Beginning a Greene & Greene Cabinet Design Project

[Chester]

Hi Chester (and everyone else) --

As much as I'd love for you to buy my book, I think that based on what you've written in this thread, Darrell's book is the best bet for you. As you saw when you looked at my book in the store, it is not a howto. I reveal many details that most people haven't seen before but do not offer instruction. Darrell does that and does it very well.

On a related note, I encourage you to buy the book directly from Darrell (and to buy any book directly from the author when possible). WIthout getting into details, the royalty to the author from a book sale via Amazon or the big chains is laughably small. I didn't write my book for a big payday (and I feel confident that Darrell didn't either) but it is nice to be compensated at least somewhat.

Best of luck with your project.

David Mathias

www.wood-and-light.com

David -

Thanks for taking the time to comment on this. Your book is amazing! It was the only book about Greene & Greene design (or Craftsman/Mission style for that matter) that Border's had on the shelf.

I have never been to Pasadena ... or even actually seen any G&G in person. But I find myself mystified by just looking at the pictures. The more I look at a picture, the more I see ... and then I see even more. Maybe it is because I can envision being able to make something as intricate and beautiful as G&G.

I was speaking with a professional cabinet maker the other day and I asked him about G&G and he didn't say too much. That prompted me to dig deeper and not let him go until he went on the record. He finally said "I just don't get it." I think what he was getting at was all the seemingly "affect" stuff that G&G does to create visual interest ... much of which has nothing to do with the structure of the piece (I hope I got this right). I laughed a little at his response and told him that he had taken me totally by surprise with his comments. So I asked him more about the pieces that he makes and found that he did a lot of things that took more artistic talent ... like carved claw feet and custom designed inlays.

I do not possess the true artistic talents like these. The extent of my talent is #1 ... I believe that I have a good eye for what looks good, and #2 ... being able to use my tools to achieve certain good outcomes. G&G, although very complex (at times), seems to fall into "my coral" of things that are possible for me to build. Of course, I could be overestimating my abilities ... we will see. The SketchUp design process, alone, will be very consuming.

[Onboard]

The SketchUp design process, alone, will be very consuming.

Chester, I’m guessing you’ve already done this, but there are a number of Greene & Greene furniture models for SketchUp. The thought of course, is to load these models into SketchUp to take advantage of the work that’s already been done and modify it for your design or use parts for your design. It might save some time.

From doing a search for G&G in the Google 3D Warehouse.

Arts & Crafts style buffet by Popular Woodworking.

G&G inspired night stand. Download available.

You’re not building a chair, as far as I know, this is a common detail on legs for other pieces of G&G furniture.

This website says it’s closed for maintenance (doesn’t say for how long), so you can check back later. Because of that I wasn’t able to determine if it had anything for G&G.

[Pete Bennett]

David -

Thanks for taking the time to comment on this. Your book is amazing! It was the only book about Greene & Greene design (or Craftsman/Mission style for that matter) that Border's had on the shelf.

I have never been to Pasadena ... or even actually seen any G&G in person. But I find myself mystified by just looking at the pictures. The more I look at a picture, the more I see ... and then I see even more. Maybe it is because I can envision being able to make something as intricate and beautiful as G&G.

I was speaking with a professional cabinet maker the other day and I asked him about G&G and he didn't say too much. That prompted me to dig deeper and not let him go until he went on the record. He finally said "I just don't get it." I think what he was getting at was all the seemingly "affect" stuff that G&G does to create visual interest ... much of which has nothing to do with the structure of the piece (I hope I got this right). I laughed a little at his response and told him that he had taken me totally by surprise with his comments. So I asked him more about the pieces that he makes and found that he did a lot of things that took more artistic talent ... like carved claw feet and custom designed inlays.

I do not possess the true artistic talents like these. The extent of my talent is #1 ... I believe that I have a good eye for what looks good, and #2 ... being able to use my tools to achieve certain good outcomes. G&G, although very complex (at times), seems to fall into "my coral" of things that are possible for me to build. Of course, I could be overestimating my abilities ... we will see. The SketchUp design process, alone, will be very consuming.

Hi Chester. I think you've answered your own questions. You are more than capable of building Greene & Greene or, any body else's including your own ideas. Just remember no matter how complex it looks over all when you break it down it's just lot's and lot's of little pieces. Some may be more difficult than others it's true. But, with the right frame of mind and taking however much time it takes, and realizing that no one, and I mean no one, both the Greenes, all the Chipendales and anyone else who ever lifted a chisel, never got it right all the time. If you balls up, chuck it in the fire and have another go. I know that may sound trite, and for someone like me who has to earn his bread from doing these things, it's never going to be an easy decision. But, I'm sure you'd rather destroy the evidence of a cock up and then proudly display the best one you've ever made any day.

