine...is a machine. And you never specified "heavy" machines...you simply said "no machines" "never
." You'll have to forgive me if I think it a bit hypocritical (or perhaps "dissonant" is the better word) to make that distinction. Now you want to walk it all back...as if you didn't really mean the "never
Almost all the rest of my remarks were about techniques themselves and the reasons why we abandon Traditional
techniques and the excuses we make when we abandon them. And what the inevitable and certain consequences of doing that are. None
of it was specific to you.
That said, if we want to get into techniques and their rationales...several points can be made. My age has nothing to do with it (you are a bit high in your lowest guess) but maybe your
a critical factor. Because the vast majority of people who abandon Traditional techniques (in favor of faster and less skilled and more profitable) are people who haven't the patience or the focus to master the Traditional skills.
The reliance on cement is a good example. Do you think they had neoprene contact cements in 1767? or 1850? Or 1880? The case can be made that the 18th and 19th centuries were the Golden Age of Shoemaking (18th century for women's work, 19th century for men's work). No cement
. Yet some of the finest shoes ever made were made using no cement. What would you do if you were suddenly dropped back into the 19th century? I suspect you'd have to find skills and methods that didn't rely on expediencies.
And it is undeniable that cement is an expediency--fundamentally, it is not
needed. But it makes things faster (and more profitable) and easier for those without the skills to do without. That's really the only rationale for using cement.
But probably just as important in the larger scheme of things...for me at least (can't speak for you)...I find it very
dissonant to use, much less rely
, on a product that is both harmful to me and to the environment while at the same time being, objectively and demonstrably, unnecessary. If nothing else, if 12 stitches to the inch is excellent work when no cements are used, it only stops being excellent work when the maker is in too much of a hurry and too reliant on expediencies to bother. Then
the definitions change... don't they.?
Of course, I'm old and not as "moderne" and hip as you younger "shoemakers." I've had time...made
time...to think about such things and to choose deliberately and mindfully how I want to exist in this world. I'm old enough (and curious enough) to have seen and experienced the work, the results, and the reasons for respecting and learning...and even mastering (to the extent I am capable)...Traditional work.
Younger folks seldom have the time or patience...or the discipline...for such niceties.edited for punctuation and clarityEdited by DWFII - 8/24/16 at 12:50pm