Bristling at the very suggestion

[Tex Robin]

Jake,

I know...But I look back on my own time with my Father. I was always looking for a better way and sometimes would argue with him about it. But now I make boots almost exactly like he taught me. All of my bright ideas went out the window. They look different, but the inside is the same. There is not much new under the sun, even in bootmaking. Oh, he would have loved the poly strings and me too because I had to make his and I hated it! Hurrah for poly strings!

See you in WF and we can talk about DW! . Since he is not going to be there....TR

[Tex Robin]

Hey Al,
I haven't heard anything out of you . Are you going to be in WF this year?

Rosemary, sorry you can't make it. But next year is a promise?. I don't know if I will make it to Gary's Brianstuffing, but thanks for feeding him ...TR

[bct]

Jake, if you inseam from the outside in, doesn't your awl make a bigger hole? I use a very small awl tip and barley penetrate the vamps leather and then the welt from the inside out. I believe this allows the stitch to be pulled into the vamps with no grins.
Tex, yes hurray for poly string! I have not forgot Tuesday afternoons rolling off 6 pair of waxed end strings. Arriving at work Wednesday morning and the shop felt like an inferno at 85 degrees in the winter time. Then waxing 6 pair of string and Inseaming 6 pair in one day was quite a chore. Some Wednesdays I made it. Some days you helped inseamed some of the boots. At my best time back then was 25 to 30 minutes per boot. I never did learn to hold on to my waxed end string while Inseaming. I was more concerned about being able to pull the strings through the innersole before the wax set up (Got Stuck). Now my inseam is much slower as I'm still a little rusty, looking forward to learning to hold my bristles while Inseaming. Don't think I will ever see a 10 minute inseam from me.
There is a lot of discussion about getting the inseam straight. This has not been a problem for me. DW did make a good point a while back about you can't hammer an inseam straight. I think the innersole channel and awl placement is critical to a straight inseam. Straightening the welt with welt pliers also assist in this operation.

"See Ya in WF"
Brian C. Thomas

[M.H. Strong]

Jake, Frank and All

Glad to hear that you tried the inseaming from the outside in. Somewhere after I went to DW's school I started inseaming like that. I think it was because of doing repairs in my shop. However the other day I tried it from the inside out as I was taught at school. I think I did a better job on the boot inseaming from the inside out. Now I'm going to try pre punching the holes on the next pair. I have never done this method before so I'll let you know how they turn out. The question comes to mind is any method better as long as we control each step while doing our work? ( The control is from DW's teaching this is a must for him and his students).

[jake]

Brian,

You bet it makes a bigger hole! But, with hammering your welt and a good wax on your thread, I didn't see any difference from my usual inseaming. The proof in the pudding will be down the line when I see these boots come back in the shop. Maybe I'll see something I don't like, maybe not. Like I said before, I'm just experimenting.

Tex,

Yeah, your words bring back memories of long ago. D.W. taught me how to make a damn good boot, but I would occasionally come up with a GREAT idea I knew would make things easier or better. Well.....I always came back to what D.W. taught me. And I'm sure I'll go back doing things like I was taught after this wild folly, but don't tell D.W.

[D.A. Saguto--HCC]

Tex,

Nope. Sorry I'm going to miss it two years running. You comming to HCC at Larry's?

[dw]

All,


First, Tex, I don't question you or your experience, either. A lot of this boils down to what you want to see...as I've said on numerous occasions. Now that may seem self-evident but I didn't learn from you or your dad (that IS self-evident) and what I want to see goes back and forth between what I was taught, what I admire in boots I've seen from many different makers (a lot of them long since dead and gone) and what my sense of grace and beauty tells me is pretty....or tight...or "made for the ages."

Jake said he wants the awl point to come out in the corner of the rabbett... I agree. That's one of the main reasons I hole (pre-punch) the insole. I've tried a lot of different ways and never seen any other technique that allows me such precision. And "precision" is the word I'm looking for here. I can control the point of the awl to within nanometers...no ands, ifs, or maybes...no guessing, at all.

Brian makes a really startling point...one that hasn't been made before. I too, feel that the smaller the awl in the holdfast, and penetrating the vamp, the better. No question. I hate driving the shank of the awl any deeper into the leather than I have too, simply because it just makes the hole bigger. And I've been fooling with these German sewing awls that have a real sharp point and are tapered in a diamond cross section. The hole made in the vamp and welt is about half the size of what it would be with a 3" King sewing awl. I try my best to never wiggle the awl for the very same reason. With a sharp awl and decent insole leather you shouldn't have to wiggle the awl. And especially if you're not holing the insole ahead of time, that'll only make the hole bigger and more uncertain as to where it will come out.

