Karl Holtey

[Rhossydd]

Rhossydd have a look at this video,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYEFINB ... 45ygXN7RL6
And if you still don't understand then you never will.

OK, I've just watched that, but I still see no particular signs of development, innovation or influence on others* that people seem to be claiming here.
OK I understand that A2 tool steel is significant, but did he create it himself or just find that it was suitable for hand tool use ?

It seems odd to me that at the price charged, David Barron still had to flatten the back of the plane's blade and put a micro bevel on it. A thousand pound plane not ready to use out of the box ? really ?
In fact the video doesn't really get some things right. African Blackwood "unplanable" ? I've just been out to my workshop and my Stanley 020 block plane seems to cope OK with it and it hasn't had the blade sharpened very recently either.

Don't get me wrong; I fully understand that these are exquisitely and precision made tools, and given that quality of manufacture, the price has too be very high.

Whether there's 'Art' in them is open to discussion, but I think a lot of that will rest on if the maker(artist?) is building them for artistic impression or not.

*Maybe the innovation was creating a market for bespoke planes for collectors with fat wallets. There do seem to be a few other now chasing the market for people prepared to pay for exclusivity. No problem with that, but does it really have an influence on hand tool design overall ?

 

[Rhossydd]

I'll bet if Turner, Constable or da Vinci were still drawing breath, they'd be struggling to get £10/hr.

You might like to learn a little about these people before making such silly claims.
Leonardo da Vinci was hugely celebrated and successful in his own time.
Turner was hardly struggling either. Have you seen Mike Leigh's recent film on his life ?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Surely, following that logic....just dying would automatically positively affect the value of all artists work wouldn't it? Is there nothing of value at all in the work itself that justifies those telephone number type prices at auction?

My remark was intended to be a bit tongue-in-cheek. Obviously missed the mark slightly! Oh well...

More seriously, there are all sorts of factors in the art market, and 'fashion' or 'snob value' become more important the higher up the price chain you go. Scarcity is obviously another factor; whilst an artist is still adding to the output, that factor is depressed, but when a fashionable artist stops working, there will only ever be a set supply to satisfy demand.

I'm not sure the woodworking collectables or antique tool market is completely free of fashion or snob value, but it seems to suffer less of it than some markets.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

You want tools and art - Bridge City tools, surely?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I'll bet if Turner, Constable or da Vinci were still drawing breath, they'd be struggling to get £10/hr.

You might like to learn a little about these people before making such silly claims.
Leonardo da Vinci was hugely celebrated and successful in his own time.
Turner was hardly struggling either. Have you seen Mike Leigh's recent film on his life ?

....and a very pleasant evening to you too!

PS. No, I haven't seen Mike Leigh's film. I haven't watched a film in nearly thirty years. I've read some great books, though, including 'The Story of Art' by E.H.Gombrich. Though t'was a few years ago, to be fair...

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Surely, following that logic....just dying would automatically positively affect the value of all artists work wouldn't it? Is there nothing of value at all in the work itself that justifies those telephone number type prices at auction?

My remark was intended to be a bit tongue-in-cheek. Obviously missed the mark slightly! Oh well...

More seriously, there are all sorts of factors in the art market, and 'fashion' or 'snob value' become more important the higher up the price chain you go. Scarcity is obviously another factor; whilst an artist is still adding to the output, that factor is depressed, but when a fashionable artist stops working, there will only ever be a set supply to satisfy demand.

I'm not sure the woodworking collectables or antique tool market is completely free of fashion or snob value, but it seems to suffer less of it than some markets.

Fair comment about the tongue in cheek nature....I wasn't being overly serious with my response....more a muse really as I am intrigued by the notion that, particularly the masters (like those we've mentioned) output has value that is created by the artist and isn't bestowed through any market forces. In other words, if you took the Mona Lisa for example and allowed it to be released into 4 completely separate art markets, where those markets were entirely discrete from one another (obviously a theoretical only experiment), would the painting naturally rise to the highest value niche in each of those markets? In other words is it's value inherent in the painting or is it inherent in the culture and people who trade, discuss, promote art etc. If in the painting, we would expect it to rise to the top of any market it entered. If it were culturally derived then only those works that appealed to the zeitgeist of the moment would become valuable. Now I accept that in real life you cant separate the culture from the painting since they're unpickable. But I just rather like the idea that the quality of the work is what drives it's ultimate value, and I'm quite prepared to be told that view is naive. I still like the idea though since it gives eternal hope that masterpieces will always rise to the top and will always command decent value. Gives something to aim for

 

[Rhossydd]

But I just rather like the idea that the quality of the work is what drives it's ultimate value, and I'm quite prepared to be told that view is naive.

No naivety, you're absolutely correct. As an example go to the National Gallery's Sainsbury wing and you'll see 'Masterpieces' of renaissance art that have no attribution, they have have their value simply through the quality of the art work.

Similarly Holtey's planes should always command premium prices, even if the maker's name or reputation is forgotten or lost, just because they are so well made. (although that doesn't automatically make them works of Art)

 

[n0legs]

Well I'm giving up on the savings, I'll never afford one now
Good luck to Karl for the future, congratulations on your retirement.

