G. Paul Houtz

Born:       Salem, Oregon, 1955 
Parents:    Arthur Houtz, Machinist, and Anne Houtz, Office Manager.
Education:  B.A. Music, Willamette University, 1978
            Master of Music, The San Francisco Conservatory Of Music, 1983

Employed:   Software Design Engineer,
            California Analytical Softwarwe Division,
            Hewlett Packard, Palo Alto, CA

Personal Comments:

I was totally bored with shop class in junior high and stopped taking
them in high school.   I got interested in tools and woodworking when
I decided to build a classical guitar for myself at 17.   I completed
the instrument but then was off to college, so no more woodworking.

My father was an accomplished woodworker, and also machinist/aerospace
worker, auto mechanic, etc.  Tools were very important to him as he 
literally supported his family with them.   He could fix or build
virtually anything, something which really impressed me.

I used to spend time with him in the shop.  He had a wood stove, and
we would spend an hour or so on week-end mornings warming ourselves
before it, and drinking coffee, and talking.   Now that he is gone,
I treasure that time more than almost anything else.

Since Music pays so well (:-), I decided to try computer programming,
and moved into software engineering gradually.

I married and bought a house in 1986, and got back into woodworking
in 1990 when we decided to remodel.  I built all the cabinets for
the new kitchen, and justified buying a lot of good machinery based
on the savings.   I became very interested in woodworking machinery,
probably some of my father's machinist blood got in me.

Now that the big kitchen project is finished, I am doing woodworking
more as a pleasurable escape.  I don't have a deadline to meet, so
I have decided to work with more traditional tools.

I also have to admit to being quite disgusted with the whole power
tool culture.   There is definitely something dishonest about some
of the tools that are coming out, and something wrong with the approach
to this craft that demands a power tool for every operation.

I guess the idiocy of it really hit me when I saw a letter to Fine 
Woodworking showing how to build a router sled to flatten a benchtop.
It would take longer to draw up the plans for the router sled than to
just take a Stanley #6 and do the job.

My new goal is to find out how to make needed furniture using hand tools,
and to test my hypothesis that most power tools are only efficient
in production settings, and that handtools can do necessary and beautiful
work nearly as fast as power tools in one-off projects.    I suspect
that there are a few powertools that are real time savers, or serve
a truly necessary purpose (like the Bandsaw), some that are overkill
for most home projects (like the Shaper), and some that are downright
unecessary for the hobby woodworker (jointer, dovetail jig, 3 HP router,
etc.).  

Finally, I am discovering a new connection to the wood, and feeling
a new pride in developing SKILL instead of equipment inventory.

-gph

Earlier Paul Houtz biographed,

> Now that the big kitchen project is finished, I am doing woodworking
> more as a pleasurable escape.  I don't have a deadline to meet, so
> I have decided to work with more traditional tools.
> 
> I also have to admit to being quite disgusted with the whole power
> tool culture.   There is definitely something dishonest about some
> of the tools that are coming out, and something wrong with the approach
> to this craft that demands a power tool for every operation.

   You're right, it can go completely overboard, and people can lose
   any sense they might have originally had.
 
> I guess the idiocy of it really hit me when I saw a letter to Fine 
> Woodworking showing how to build a router sled to flatten a benchtop.
> It would take longer to draw up the plans for the router sled than to
> just take a Stanley #6 and do the job.
> 
> My new goal is to find out how to make needed furniture using hand tools,
> and to test my hypothesis that most power tools are only efficient
> in production settings, and that handtools can do necessary and beautiful
> work nearly as fast as power tools in one-off projects.    I suspect
> that there are a few powertools that are real time savers, or serve
> a truly necessary purpose (like the Bandsaw), some that are overkill
> for most home projects (like the Shaper), and some that are downright
> unecessary for the hobby woodworker (jointer, dovetail jig, 3 HP router,
> etc.).  
 
   I don't totally agree with the idea that most power tools are only
   efficient in production settings....

> Finally, I am discovering a new connection to the wood, and feeling
> a new pride in developing SKILL instead of equipment inventory.
 
   .... I have a certain method of going about deciding whether power
   tools are useful or not for a given application.  First, in whatever
   and any and all cases, it's imperative to learn and "perfect" the
   handtool method of doing something.  _Given_ that, objectively then,
   would a power tool be a help or a hindrance?  Also factoring in
   esthetic considerations.

   In some cases, handtool methods are so obviously superior, it's just
   a no-brainer, when you take into account esthetics.  In other cases,
   even taking into account just doing a one-off, it's a fine line one
   way or the other, and it really depends on the situation.  E.g., would
   I sell my electric jointer and thickness planer?  I would have to be
   nuts ( present company excepted of course. ) 

   As well, for some of the things I do, which consist of large numbers
   of repetitive machine operations, a shaper is a genuine asset, and
   allows me to spend more time on the _creative_ end of things - a
   notion that methinks tends to get ignored here when we talk about
   the "esthetic advantages" of hand tools.  