Go for it and all the best.

Pete

[Wood&Light]

Chester -

My pleasure and thank you for your kind comment. While Pasadena is the center of the Greene & Greene universe, you can see some of their work in other parts of the country. I see that you are in Michigan. The Detroit Institute of Art has the Blacker house dining room table in it's collection. Cleveland has a secretary from the Cordelia Culbertson house and, last time I was there, a living room chair from the Blacker house. Minneapolis, Chicago, St. Louis, Pittsburgh all have pieces as well. There are others but those I've listed are closest to you.

To my way of thinking there are a couple of keys to a successful Greene & Greene piece. First, it's subtle things. Make sure that edges and corners are sufficiently softened. Make sure that surfaces are silky smooth. Ebony, if used, should be highly polished. Small details make all the difference. The second thing concerns newly designed pieces in the G&G style. It is critical to employ the elements of the G&G vocabulary in a sensitive way. It's not enough to simply use cloud lifts and throw in a few ebony pegs. While these elements seem simple, using them well requires practice and, perhaps, trial and error.

As for your cabinetmaker acquaintance, I would argue that there is precious little furniture that doesn't include some degree of "affect." Certainly claw-and-ball feet aren't necessary for the structure of a piece. Only the most severely simple pieces are free of this. I would further argue that it's this "affect" that provides the unique quality in numerous furniture styles and, as you say, creates visual interest.

I agree with some of the other replies, there's not reason that you can't implement a G&G project. Just think through each step, ask questions and don't be afraid to add to the scrap bin in the name of getting it right.

David

[Bobby Slack]

David. Thank you for this great post. Is your comment about getting the vocabulary right on Greene and Greene design which is stopping me for the moment until I get my sketchup skills up.

Then I can share my sketch without throwing a single piece of wood in the bin.

Chester -

My pleasure and thank you for your kind comment. While Pasadena is the center of the Greene & Greene universe, you can see some of their work in other parts of the country. I see that you are in Michigan. The Detroit Institute of Art has the Blacker house dining room table in it's collection. Cleveland has a secretary from the Cordelia Culbertson house and, last time I was there, a living room chair from the Blacker house. Minneapolis, Chicago, St. Louis, Pittsburgh all have pieces as well. There are others but those I've listed are closest to you.

To my way of thinking there are a couple of keys to a successful Greene & Greene piece. First, it's subtle things. Make sure that edges and corners are sufficiently softened. Make sure that surfaces are silky smooth. Ebony, if used, should be highly polished. Small details make all the difference. The second thing concerns newly designed pieces in the G&G style. It is critical to employ the elements of the G&G vocabulary in a sensitive way. It's not enough to simply use cloud lifts and throw in a few ebony pegs. While these elements seem simple, using them well requires practice and, perhaps, trial and error.

As for your cabinetmaker acquaintance, I would argue that there is precious little furniture that doesn't include some degree of "affect." Certainly claw-and-ball feet aren't necessary for the structure of a piece. Only the most severely simple pieces are free of this. I would further argue that it's this "affect" that provides the unique quality in numerous furniture styles and, as you say, creates visual interest.

I agree with some of the other replies, there's not reason that you can't implement a G&G project. Just think through each step, ask questions and don't be afraid to add to the scrap bin in the name of getting it right.

David

[darrellpeart]

David. Thank you for this great post. Is your comment about getting the vocabulary right on Greene and Greene design which is stopping me for the moment until I get my sketchup skills up.

Then I can share my sketch without throwing a single piece of wood in the bin.

Chester,

I think you are going in the right direction. Draw - then think about it - then re-draw.

I like to imagine a design as having DNA - in other words, the design has its "building blocks" (design elements) to draw upon.

Think about where the particular detail is going - how would nature (DNA) utilize it to build the piece.

I recently observed a detail in the stair way of the Thorsen house - plugs that were not square but parallelograms - to reflect the shape of the piece they were attached to

Also - use a bit of caution in your early designs - it is so easy to over-emphasis an element . When we are new to the style and are first discovering all the great details there is a tendency to

focus on couple of those details and display them ( way too) prominently.

[Chester]

Chester,

I think you are going in the right direction. Draw - then think about it - then re-draw.

I like to imagine a design as having DNA - in other words, the design has its "building blocks" (design elements) to draw upon.

Think about where the particular detail is going - how would nature (DNA) utilize it to build the piece.

