For those who know the symptoms of cabin fever you'll understand my last post. I'm snowed in and have too much free time. More snow and digging out today; no time for parody.
It seems my one serious point in all that baloney was lost. That being the more diversity in form (and nomenclature), the more interest and participation--marketing 101. Build it, and they will come. Boxing started with no weight divisions. Now there are 7 and several sub- divisions and even the ladies are boxing--something for everyone.
Boxer classification is simple--bodyweight; knife classification (with all due respect, Roger) is mission impossible. I'm not just talking bowies, but all fixed blades. I've seen doubled guarded 5" clip points with generic handles (whatever that is) called fighters, baby bowies, hunters, utility knives, and camp knives. The "I know it when I see it" rule is in the eye of the beholder and only convergent (with others) on the most stereotypical examples (whatever they are). The betwixt and between knives are whatever suits your fancy. Knife classification now is helter skelter and serves like a flat tire. If not addressed today, it will be tomorrow, because the one constant in all evolving disciplines is specialization. And blurry systematics is the enemy of specialization, promotion, progress, and everything else.
Frankly, as a trivial collector, I couldn't care less about knife systematics. Visionaries who do care and can see beyond their collections should take stock and then do the math: where are all those new makers coming from and where are those new collectors going to come from?
Ken
