Good, Better...Bad?

[Mark Arnold]

It is rare to find a period furniture maker who  has not chosen to make a piece inspired by a masterpiece in <i>Good, Better, Best</i>. While there is a vast body of work appropriately described as American period furniture outside of <i>Good, Better, Best</i>, there are fewer than 200 pieces described as "masterpiece" in Sack's book.  I have often wondered, given our reliance on <i>Fine Points of Furniture</i> if the contemporary period furniture maker limits his own choices when choosing a piece to reproduce. Although Sack had to limit the number of pieces he could include in his book, by association with the Sack family name, the pieces appearing in the book will always retain an iconic status.

On the other hand, the Sacks were in the business of selling original antiques and the Sack legacy remains relevant. To what degree was  Albert Sack's selection informed by the likes and dislikes of the collectors he served?

 

[John McAlister]

Mark, I have been inspired by and made several pieces from Sack's books. I voted that Good, Better---etc is an opinion; but one that I, for the most part, agree with.
Since I am not making furniture to sell, I am in the fortunate position of looking at Good, Better and Best and then I decide which I like the best. Sometimes I will take part of a "Good" and work it in with other features of a "Best" etc. Obviously I'm not after an exact copy of anything.
However I cannot help but think that Sack's clients were more apt to influenced by Sack's likes and dislikes rather than the other way around! I may be a bit naive.
John McAlister

 

[msiemsen]

Both "Finepoints" and "The New Fine Points" show examples of similar pieces and explain why Sack prefers one design over another. He never states that these are the only masterpieces out there. They are ones he has access to and 3 or four similar ones to compare them to. I have always regarded them as design books. You could select the "good" piece and change the dimensions a little and vastly improve it. Most design books will give you the same advice. Sack just demonstrates it with antiques.
Mike

 

[Kent A. Ryan]

Mark,

I might be all wrong but I always looked at the Sack books as reference books that described the preferences of his clients and the price preferences of the antiques market as Sack saw it.  I look at the Fine Points books as a ready reference for the collector, seller etc. to employ as a yardstick in the comparative evaluation of similar pieces of furniture - of course this measurement then leads to pricing variances and considerations.  I look at the Good, Better, Best rating - for say a Secretary - as a classification a bit like one might encounter when valuing car models of old like maybe the 1955 Buick models  Special, Century, Roadmaster.  The more features, the higher the rating.  Of course the "features" in the Sack books are those features Sack and the market value.

I like the Sack books and have a fair respect for his classification but I don't always value the pieces (my own subjectivity?) in the same way that they are ranked in his book.  I guess sometime I just favor the Belair!

John McA. - It is very good to see you back here on the Forum.  I look forward to your "fine tuning" my response above!

Kent

 

[Mark Arnold]

John, Mike, Kent et al,

Fine Points is a departure from the other catalog-type of reference books that we all have and refer to. I'm not sure if every piece illustrated actually passed through the Sack establishment (of course, what piece hasn't) because many of the images come from other sources. Very few of the 'Masterpieces' in the book could even be had at auction for under seven digits. The pool of potential buyers for any of the 'Superior' or 'Masterpieces' is dwarfed by us tire-kickers so I'm not too convinced that the book was written for collectors--at least not collectors of iconic furniture. (Maybe for collectors of furniture books?)

I do use Good, Better, Best as a reference book. I'll find an image of a piece I like and then see if I can find more about it elsewhere, and like John, I don't build exact repros. I'll piece together elements that I appreciate from several sources. The members of SAPFM reproduce thousands of pieces of furniture every year. It would be interesting to know how many of these are inspired by or exact copies of a piece in Good, Better, Best...

 

[Dave Anderson]

I voted for the choice of the Sack's a major influence in reproductions.  There is no question that the book is one man's opinion, but having said that, consider the credentials of the man or more accurately, men.  The various generations of Sacks have probably had more furniture pass through their doors than almost any museum in existence including Winterthur.  That gives them a amazing basis for comparison that none of us will ever have the chance to equal.  I have, or more accurately, my wife has often used the book to choose what will be  built for our home.  In one particular she was having difficulty describing a drop leaf table she wanted for the living room picture window.  She leafed thru G,B,B and then pointed to the page with a pair of Boston Queen Anne breakfast tables and said, "that one".  I aked if she wanted something "similar to" the tables and the response was a strong and definitve, "No, that one!"  I will admit I cheated and scaled it up in length width and height since the actual height was too low for our knees to fit under the aprons.  The proportions remained the same and it worked out well.  The point is that GBB has a major influence in our house, far more than I do.

 

[walkerg]

I voted for the GBB as a major influence on reproductions. In my case for the last several years I have been studying period furniture design and it's roots in classical architecture. The more I learn, the more I line up behind Sack's opininions about masterfull work vs lesser quality. Don't know if Sack studied design formally at any point, but he obviously developed a keen eye for superior work. I refer to the book frequently to study examples of outstanding design but also to help understand and compare the major design forms that were prevelent in different regions and time frames. I value the book for the great collection of objects assembled, Sack's informed opinions, and as inspiration for peices I plan on making in the future.

George Walker

 

[pampine]

I voted for the "opinion" option, but only because that was the closest to my assessment. Yes, this is an opinion piece, but I think that some people's opinion is more valuable than others. I learned a lot from this book and continue to return to it for study.

Pam

 

[Larry]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  While the book is Sack's opinion, it is an educated opinion.  Take the Golden Rectangle as one example.  Those dimensions have proven to be pleasing to the eye over the centuries.  None the less, it was, and still is an opinion.  Albeit one that has stood the test of time for most "eyes"..  Sack's opinion will, in my opinion, stand the test of time.  The "Best" selections were selected for a reason.  The authors, the publishers, the editors and anyone else in that long list before the book hit the market.  I find it hard to believe that Sack's selections are market driven.  Any more than I believe the 1.618 ratio is market driven.

 

[Larry]

A good companion book for Sack's "Good, Better, Best" is The Power of Limits , Proportional Harmonies in Nature, Art and Architecture  by Gyorgy Doczi.    It is also good in understanding the impact proportion has on furniture.