I recently observed a detail in the stair way of the Thorsen house - plugs that were not square but parallelograms - to reflect the shape of the piece they were attached to

Also - use a bit of caution in your early designs - it is so easy to over-emphasis an element . When we are new to the style and are first discovering all the great details there is a tendency to

focus on couple of those details and display them ( way too) prominently.

Darrell -

Again, thanks for taking an interest. I have finally started drawing ... and redrawing. This works well for me and I learn a lot in the process. I have currently come up with 3-variations for the 4-front cabinet doors (see attached). It looks like the side doors will be some sort of leaded-glass design ... along with the side cabinet panels that will intersect these side doors.

Still, a lot to do and decide ... and redraw. Have not decided whether to do a solid base or open-legged.

Stay tuned ...

[Chester]

Chester -

My pleasure and thank you for your kind comment. While Pasadena is the center of the Greene & Greene universe, you can see some of their work in other parts of the country. I see that you are in Michigan. The Detroit Institute of Art has the Blacker house dining room table in it's collection. Cleveland has a secretary from the Cordelia Culbertson house and, last time I was there, a living room chair from the Blacker house. Minneapolis, Chicago, St. Louis, Pittsburgh all have pieces as well. There are others but those I've listed are closest to you.

To my way of thinking there are a couple of keys to a successful Greene & Greene piece. First, it's subtle things. Make sure that edges and corners are sufficiently softened. Make sure that surfaces are silky smooth. Ebony, if used, should be highly polished. Small details make all the difference. The second thing concerns newly designed pieces in the G&G style. It is critical to employ the elements of the G&G vocabulary in a sensitive way. It's not enough to simply use cloud lifts and throw in a few ebony pegs. While these elements seem simple, using them well requires practice and, perhaps, trial and error.

As for your cabinetmaker acquaintance, I would argue that there is precious little furniture that doesn't include some degree of "affect." Certainly claw-and-ball feet aren't necessary for the structure of a piece. Only the most severely simple pieces are free of this. I would further argue that it's this "affect" that provides the unique quality in numerous furniture styles and, as you say, creates visual interest.

I agree with some of the other replies, there's not reason that you can't implement a G&G project. Just think through each step, ask questions and don't be afraid to add to the scrap bin in the name of getting it right.

David

David -

For me, there is something about G&G that is so complex and ornate ... but it seems to say to me, "you can build this" ... "it is within your range as a woodworker." But when I see queen-Ann legs and clawed feet, I feel like that is not within my range. I am a good woodworker with a very good eye for design and for what I like ... but I am not an artist!

[Bobby Slack]

Great post. I think that this is where we loose ourselves in the design (loose ourselves in a good way), thinking, looking at proportions, language and rhythm and then .. loose ourselves again in the process of craftsmanship doing the work.

Chester,

I think you are going in the right direction. Draw - then think about it - then re-draw.

I like to imagine a design as having DNA - in other words, the design has its "building blocks" (design elements) to draw upon.

Think about where the particular detail is going - how would nature (DNA) utilize it to build the piece.

I recently observed a detail in the stair way of the Thorsen house - plugs that were not square but parallelograms - to reflect the shape of the piece they were attached to

Also - use a bit of caution in your early designs - it is so easy to over-emphasis an element . When we are new to the style and are first discovering all the great details there is a tendency to

focus on couple of those details and display them ( way too) prominently.

[darrellpeart]

Darrell -

Again, thanks for taking an interest. I have finally started drawing ... and redrawing. This works well for me and I learn a lot in the process. I have currently come up with 3-variations for the 4-front cabinet doors (see attached). It looks like the side doors will be some sort of leaded-glass design ... along with the side cabinet panels that will intersect these side doors.

Still, a lot to do and decide ... and redraw. Have not decided whether to do a solid base or open-legged.

Stay tuned ...

Chester - I like the variation that is in the middle and to the right of the other two.

The arches in the examples on the left are working against one another - the DNA is mixed up and your eye is not drawn to the center (which should be the focal point - dominant section).

In the example on the right the DNA is consistent and your eye is drawn to the center - the two outside doors are visually in support of the center two as they should be.

Your design problem is very similar to a problem I faced a few years ago - a cabinet with four doors roughly the same size - this was my clients starting criteria.

I let the arch continue through all four doors and only put cloud lifts on the outside two doors - there is a bit of Krenov influence in this design as you can see - the block and dowel pull and the top and bottom rails passing through rather than the stiles running through. (See attached) I am not totally happy with this design and someday hope to re-visit it .

[Pete Bennett]

Chester - I like the variation that is in the middle and to the right of the other two.

