Mike,

I asked a fairly direct question and this has been met with an evasive response.

It might well be that you are either embarassed or confused by recent events or potentially even gagged from speaking out but what kind of message does this send out to the present Guild membership and aspiring members.

The work done and achievements made over the past 20+ years is not an irrelevance. This constitutes an investment of time, money, commitment and belief by people like me and others that this was and still is a worthwhile endeavour. In short we are all the building blocks upon which The Guild was founded and if The Guild fails then we have failed. Personally, I would prefer to do this in a way in which at least I know what it was that we all collectively did wrong such that members and supporters can take care not to repeat the same mistakes in the future.

Ken Hume

Hi Ken,

No, not embarrassed, not confused. Frustrated, by where we are, for sure.
But its awkward to try and cover ground that we've already discussed in members notes and communications.

We moved on from the management company because we couldn't turn things around fast enough regarding $$ flow from where we thought we were when we signed them up in Burlington. Lots of intertwined reasons for that - chief among them $$$$, or lack of it, actually.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that our history is irrelevant. Its actually on my mind all the time as I (we) have to make decisions regarding the running of the organization.

As to this:


The short answer?
Excerpted and paraphrased from an email that I've sent to many members:

We’ve worked hard to understand buildings that have stood for hundreds of years.
And we have applied that understanding to design, craft, and build structures that will last hundreds more.

Yet we, as an organization, have failed to look after ourselves with the same discipline and respect as we do our history, craft, and buildings.
Our timber frames may be standing for centuries.
Yet our ‘community’, our ‘guild’ is having trouble outlasting a subprime mortgage on a suburban McMansion.

This covers everything from (lack) of grant seeking (with a few exceptions for publications), care of our books, leveraging our legacy, monetizing our IP, protecting ourselves with regards to copyright, backing up our data, archiving our videos and photos, building a database driven easy to use website.... etc. etc. - as well as burning through our assets at an alarming rate that was not arrested soon enough...


I may sound negative about things, and critical, but I would have resigned long ago if I didn't think we could turn things around, if I didn't believe that we'll sort out the issues, and make peace with and respect our past while moving forward, to a place where the TFG is relevant to a greater audience, and we move from more of a 'club' to more of a 'guild'.

So Mike what, then, does the future look like, in your opinion?

Not a simple question of whether or not you foresee the guild existing, you have expressed that you do see that. Rather, in what form do you see the guild existing 5 years from now? This in regards to publications, projects, teaching, etc?

What is the guild doing now to prepare for this future?

What is the guild doing to promote the craft, and to promote those who are a part of this craft?

Most importantly, what is the guild doing to build up its members? How is the guild helping timber framers, and how will it do so in the future?

Personally, I believe this is what the guild should look at if is to prosper. Simply put, we are businessmen in tough times. We, for the most part, will not continue to invest our resources (time, money, etc.) in something that does not benefit us. I am not suggesting the guild does not benefit its members, but I do suggest that in terms of simple economics, this should be viewed as of the highest importance.

So you will then ask the question, how do we do that? I don't know. But I will do my best to think of what I can, give what I can, etc. in the hopes that I can provide at list a little bit of something valuable.

The regional meetings have been great, and have brought more interest to timber framing (and some new members), but they don't make money for the TFG, at least in the short term. As far as I know, everyone in the Guild is pro-regional meetings.

DL, I don't know if the Swiss Holzbau Schweiz runs like the French and German guilds. The French compagnon and German zimmerman programs are paid for by the government, through taxes paid by corporations. As far as I know, the guilds lobby (?) individual companies to have their corporate taxes allocated to their Guild. I can't even begin to imagine that happening in the US.

And Kevin, in your critique of the apprenticeship program, I think that you're talking about joiners and not timber framers. There a lot of guys (and a bunch of girls) cutting timber frame joints every day, but that's certainly not all of timber framing. It's really the easiest part. I can train a monkey to cut a mortise or tenon. You say that timber framers don't need to know scribing or forest management, but I would argue that not knowing either of those subjects (and the many more covered in the app. program) severely limits what you can do. A client asks you to put some round timbers from their property in their house, and you say what? Sorry, I don't know how to do that? Or even better, 'that's ridiculous, timber comes on a truck from Oregon.' A group of the best timber framers in the country came up with that curriculum, and you're opinion is that all you have to do is put in a couple of years in a shop to be a journeryman timber framer?