With regard to this nerve damage in my palm. I use a hand leather with a pad on that hand that protects my palm...but let me clue in all the apprentices...get yourself several of Dick Andersons awl hafts and you'll never develop the kind of problems I have. Even with my nerve damage, I can sew an inseam without the hand protector, as long as I'm using one of Dick's awls. I even make a few of them myself now, that's how much I like them.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[dw]

My ears are already burning! This weekend's gonna ruin my hat!!




Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[gcunning]

Just one point to the newbies. I draw on my vamp the feather line (I think that is the name). The point where the awl should come out working from inside out. This allows my peabrain to always hit right in the center of my mark. I know just more work for you old people- sorry - ah 'ol bootmakers but less work in the long run for me.

[dw]

Jake, Frank, Tex...

Actually a semi colon and a right parentheses makes a wink [ ]. A colon and a right parentheses makes a smile [ ]and a colon and a capital "D" makes a "big grin." [ ) Likewise a colon and a left parentheses makes a frown. [ ]




Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[dw]

Gary,

The only real problem with marking your feather on the vamp is that it's not very accurate. This is the crux of all my reservations about inseaming "blind."

Look at the following images:

The first one shows that if you are inseaming blind you can think you're in the right spot and actually hit that line drawn on the vamp, but not really be exactly right. The same effect applies if you're inseaming blind from the outside in or from the inside out.

The second illustration shows how the awl should emerge from the holdfast whether you hole the insole ahead of time or inseam blind.

2195.gif

2196.gif

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[Tex Robin]

DW,

I do differ with you. Everything has to fit together before you can say that you are too low or too high or even just right. The way I do my channel and holdfast does not correspond with your artwork. Also I tack a 1/4 in strip around the channel that shows exactly where my awl should come out and I am not inseaming blind. I don't think that what you are putting in your sketches is accurate for anyone but you. For like I say everything must fit in place for whatever method you are using and a drawing will not fit everyones procedure....TR

[jake]

D.W.,

Thanks for the guidance on making funny faces!

Now, how did you do that face with the mustache? Actually, it looked just like ya!

[Tex Robin]

DW,

Sorry about the colon semi colon. I never could tell them apart. But I do know how to make the
faces and I do know how to inseam a pair of boots and my stitches are completely straight without pre-punching the holes. And they are not blind.

I also do as Gary said with my students making a mark along the featherline for them to follow and it works for them just fine. You say it is not very accurate. Well, what is accurate for a student or a beginning bootmaker that doesn't always know where his awl is going to come out?
Drawing a line where his awl is going to come out is a very good start for a beginning bootmaker.

And then there are the differences in the way different bootmakers make their channels. You have no idea how I do it and you would have to see all of my procedure and results before you could make any kind of judgement about the method.
You say you don't question my experience but their seems to be some question when you and I can't agree on anything except that we both make boots. I have the results but you are saying that the results don't count because they weren't obtained by your directions? I'm sorry but this is what I keep hearing over and over and there never seems to be any end to our discussions.

Mr Anderson makes a fine looking awl but it is not for me. I like a longer handle and the larger palm swell. And I would never use an awl that doesn't have a way to tighten the awl. This is not a criticism of Anderson's awl hasps. It just doesn't suit me. And I use the handle to take a couple of wraps around the string to pull my stitches. I need a longer handle for this. I don't use the leather wrapped around my hand like you do. Like I have said , we do a lot of things different down here in Texas. And if I have not said it , I am saying it now..Man that hat is something else. ....TR

[dw]

Tex,

For the record Tex, if you check all the posts in this discussion...and re-read them carefully...I think you will find that I am not the one pushing our disagreements.

As an example, my last posting was a response to Gary...*addressed* to Gary...and you responded *twice*! Both times taking issue with my remarks. I've got no problem with that. But you seem to.

What's more, Tex, if you read my posts, going back literally to the beginning of the Forum, you'll see that I have a tendency (a closely held desire, if nothing else) to express what *I* think...what *my* reservations are--and as time has gone by, I think...I *hope*... I've gotten better at doing just exactly that.

I don't question your work or your observations...as you do mine...I speak almost exclusively from the first person. In other words, I talk about my experiences and my observations and not about whether someone else is doing it right or wrong. If someone asks me....and I have been asked many times...to critique their work, I *never* do it. Instead, if I think I can help a person to see something in a little different light, I talk about what *I* like to see in a boot--with little or no, or only incidental, reference to their own work. If they can learn something from that, fine. If they can't, then they weren't really asking to learn, were they?...just fishing for compliments. And I know all about fishing...I'm a fisherman.

