Copying.

There are those who seek to copy, and then there are those who join with the maker in spirit and take his knives further, together although the first maker may be present only through his knives.

Consider Dr. Lucie, he knew Scagel, has collected and studied his knives thoroughly, worked very hard to develop his abilities with hammer and heat treat. Are Dr. Lucie's knives a copy? I feel they are a colaboration, he is working with Scagel through his knowledge both historically and presently in a manner that very few could achieve.

When Buster Warrenski sought to copy the King Tut Dagger, he became very involved with the origonal maker or makers. The copy took some invlolved research into materials and craftmanship. It takes a lot of knowledge and ability to develop copies of some knives. This kind of copy goes a long way beyond simple copy.

Some knives require a lot of participation with the the origonal thoughts and bring copy to a new realm. Those who develop a true representation of the origonal spirit can in a way be a part of the maker.

Many copy the Loveless design, but very few achieve the spirit one can know when he holds an origonal Loveless. It takes a lot of learning on the part of the man who judges the knives, those who can feel, hear or otherwise know the spirit have done their homework.

I am attempting to describe a very small percentage of the population, the makers who would make the origonal maker proud.
 
Hmmm.

I don't really know what to say to this Keith. But with your mention of Eds' knives being copied I feel as though you are talking to/about me. Likewise with Ed when he talks about the copier (me) trading thoughts with the maker (Him) so that the two together can produce a better knife. One thing that I would like to say is that I, like Art, called Ed and asked if he would mind if I made knives like his. Needless to say I received his blessing and have spent several hundred hours trying to understand the WHY and the WHAT FOR. I have also spent alot of time with Ed on the Willow Bow, talking about and expermenting with ways to make a better performing blade and hope to be able to continue to do so. In addition to the time I have spent with Ed, I have spent untold hours in my own shop duplicating many of the test that Ed himself did. Most of the time getting the same results. On the occassion that I get different results Ed is the first person that I call.

In conclusion and before this post starts to sound like a defense, If, Ed ever wishes that I not make knives similar to his, all he has to do is to mention this to me, and second Although I am putting my initials on the knives that I make They are always refered to as ED Fowler style knives. THAT IS all I am going to say. :(
 
Geez Tom, are the waves blown out or something?

Makers get copied, that is just the way of things. Ya, it kinda sucks that they are TOTAL ripoffs, but these things happen.

You gonna get on my ass becuase a just finished a cord wrapped bowie? Am I trying to ride Mitchs shirt tail? NO WAY! I just thought it would be fun to do one.

Every maker works hard on thier designs, you and Strider are no differant.

Settle down and take a few deep breaths buddy.
 
Like I said Tom, Ya it kinda sucks. But I see it like the whole Rolox watch thing. Guys who are into knives enough to buy a Strider are not going to buy those knock offs. And guys that would buy that junk are not going to drop 20 times the money for the real deal. If they were a good steel (ATS or S30V) then it MIGHT hurt Striders business. But as it sits I do not see it as any big deal.

I think we all fully understand that if we get popular, our ideas will be ripped off. Its just all part of the business.
 
Bill, to tell you the truth, I was not really even thinking about you and Ed when I started this thread. You do most definitely make knives that look similar to Ed's. Even in these knives you have developed a definite style of your own and I can tell the difference between one of your knives and one of Ed's very easily. I fully realize that the knives you make are done with the total blessing of Ed Fowler and do not consider them to be the type of copying that I was referring to in my first post in this thread.

In truth, I never mentioned anything about anyone copying Ed's knives. I did post that I did not think that it was likely that Ed had copied his knives from knives that Native Indians were making several thousand years ago, but that was the only mention that I made of Ed's knives. Sorry if somehow I touched a nerve with this topic.

It is when I see one makers knife that looks almost exactly like another makers knife that I feel a little disappointed in the lack of imagination I see.

I can see how the above comment that I made might lead you to think that it was you that I was referring to. This is not the case. I was referring to makers that copy designs without the knowledge or permission of the the original designer to do so.


Edited to correct a typo.
 
Keith,

No nerve here and IF I would have read this post today when I was rested and not last night after just getting home from a three day show and a day at a hammer in, I would have been able to tell that you were not talking specifically about me and Ed. I was not trying to jump on you about it sorry.

Bill
 
not to get all mystical or anything, but i feel there is something really magical about the creation of a new knife.
when you take 5 months to sit down each day and slowly make a blade you have to end up putting something of yourself into that blade.

i think this comes out part as your style.. people start to be able to recognise your work and know it simply by look because it holds the elements that people know come from you.
the point i am making is this: when you copy a piece .. you can still be flexible enough to place a part of your own style into the blade .. the blade doesnt come out as a total exactness and there seems to be a point of someone else making this blade and not just going to the original source to begin with.
if someone should take a blade and make an exact duplicate .. there seems little point in that.

but then there are some styles of blades that are, as perviously stated, have become more then just a single makers respective style.
the loveless blades have moved onto more of a legendary status .. though they are one of the most reproduced style out there .. they end up being shown (IMO) as a makers interpretation. the slightest difference to the original comes out and shows itself to the collector.
its kinda hard to put into a few words.

as for whether or not i like people copying designs .. i havent had this happen personally.
but i do remember that quite a few years ago when i was starting out, a friend wanted a blade kinda like one he saw online .. it was one of Neil Blackwood's knives .. and i did email him and asked his permission to make something based on his blade design.
did it turn out the same? ... nope, not at all.
but it was the base of inspiration and so out of respect i thought it was the least thing i could do.

but thats just my weird thoughts on the matter.
--end rant mode--

D.
 
Back
Top