   ( And in the above I'm not necessarily excluding one-off work that
   may involve such repetitive machine operations... )

   Ideally, I like to try to use the best tool for the job.  Sometimes
   it's hand tools, sometimes it's power tools...  of course you have to
   have seen both sides to be able to make this judgement. :-)

   Doug Dawson
   dawson@p...

Paul writes:

>Finally, I am discovering a new connection to the wood, and feeling
>a new pride in developing SKILL instead of equipment inventory.

 Ain't nobody here concerned about equipment inventory.

Ray T.

 Just Say, I need a new cabinetmaker chest. My old one is full of molding
planes already.

boy, Paul, talk about your politically correct bios!! 
A minor correction there--oldtools lets you continue to build inventory!
good to have you here
Tom

On Dec 16, 10:03am, Paul Houtz wrote:
> Subject: De-Lurker's Bio

-- nice bio snipped --

> I also have to admit to being quite disgusted with the whole power
> tool culture.   There is definitely something dishonest about some
> of the tools that are coming out, and something wrong with the approach
> to this craft that demands a power tool for every operation.
>
> I guess the idiocy of it really hit me when I saw a letter to Fine
> Woodworking showing how to build a router sled to flatten a benchtop.
> It would take longer to draw up the plans for the router sled than to
> just take a Stanley #6 and do the job.

Ah yes, just the nudge I needed to drudge up a story I'd been meaning
to relate on the Porch, but forgot until now.  I too have felt a little
queasy when faced with some of the methods discussed in the power-tool-full
world of woodworking these days, and this one took the cake.

A friend of mine who is a dedicated electrical woodworking toy collector
attended one of the local woodworking shows a while ago and came back with
lots of toys and stories.  He attended some workshops, and one in particular
inspired him very much.  In it, the instructor showed the audience how to
use a router to make FAKE dovetails.  The joint, I think a drawer front, was
actually constructed with bisquicks, but these tricky little inserts of
wood were laid into the drawer sides to make it appear that dovetails had
been used.  I'm sorry I can't relate the exact construction details, but
I found the whole thing so silly and a little revolting, that I apparently
didn't pay very close attention.  I do remember having to hold myself in
check later as I related the story to some non-woodworking friends of mine
who appreciated my basic sentiments, but don't share my passion.

So, while I use power (and even bisquicks) when I think it makes sense, I've
definitely found a passionate heart inside which knows when some woodworking
method just seems totally wrong.

My $0.02, and my appologies to anyone on the list who likes these little
fake dovetails.

- Bill (Who tuned up and made a handle for a KK 1/2" firmer last night to
        make some REAL m&t's tonight.)

-- 

> 
> My new goal is to find out how to make needed furniture using hand tools,
> and to test my hypothesis that most power tools are only efficient
> in production settings, and that handtools can do necessary and beautiful
> work nearly as fast as power tools in one-off projects.    I suspect
> that there are a few powertools that are real time savers, or serve
> a truly necessary purpose (like the Bandsaw), some that are overkill
> for most home projects (like the Shaper), and some that are downright
> unecessary for the hobby woodworker (jointer, dovetail jig, 3 HP router,
> etc.).  
> 
> Finally, I am discovering a new connection to the wood, and feeling
> a new pride in developing SKILL instead of equipment inventory.
> 
> -gph

Welcome aboard, Paul.
Just got one question:

	Do you still have your pneumatic nailer?

(Porch needs some additions to hold all of us and I'm
tired of swinging this gol-danged hammer.)

Carl

On Mon, 16 Dec 1996 14:25:22 -0500, you wrote:

>So, while I use power (and even bisquicks) when I think it makes sense, =
I've
>definitely found a passionate heart inside which knows when some =
woodworking
>method just seems totally wrong.

I think fake anything in woodworking sucks. Including drawers and
other falsies.

"Involvement and Commitment are a lot like ham and eggs the chicken is =
involved but the pig is=20
   commited"

[The posts to oldtools this week have been very interesting.  I'm now
up to 46 posts lying in my inbox that I want to either reply to or at
least re-read.  So I've gotten a bit behind.]

Doug, talking about his mix of hand and power tool use, said :

>   As well, for some of the things I do, which consist of large numbers
>   of repetitive machine operations, a shaper is a genuine asset, and
>   allows me to spend more time on the _creative_ end of things - a
>   notion that methinks tends to get ignored here when we talk about
>   the "esthetic advantages" of hand tools.  

I've noticed that since I became almost entirely handtool-oriented 
the issue of creativity has almost disappeared from the picture.  I 
think that when I used power tools, since they did most of the work, 
creativity was important because that's where I felt personally 
involved, the only place to squeeze in some originality.