Sometimes my opinions and my observations differ from what you've experienced. I've got no problem with that ...or with you. In the end, there may simply be no way to resolve the issue. Nor is it reasonable to expect that there would be. There's no way to determine who's right or "wrong"...assuming you have an all-consuming need to make that determination. I don't. It's just music...point/counterpoint.

On the other hand, this forum speaks to many more people than Tex or DW. I speak to (and very occasionally for) them as much or more than I speak to you. If what I say strikes a cord, if it resonates....if they have the drive to "control" a particular process or technique as closely as I do; if they have experienced some of the same problems; observed some of the same results, and asked some of the same questions...then sometimes sharing my experiences and sharing my opinions and sharing my responses to such problems will make sense to them...and that's all I'm after.

After 40 years of doing things one way, you may very well be able to inseam straight....or you may simply need a better definition of "straight." There's no way to know. So that's not the issue with me. I'm not calling into question whether you can or cannot. I'm simply saying that I've done it three or four ways (long enough to get good at doing it each way) and, in my opinion, this particular technique addresses the problems that I see better than any other. Take it or leave it. It's another approach, another idea to contemplate while you're inseaming or in those restless hours before sleep steals up on you--suitable for some, beside the point for others. Why it bothers you, is beyond me.

Lastly (although I've said this to you before), I think I should point out that my position vis-a-vis this forum is unique. The Colloquy is like a cocktail party. I'm the host. My job is to circulate, make folks feel welcome, encourage conversation--even interjecting a little controversy now and again, if that's what it takes--make sure everyone has access to refreshments, keep my temper even when attacked (not something I do naturally--I've had to grow into the job of moderator) and to clean up when everyone else goes home. Because of that, I'm here. I'm gonna be here. And I very well may be the first and last (and sometimes the *only*) response anyone gets to their conversational gambits (posts).

Have you tried the canapes?



Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[Tex Robin]

DW,

You mean now we must have our name at the top of a post before we can address the subject? And that rule only applies to me when I dissagree with you?

You were telling a young bootmaker that he was wrong and I go on record as saying he was right. Why does anyone else even post? I am beginning to wonder. I think I have better things to do today and I am going to take a while off from this forum and just make some boots. Have a good day. I am Looking forward to the WF Round-up.....TR

[rosynay]

The forum is no cocktail party. I think all who post here are no doubt
dignified worthwhile human beings and
everyone should have the right to disagree without getting dressed dowm
and disputed. In my way of thinking not any of us need any patronization.
One is off base to think one must clean
up after us most of the time, like me & Michael Anthony who made me really mad here but we resolved our own differences before the fact we both were called upon. I like Michael Anthony very much and I choose to call
him my friend and he is welcome to visit in my home at any time. I also like a lot of others here and they all
deserve respect without a long winded
dissertation of a put down. To think
we all have to be put in line is out of line. RL

[dw]

Tex,

On the contrary, you are welcome to address any subject you that you feel prompted to. What I take issue with, however, is then coming back at me for disagreeing with *you* when in fact I wasn't actively disagreeing with anyone.

And as for telling a "young bootmaker he was wrong" as far as I can tell you are the only one who has used the word "wrong" in that context for as long as the Forum has been in existence--four years plus. Please re-read my post to Gary.

I have offered, and will continue to offer, another perspective. It is a perspective that is informed by my own training, my own experiences, open and attentive conversation with other boot and shoemakers from around the world, and at least a passing acquaintance with the experiences and knowledge of past masters in their collected writings.

With all due respect, you've made an issue of not having read the books; of not having paid any real attention to any other makers outside of your own circle. That's fine. I've got no problem with that...sometimes the most unique and interesting wildlife can arise totally cut off from the mainland. But sometimes it's also an evolutionary dead-end. The Forum is about cross-fertilization. Ideas and perspectives freely shared that go far beyond Texas or western bootmaking.

But every technique presents it's own set of problems...it doesn't make any difference whether it's post modern, avant garde or as traditional as Rees. In the analysis is the learning, in the analysis is the growth. I try to consider every technique with the objective of ferreting out the drawbacks and the benefits. And I'm convinced that looking honestly at those drawbacks and benefits, helps the Trade.