 

[Paddy Roxburgh]

Bob, I'm afraid that the value of art is not in the actual piece. Why this is I'm not sure, but as evidence I have a friend whose truck was painted by Banksy many years ago before the art world decided his work was important/valuable. Her house was falling down and she decided to sell a panel of the truck to pay for repairs. Before they were verified as genuine Banksy's they were of no value and she could not get his agents to verify them. Eventually he verified them and she got enough money to fix her house ( I don't know the actual sums but they go for upwards of £100,000). To me this is all odd as they were the same thing whether painted by him or someone else. This is a big difference between art and craft. If a piece of furniture that was supposed to have been made by Alan Peters turned out not to have been made by him it may lose some value, but the fact that it was fine enough for people to have thought he made it means it is still a fine piece with an intrinsic value. This is not the case with art works. Even a violin that turns out not to be made by Stradivarius will have an intrinsic value if it was fine enough to possibly have been made by him. Perhaps its value goes from 1,000,000 to 20,000 but it still has a "real" value.
I have just had a couple of customers in our dock who make art for Gavin Turk. The "craft" is theirs not his, but they are on £100 a day whilst his works sell for 6 and 7 figure sums. My bed is at least as messy as Tracey Emin's and my drawings are probably better, but neither are of any value.
I'm not anti modern art but there is something weird about the market. Banksy's work is street culture, often about radical politics and counter culture, I actually like it, but who are these idiots who pay £100,000 upwards for a stencil, you can't buy your way into counter culture.
I'd prefer a Holtey to Banksy any day, but this is partly because they are not art, they are a real thing, it doesn't matter who made them, it is what they are, unfortunately I am very unlikely to ever own either so I'll just be happy with my Stanleys and pictures by my seven year old daughter (somewhat better than Tracey Emin's).
Paddy
Paddy

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Interesting.

 

[John K]

An exact copy of a Karl Holtey plane would not be as valuable as one made by Karl himself, which is partly why it is, in fact, art.

 

[RogerP]

"Art" or objects of great rarity or value are bought for investment not for looking at or using.

The item is locked away in a bank vault and brought out and sold on a few years later when it has increased sufficiently in value. Then it goes into the new owner's bank vault.

Occasionally they appear at a heavily guarded exhibition for a few weeks to prove they still exist and to garner interest from prospective buyers.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

It always amuses me when galleries have abstracts for months before they're informed that they've hung them upside down.

 

[bugbear]

An exact copy of a Karl Holtey plane would not be as valuable as one made by Karl himself, which is partly why it is, in fact, art.

That's a bold and unsupported statement.

IMHO the merit of Karl Holtey's planes is partially the design, but mainly the extraordinary (and unique) level of precision and care in the manufacture.

If (and it's a colossal "if") an exact copy could be made, I (for one) would value it equally with a Holtey.

If you're looking for a tool that is priced like Art, I suggest the a Krenov smoother is a better choice, although they
may be selling as souvenirs or memorabilia.

BugBear

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

An exact copy of a Karl Holtey plane would not be as valuable as one made by Karl himself, which is partly why it is, in fact, art.

That's a bold and unsupported statement.

IMHO the merit of Karl Holtey's planes is partially the design, but mainly the extraordinary (and unique) level of precision and care in the manufacture.

If (and it's a colossal "if") an exact copy could be made, I (for one) would value it equally with a Holtey.

If you're looking for a tool that is priced like Art, I suggest the a Krenov smoother is a better choice, although they
may be selling as souvenirs or memorabilia.

BugBear

That's a little harsh on John's statement BB! This is the perennial problem with art isn't it. What constitutes it is very much in the eye of the beholder, it's subjective, no more gossamer than a fleeting opinion perhaps?

But from the perspective of a Hotley plane I really think we're all missing something here which is confusing the issue. The plane in question is obviously a triumph of engineering in terms of the materials, the design, the construction and the tolerances. So on that level it's FUNCTION is a total and utter success and therefore woody's crave it's ownership because they know it will work well at it's job. But maybe less, maybe more, maybe just equally, it's FORM seems also to attract, to move, to motivate people in it's direction. So I would contend it has subtly crossed the line between tool and call it "sculpture in metal" as an art form. In other words it co-exists, in both camps. it's both rational and functional yet aesthetic and "beautiful" simultaneously. I'm not sure I would be in such a hurry to denigrate an opinion that promotes it's aesthetic qualities myself.

It does feel weird I'll freely admit that, thinking of a plane as sculpture, but if it moves the onlooker emotionally then why on earth can't it be classified in the art section of life?

 

[John K]

Thank you, Bob. I'd add that the value of a piece of art is also impacted by CONTEXT. What were the circumstances under which it was created? What influence did it have? Who commissioned it? The story behind a particular work adds to its meaning and shapes how we view it. Aesthetics are a symbolic form of communication. When I look at a Karl Holtey plane, I see a man skillfully laboring to pay tribute to and to dignify (with his entire being) the value of tools as an essential part of the human spirit and the ingenuity of mankind.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

wow.....[I've gone to roll a spliff]

 

[woodpig]

Can I take it these planes aren't intended to be used but are for collectors?

 

[John K]

I would guess that a large percentage of Karl's planes are cherished but unused. Others are used regularly. And others are used for special works. It's up to the owner. David Charlesworth has one.

 

[MIGNAL]

Probably quite a large percentage too. I think many will see them as being too precious to use, at least on any real day to day woodworking basis. They probably use their Stanley circa 1978 for that.