Using hand tools, just their use is original in itself, compared to
all the machined-made stuff out there.  Now I get much more pleasure
from making a very simple 4-piece bench entirely by hand than I got
making intellectually challenging designs by machine.

I now find it pretty well impossible to use a powered surfacing 
machine, be it jointer, planer or router.  The reason is that once
the machine has touched a piece of wood it is suddenly :too late: for
me to get involved.  The piece has had all emotional possibilities
wiped completely off its surface.  Trying to 'put back' some of that
by going back over the surface with a handtool doesn't make any sense
to me.

I find that there is a very definite look to a piece of wood that has
gone from rough to smooth through the various stages of surface 
preparation using hand tools.  There's something soft and deep about
such a surface.  Quite different from a surface that has been power
planed, even if it was then smoothed by hand.

Paul

Montreal (Quebec)

On Wed, 18 Dec 1996, Paul Pedersen waxed almost poetic about hand tooled 
wood vs. machined wood thusly:

> I find that there is a very definite look to a piece of wood that has
> gone from rough to smooth through the various stages of surface 
> preparation using hand tools.  There's something soft and deep about
> such a surface.  Quite different from a surface that has been power
> planed, even if it was then smoothed by hand.

I love to hand tool.  I love to see the wood progress from rough-sawn to 
project-ready.  Old rank-set jack plane (in lieu of the scrub plane I don't 
yet have); better, finer-set jack; jointer and/or smoother; sometimes 
scraper.  I still sand, but not much (and I never admit to it).

This being said, I don't believe Paul's claim.  I _want_ to believe it,
but I can't imagine that the wood knows whether the jointing, for
instance, was done by a loud, finger-eating monster with a plug-in tail or
by a strong, silent-type with a thin mouth and a frog behind its throat. 
I am certain most of us can tell the difference between a hand-smoothed
piece of stuff and something that got left out under the ROS, but I can't
see how the use of power tools at preliminary stages can be detected. 
Once I plane off the saw marks, can you tell if I cut with a band saw or a
bow saw?  After I lift off a full-length shaving, can you tell if I had
previously dimensioned with many tiny rotating knives or one large one? 
There is some compression and burnishing that goes on, but it seems to me 
that the final stages are what make this difference. 

Of course, I am far from expert.  Is it true?  Can one tell hand work 
from machine work to this extent?

Paul, 
  who would be pleased as punch to be wrong in this case.

Paul Swets, the unbeliever, laments :

>This being said, I don't believe Paul's claim.  I _want_ to believe it,
>but I can't imagine that the wood knows whether the jointing, for
>instance, was done by a loud, finger-eating monster with a plug-in tail or
>by a strong, silent-type with a thin mouth and a frog behind its throat. 

You haven't seen my hand-dimensioned boards :-)  Wind, cup, tearout.
If I'm lucky slightly hollow faces to a board, if I'm not slightly
rounded faces.  I love beautifully smooth surfaces as much as anyone
else, but I don't always get them and it doesn't mean that the board
is perfectly flat.

While writing what I did this morning I kept hearing the voices over 
in rec.ww last year where the discussion was : "if a craftsman is so
good that he can produce the perfect surface, what would be the 
difference between that and a machined-perfect surface ?"

My answer is that there would be no difference.  If you're after the
perfect surface, you might as well use a machine and do it this year
instead of waiting to the end of your life when you're good enough.

There's another thing with using handtools.  I'm getting more and more
into the habit of producing and fitting one piece at a time into the
eventual whole of whatever I'm working on.  With this approach, it 
doesn't matter if things are perfectly square, straight, flat or plumb.
I make fewer mistakes since I usually mark a piece from its neighbours
already in place.  The result is that the entire piece is not perfect
dimensionally, but the pieces fit much better together that if it was
(unless I did it by machine to thousandths tolerance like I used to).

It is the sum of all these slight imperfections that I find softens
the look of the wood and gives depth to a piece.

Paul P   (who keeps forgetting to add on that extra P)

Montreal (Quebec)

** Reply to note from dawson@p... Mon, 16 Dec 1996 12:15:05 -0500 
 
Doug Dawson writes: 
 
>    
> snip... 
>    
>    Ideally, I like to try to use the best tool for the job.  Sometimes 
>    it's hand tools, sometimes it's power tools...  of course you have to 
>    have seen both sides to be able to make this judgement. :-) 
>    
 
Amen to this.  For some things hand tools are clearly superior, for some I 
find power tools superior.  Sometimes I use the hand tools just to learn. 
 
My goals are not always the same.  If I am building something for the wife 
and she wants it NOW I use the quicker method.  If I am building for me or 
for learning I will use the fun method.

ernie   
The Arizona tool sink, IT #22