Of course, I'm only one person, I see things from one perspective. I see weaknesses in some techniques and strengths in others. I assume and expect someone else to see and expose the weaknesses of techniques that I use. That's your job. Just don't take it so personally.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[Tex Robin]

DW,
All I can say is you are very good at skirting an issue, and when you say someone is inaccurate, that is not saying they are wrong? Being inaccurate means that someone needs to correct their method. That would, in my opinion mean that they were making a wrong move or doing a wrong procedure. Very good explanation! If anything you could just admit that you were disagreeing with Gary's method because that is exactly what you were doing. Now I see that we are heading for a horn locking and I am through for today. Have a good day.....TR

[dw]

Tex,

There's a very *big* difference between saying a "technique" is inaccurate and saying someone (some person) is wrong. Again you've not read the post...so let me quote it for you....

"The only real problem with marking your feather on the vamp is that it's not very accurate"

The word "it" as in "it's not very accurate," is almost universally accepted as referring to an inanimate object or idea. Nothing personal there. Not now, not ever. An exchange of ideas, an analysis of a technique. That's all.

If you decide to read something into a man's words that aren't there, it seems to me the problem lies more in yourself than in anything he's said. I try to treat everybody with respect. I take the time to explain myself....without resorting to condescension or disdain. Nor am I dismissive.

The ideas have to stand on their own without reference to who they come from...or even whether you like the other guy. And as much respect as I have for you...and anyone else on this forum...I, nevertheless, don't feel any compulsion to yield a point--especially one that ignores the facts--just because you're who you are or older than I am, or even a friend. There's no respect in that course of action...only condescension.

Or maybe you'd rather I said "have it your way, old man." ("poor old guy." )



Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[Tex Robin]

DW,
Or maybe I should have said, Have it your way and hey, don't give quarter to me because I am older or have had more experience than you. You're the one with the white hair!.. And I promise to only talk boots with Jake. Not a word about guys with funny hats.. Last transmission till after WF....TR

[rosynay]

No, I am the one with white hair and
I am probably the oldest one who posts
here. I am old enough to be the mother or grandmother of most of you. "Come off of it" we elders have had more experience and I dare say most of us have been around the block probably more than most anyone, therefore, one who is 20 years younger than me or more
is not entitled to tell me how the"cow
ate the cabbage". I had manners and
social acceptability long before any of
you were born. No one deserves to be
put down here, elders or not and called an "old man' in gest or not. That is
derogitory and highly descriminatory.
I got called down here for calling Michael Anthony an "egotist" which wasn't half as bad. Now I would like to know who chastises the chastiser?
RL

[gcunning]

I'm the one that used 'ol and old. I was making a play on that DW and others have been around boots a lot longer than me (I even used pea brain in describing my ignorance of the business to their longevity in the business). It was meant in more reverent terms toward individuals that have been at this a lot longer than me. I have made reference to DW being an 'ol bootmaker before. My fault that I did not address just him in that term. I think he knew what I meant. No disrespect was meant to anyone. I will make sure in future post when I kid with someone I will specify a name and that way it will be just between me and that individual.
Again my apologies.

[dw]

Gary,

Get out! Why in the world would I take offense at being called an old man? It's a fact of life. I don't take any credit or blame for it. It doesn't make me a better bootmaker nor a better person.

Nor do I use my age as an excuse for rude behaviour or vindictiveness.

As far as I am concerned, there are very few people on this forum that I have any problem with or who offend me. I can probably count them on one hand--and you're not one of them. I can be offended...like anyone else...but it takes a concerted effort. And although I appreciate your apology it's not necessary. Nor is it necessary to let yourself be buffaloed into believing an innocent comment is a crime.

Anyone who pays attention here knows who's looking for trouble and who's just having a good time in the spirit of discussion and debate and sharing. Time, if nothing else, will take care of the troublemakers.


Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[rosynay]

Gary:

You are one of the most well banlanced
persons I think I have ever met and I don't recall your "old bootmker" terms
as stated which is quite a diffenece
than blatantly calling someone "old
man", "old lady" ect. Here is the point
I know I am aging and being an "old
lady" and the truth doesn't bother me
but the mean spirit in back of it does. I don't for one moment think you have a
mean spirited bone in your body. Some of you here have met me and met Tex and
I think you have to agree neither one
of us has one foot in the graveyard and I am a lot older than Tex. Beyond that
someone quite my junior does themselves
no favors with me if I am told how I should be behaving myself. I read Emily Post more than 60 years ago, and
if others want to continually try to topple all with their putdowns then they need to read Emily Post also.
There are absoluely no aplogies needed
from you but thank you for your consideration. Rl