In the main...a professional ORG justifies its existence by supporting and contributing to the prosperity of its membership. Not withstanding the limitations of the GUILDs Non-Profit Charitable Org status...Public Education is a modality it can utilize to achieve, or at the least pursue that objective.

The failure to adequately utilize IP (Intellectual Property) Mike B. refers to, combined with the "high importance" emphasized by DL of producing tangible ($profitable$) benefits of membership, both reside in the realm of Public Education, which is a mandate of the GUILD Charter and Mission.

As a focus of rebuilding and/or recreating the GUILD going forward, a better understanding and plan for this single objective should be considered a primary ingredient. Learning how to educate the segment of the home building marketplace who is NOT looking for or even AWARE of TF homes is an option worth exploring; and perhaps more germane to our existence, relevance and prosperity than any other challenge. There are ways to achieve this which are available and accessible to all ORGs associated with the building industry. They include options for joining other ORGs such as the Building Systems Council of NAHB. This allows the TFG / TFBC to be in the "room" with Architects, Builders, Contractors, Attorneys, Planners, Suppliers and others associated with building nationally. The introduction could be very beneficial in educating the "Professional Public" on a larger scale than five architects at a time at a LOG and Timber Frame Home Show CEU class.

Combined with a similar imperative by the TFBC and individual TF companies in their outreach and advertising...we may for the first time connect to a broad spectrum of the home building marketplace who doesn't even know we exist. The very good news is that we have 99% of the marketplace (TF is lumped into the category of "alternative housing" which represents 1% of sales nationwide) to educate and stimulate. There are few vendors of any product who can claim that advantage.

Should our National Orgs commit to a strategy of accelerated outreach and Public Education, our membership will benefit by increased market demand...and our ORGs will benefit by increased participation. It's a WIN / WIN scenario.

As a supporting member of the TFG and TFBC, I believe there is no better way to sustain the Craft and its Crafters and the ORGs which represent them.

Jack Costantino, TFU
TFBC, BoD

hello everyone tonight

Hi Jack

That is quite a mouthful indeed, and I am having a hard time getting my old brain around all that technical stuff

I personally think that the Guild was formed originally to keep the old techniques alive for future generations, I don't really think that we need to expand to the point that the guild is unrecognizable so to speak, it may turn many off who want to just learn about the old ways and techniques of that era

I am a staunch advocate that we should try and not become entwined with the modern world's approach to building construction, to the point that we loose our unique identity

Just food for thought

NH

Hi Jack Constantino,

Welcome to the forum.

Hi Richard,

I tend to live my life in the past mainly because I can. There are a number of really old buildings within walking distance of my home however I once lived on the prairies and that option simply would not have been available to me and so what can a person domiciled in the new world do to learn "how to" timber-frame. My first introduction to the craft of timber-framing was the purchase of Ted Benson's first book in "The Bay" in Edmonton when it was minus 40 degrees outside. I read and re read this book over the winter becoming more aware of the possibilities that timber-framing could afford but at the same time struggled to reconcile what I was seeing in his book with what I had seen and experienced back in England. So started the never ending journey.

The Guild is all about communication be this written, drawn, photographed, demonstrated, practical demonstration, workshops, networking, personal contacts, good works, etc.

There is a real need to join up what The Guild practices and preaches today with discoveries still being made by building researchers in the hope that we can develop a much better understanding of what design aspects and practices form the basis to build buildings today that will hopefully still have a relevance in the built environment in another 700 years time.

A good example of this process is contained in an article by Duncan James on the use of frame saws versus pit (whip) saws as was recently published in Vernacular Architecture - (vol 43 pages 7-18). There is a complete absence of input into this article from acknowleged North American sources and possibly this presents an opportunity for Guild persons such as Jack Sobon and Richard Casselmaine (Northern Hewer) to help join up the dots.