The arches in the examples on the left are working against one another - the DNA is mixed up and your eye is not drawn to the center (which should be the focal point - dominant section).

In the example on the right the DNA is consistent and your eye is drawn to the center - the two outside doors are visually in support of the center two as they should be.

Your design problem is very similar to a problem I faced a few years ago - a cabinet with four doors roughly the same size - this was my clients starting criteria.

I let the arch continue through all four doors and only put cloud lifts on the outside two doors - there is a bit of Krenov influence in this design as you can see - the block and dowel pull and the top and bottom rails passing through rather than the stiles running through. (See attached) I am not totally happy with this design and someday hope to re-visit it .

I agree with Darrel the right hand design is way more harmonius I reckon that in a year from now you'll be just finishing the final polish.

[Wood&Light]

Chester -

I too agree that the right hand version is the most harmonious. But after looking a little longer, I thought "Why not continue the line from the inner doors to the outer doors?" Nothing says that the top rails have to be the same size (approximately) on all of the doors. Then I looked at Darrell's drawing and saw that that is exactly what he had done. Not surprising - Darrell's the man. If I were you, I'd try a version of the sketch that way just for comparison. By the way, great job.

David

[tombuhl]

Boy Chester, you struck some fine chords with your initial post. Marc himself has a frame video on a G&G inspired design. I believe he also posted some video on the class he took with Darryl. Lots of good stuff. Not sure if that was Guild or regular. Mr. Marc ????

[Chester]

Thanks much for all the good comments (so far). It is somewhat amazing ... almost everyone we have asked (on the forum and off) has liked the same set of doors.

Here is the lastest. Note that the side doors and the end panels will have custom designed leaded glass. I think that "glue chip" glass is what we are going to use. This is, from my understanding, clear glass that gets part of its surface chipped off from the application and drying of hide glue. I am still working on the design with my leaded-glass friend ... but it will be somewhat of a "pen-and-ink" drawing of tree branches that will carry from the front door panel (on each side), continuously, to the side panel ... kind-of a black on clear affect.

Here is the latest view of the cabinet ...

Now ... what to do with the base? If I make it "open-legged" it will be better on carpeting but force a somewhat shorter cabinet height. Open-legged will also keep me from using the "finger-jointed" base edging (like Darrell Peart's great Aurora desk). Maybe I can come up with a hybrid version? What do you think?

[Wood&Light]

Those of you who have been following this thread might be interested in my blog entry today. I'm writing about modern Greene & Greene furniture makers for CustomMade.com. Darrell Peart is one of the craftsmen I'm highlighting. So I decided to write about him for my blog today as well. It isn't in depth but there's a photo of a beautiful new piece he's added to his Aurora collection which is worth a look. I'll try to post the URL but I don't know if that will work. If not, a link to my site is in my signature. From there click on Essas and Blog in the menu. http://www.wood-and-light.com/blog/files/668573940d736cae88816318e9feb246-80.html

David

[Chester]

Chester - I like the variation that is in the middle and to the right of the other two.

The arches in the examples on the left are working against one another - the DNA is mixed up and your eye is not drawn to the center (which should be the focal point - dominant section).

In the example on the right the DNA is consistent and your eye is drawn to the center - the two outside doors are visually in support of the center two as they should be.

Your design problem is very similar to a problem I faced a few years ago - a cabinet with four doors roughly the same size - this was my clients starting criteria.

I let the arch continue through all four doors and only put cloud lifts on the outside two doors - there is a bit of Krenov influence in this design as you can see - the block and dowel pull and the top and bottom rails passing through rather than the stiles running through. (See attached) I am not totally happy with this design and someday hope to re-visit it .

Darrell -

You are crafty (no pun intended).

I just spent another 15-minutes … just looking at the Cradenza. Sheesh! I had always thought that you used normal rail and style construction for the doors … but … not! Your doors are amazing! Is the step-down of thicknesses on the rails and styles considered a “waterfall” affect?

As you know, my cabinet will be similar to this piece of yours … but mine will have leaded glass in the two side doors and end panels. I am also working on some way to make it at least partially … open-legged. I think that it will sit better on carpet with actual legs.

The way that you use all of the different “planes” on the same surface is intrigueing. On the front and each side, I counted 7-different planes (excluding the top). That’s a lot of levels!

Drawing this piece may be tougher than building it ... especially with all of the edge rounding.

[darrellpeart]

Chester - I would not consider the step down in my cabinet a waterfall although I can see how it might be considered so.

Yes, there is a lot of different planes in G&G designs - I feel it makes things interesting - really emphasizes each structural element and gives the design depth.