Mike,

You have still not explained the recent move of the Guild HQ to Beckett, Mass.

The Guild currency is knowledge.

Regards

Ken Hume

Ken,

Ending our contract with the management company left us with a need to store our stuff, and a need to have someone manage members and the store. Sue Warden is taking on an executive secretary / business manager role for us. Brenda Baker resigned from the BoD and is working (at no cost to the TFG) as program director as we get a stable financial foundation back under us.

In our member emails and a recent edition of Scantlings this was outlined.

It’s good to see the discussion taking off. Two points were brought up by different members that shed light on the fact that the guild is made up of many opinionated people. Each with their ideas of what the guild should be. I myself am included in the above statement.
I wholly agree with bmike when he says

“We’ve worked hard to understand buildings that have stood for hundreds of years.
And we have applied that understanding to design, craft, and build structures that will last hundreds more.

Yet we, as an organization, have failed to look after ourselves with the same discipline and respect as we do our history, craft, and buildings.
Our timber frames may be standing for centuries.
Yet our ‘community’, our ‘guild’ is having trouble outlasting a subprime mortgage on a suburban McMansion.”

On the other hand I disagree with Timberwrestler when he by his own analogy describes a two tier system. One with semi-skilled simians and one with know it all Timber Framers.

“I think that you're talking about joiners and not timber framers.”

“ I can train a monkey to cut a mortise or tenon.”

It is true that the theoretical knowledge to cut a mortise and tenon is basic but cutting that joint well takes much longer and I don’t think that’s monkey business. I don’t think insulting the shop/production timber framer is the answer.

NH...after serving a 10 year carpenter apprenticeship starting on June 29,1959, I couldn't agree more with the importance of maintaining cultural and qualitative controls in what we do. And...to clarify...I am a carpenter NOT a Timber Framer. However I am truly privileged to work with and provide work for them. And that may be the essence of my concern. Since its highpoint of 1900 members in 2006 we have lost approximately 30% +/- of our membership. Not coincidentally this is the period roughly encompassing the recession, still alive and well today.

The empirical evidence is...as with all pursuits, our future, artisanal, cultural, craft bound, or otherwise is tied to our ability to sustain our day to day, payment to payment existence. For those TFers represented in the approximately 600 former members lost...this may not have been the case.

Our personal economies are just a slice of the whole pie. During the past 7 or 8 years that pie has shrunk to the size of a cupcake. I have always contended that...whereas that is very bad news for most workers, in the case of sustainable design and building, what we do has yet to be discovered by a significant piece of the housing market. It's far from my intention to diminish the amazing culture of our remaining practitioners. On the contrary, my hope is to preserve the craft by allowing more prospective homeowners to at least know it's an option to consider.

Beyond the abilities of individual companies and crafters...I believe our National ORGs can and should provide public education on a scale we individuals cannot. Of course the option is for our ORGs to disappear altogether and the crafters who created it in 1985 can return to the pre TF renaissance of the 1970's. As with all outcomes, which option we choose will be determined by our preferences and actions.

In my own case...after beginning sustainable design and building as part of my focus in 1975 it will be disappointing to say the least to watch the demise of our ORGs...but my life (at 72) will not be changed significantly. I'm in the last chapter of my book. Those who matter going forward are not.

For an excellent review of the life of the GUILD since its birth in 1985 read and/or reread Ken Rower's excellent article "WHITHER THE GUILD" in TF109 / September 2013 available in the ARCHIVE section of the TFG PUBLICATIONS page. I believe others on this forum have recommended it. As always, Ken defines and reports the events in his clear, precise style. He covers the history, economics and personal history without judgment or blame. Including the loss of Joel McCarty, and the period leading up to the assignment of various professional management groups.

As members...our future is in our own hands. Our BoD's WANT and NEED to understand the preferences and needs of their membership. Their contact info is available in the MEMBERS area of the TFG site. Contact them and share your thoughts.

And thank you again for your comments. We agree more than you know. Jack