Darrell -

You are crafty (no pun intended).

I just spent another 15-minutes … just looking at the Cradenza. Sheesh! I had always thought that you used normal rail and style construction for the doors … but … not! Your doors are amazing! Is the step-down of thicknesses on the rails and styles considered a “waterfall” affect?

As you know, my cabinet will be similar to this piece of yours … but mine will have leaded glass in the two side doors and end panels. I am also working on some way to make it at least partially … open-legged. I think that it will sit better on carpet with actual legs.

The way that you use all of the different “planes” on the same surface is intrigueing. On the front and each side, I counted 7-different planes (excluding the top). That’s a lot of levels!

Drawing this piece may be tougher than building it ... especially with all of the edge rounding.

[Bobby Slack]

Regarding the "waterdown" effect. I was designing kitchen cabinet doors for my place in Colorado ... so How does this design work with inset doors? I see it difficult to pull off.

Should my cabinet doors just be overlay? Personally I don't like face frame construction from a space efficiency point. I achieve the look by applying 1-1/2 wide x 3/4" solid wood banding over two cabinets that are edge to edge. I achieve the look of a face frame cabinet and at the same time I can use pullouts that utilize the opening flush with the banding.

So ... going back to the waterdown effect ... this can only be done with overlay doors right?

Darrell -

You are crafty (no pun intended).

I just spent another 15-minutes … just looking at the Cradenza. Sheesh! I had always thought that you used normal rail and style construction for the doors … but … not! Your doors are amazing! Is the step-down of thicknesses on the rails and styles considered a “waterfall” affect?

As you know, my cabinet will be similar to this piece of yours … but mine will have leaded glass in the two side doors and end panels. I am also working on some way to make it at least partially … open-legged. I think that it will sit better on carpet with actual legs.

The way that you use all of the different “planes” on the same surface is intrigueing. On the front and each side, I counted 7-different planes (excluding the top). That’s a lot of levels!

Drawing this piece may be tougher than building it ... especially with all of the edge rounding.

[Chester]

Regarding the "waterdown" effect. I was designing kitchen cabinet doors for my place in Colorado ... so How does this design work with inset doors? I see it difficult to pull off.

Should my cabinet doors just be overlay? Personally I don't like face frame construction from a space efficiency point. I achieve the look by applying 1-1/2 wide x 3/4" solid wood banding over two cabinets that are edge to edge. I achieve the look of a face frame cabinet and at the same time I can use pullouts that utilize the opening flush with the banding.

So ... going back to the waterdown effect ... this can only be done with overlay doors right?

Bobby -

If you really look at the doors on Darrell's Aurora Cradenza, you will see a lot of things happening with the wood:

• They are not traditional rail & stile construction.
  
• The stile on the hinge side appears to be the thickest. Then the rails are thinner ... and then the opening-side stile is still thinner.
  
• And ... the stile on the opening side does not go top-to-bottom. It goes between the rails.
  

The doors are recessed and flush with the cabinet face ... and that is good. I assume that the panel is a floating recessed panel.

These doors, while do-able, would involve a lot of thought and planning ... and drawing!

[Chester]

Here is the latest. Because of a change in overall dimensions required, I have had to redraw my idea for this "low china cabinet." I have also softened some of the G&G features from my previous version. I ordered (and read) Darrell Peart's book on G&G and it has helped in my understanding.

Remember ... the two side cabinets will have leaded glass doors and leaded glass side panels (for the antique glassware).

It still amazes me that the "G&G affect" seems to be to design a totally square A&C piece of furniture with all rounded edges. How am I going to round all of those edges? I know that the router will not go into all of those tight spaces ! :-)

[jusfine]

Very interesting thread Chester! All the best on your project!

I hadn't seen any Greene and Greene furniture "in person" either, and was really wanting to do that, so my wife and I booked a private joinery tour earlier this month, flew to California, and spent some time in Pasadena. Worth every penny to see their creations first hand!

I think I would have missed most of the details if they would have let us take a camera inside, but the (almost four hours) tour jammed so much in such a short time I felt as if I went through a tornado...

I came out more enthusiastic and more in wonder that this was done over a hundred years ago.

How did they accomplish the quality of the furniture and design when for the most part, buffalo were still running around the West?

Attached are a couple of the photos we took of the exterior, everything ties together.

[ChetlovesMer]

I attach the

top by way of magnets (a trick I learned from my friend Tom Stangeland ) - so when lifted by the breadboard ends the top comes

off.

That is genius! I've had that problem and never thought of that solution. Absolutely great idea!