Fixin' it? "Code of ethics"

[Kevin Jones]

How many would consider the following a true statement ?

Some, perhaps most , but certainly not all ) collectors have no issue with Merritt doing some ( or most ) of the work on a Loveless Knife and it still being marked a Loveless , but few if any other makers who did the same thing would be met with the same acceptance.

I'd say it's pretty accurate as well.
And I'm not too surprised that the practice is accepted with Bob but not other makers considering Bob Loveless' enormous contribution to custom knives.

Regardless of whether you appreciate Loveless knives or not, I doubt that there's many who would dispute that there's certainly not many if any makers who have done more to put custom knives on the map than Bob Loveless.

 

[brownshoe]

I think your statement is probably true, but I think most collectors don't know squat about who really did all the work on a knife and its sheath. Why do I think this? Because at knife shows most collectors never ask if the knife is sole authorship and only about 25% of all makers advertise sole authorship.

 

[Ramm9]

As the infamous Schultz in Hogan's Heroes used to say...."berwy interwesting"

Actually Shultz coined "I know nothing" and "Jolly Jokers". I think your quote is either the renowned hunter Elmer Fud or Artie Johnson on "Laugh In".

Sorry for the "off topic".

 

[Hmathews]

I don't have a problem giving credit where credit is due..... and I do, often.

The makers that I really appreciate are the ones that are getting long in the tooth, still love making knives, and still do. Even though their quality shows that their eyesight is not what it used to be and their limbs aren't as strong as they once were. I passed on a couple of knives this year that looking back I would like to have because of the guys that made them and I don't plan on letting them slip past me again.

 

[ELDE]

The makers that I really appreciate are the ones that are getting long in the tooth, still love making knives, and still do. Even though their quality shows that their eyesight is not what it used to be and their limbs aren't as strong as they once were. I passed on a couple of knives this year that looking back I would like to have because of the guys that made them and I don't plan on letting them slip past me again.

Yes , yes , and yes !!!!! ( did I say yes ? )

ELDE

 

[John T Wylie Jr]

I'd say it's pretty accurate as well.
And I'm not too surprised that the practice is accepted with Bob but not other makers considering Bob Loveless' enormous contribution to custom knives.

Regardless of whether you appreciate Loveless knives or not, I doubt that there's many who would dispute that there's certainly not many if any makers who have done more to put custom knives on the map than Bob Loveless.

Thanks Kevin.

While I do appreciate what Bob has done for custom knives , I still don't feel that alone should means he gets one set of standards and everyone else has another set. But it is great to hear everyone's views on this subject.

Brownshoe made the comment about sole authorship , which has been discussed before , but it is a valid point , what % of work should be done by the maker on the knife bearing that individual makers name ?

lets not talk about Bob in this example , imagine it being another maker :

This maker has shop help do everything but final edge and logo , should it bear the makers name ?

Is it different if the maker just has the help profile and ruff in the grinds ? Ruff fit the handle ?

If the maker who puts his name on the blade , doesn't do that majority of the work (lets say 51+% ), then it is not an individual made knife , it is a shop made knife , correct ?

Unless of course the logo is " John & Sons " for example ( my kids don't help me , well other than help spend my $$$ ).

 

[Jose Reyes]

Jose - fair enough - it's a long thread. Had you read it, though, you would know that NOBODY CALLED ED A HYPOCRITE. This was a completely made-up accusation by David, which he then sought to refute. I asked him to point to the source of this phantom charge of hypocrisy (which he attributed to me). Unsurprisingly, I am still waiting.

It had been suggested - by me and others - that Ed's positions on refinishing and "Loveless" were difficult to reconcile. They are. But this had NOTHING whatsoever to do with Ed's acknowledgment of a past "mistake".

Roger

Rog,

Sorry, I think I used the word on my own by reading it through the lines. It seemed to me your original query was one you knew the answer to, as if to say, you did something similar. I did think your response to Ed's candid post was classy though. My post was not really directed soley at you, just the impressions I got reading through the thread.

 

[Jose Reyes]

Jose,
I am happy you're alive and well. Welcome back!
David

David,

Thanks for the welcome. Good OP, this many pages and there are still other questions you asked that we can delve into. These forums are all about debate and differing opinions so I wouldn't take it personally. Being a DA Roger's going to make some valid points and leave very little to counter, maybe seeming a little bit aggressive. I've known him to be a stand up guy though so better to agree to disagree than get into any spats.

 

[Jose Reyes]

I don't have a problem giving credit where credit is due..... and I do, often.

The makers that I really appreciate are the ones that are getting long in the tooth, still love making knives, and still do. Even though their quality shows that their eyesight is not what it used to be and their limbs aren't as strong as they once were. I passed on a couple of knives this year that looking back I would like to have because of the guys that made them and I don't plan on letting them slip past me again.

Good post, written like a true collector. :thumbup:

 

[RogerP]

Rog,

Sorry, I think I used the word on my own by reading it through the lines. It seemed to me your original query was one you knew the answer to, as if to say, you did something similar. I did think your response to Ed's candid post was classy though. My post was not really directed soley at you, just the impressions I got reading through the thread.

Actually Jose - I thought the answer would be "Nope, never had, never would, my name on a knife means I made it and only I made it." Which would, of course, beg the question: "Why then is it perfectly okay with you for a maker to put his name on a knife he didn't (solely) make, when you take such extreme umbrage at one maker merely refinishing the work of another? Frankly, I'm still waiting on an answer to that one.

The circumstance Ed described may well be known to those who follow his work closely - but while I admire both his work and his writing, I wouldn't really put myself in that category.

I was sincere in thanking Ed for being candid in revealing that there was one exception to what I had fully expected to be the rule.

Roger

 

[2knife]

......

 

[Kevin Jones]

Thanks Kevin.

While I do appreciate what Bob has done for custom knives , I still don't feel that alone should means he gets one set of standards and everyone else has another set. But it is great to hear everyone's views on this subject.

Brownshoe made the comment about sole authorship , which has been discussed before , but it is a valid point , what % of work should be done by the maker on the knife bearing that individual makers name ?

lets not talk about Bob in this example , imagine it being another maker :

This maker has shop help do everything but final edge and logo , should it bear the makers name ?

Is it different if the maker just has the help profile and ruff in the grinds ? Ruff fit the handle ?

If the maker who puts his name on the blade , doesn't do that majority of the work (lets say 51+% ), then it is not an individual made knife , it is a shop made knife , correct ?

Unless of course the logo is " John & Sons " for example ( my kids don't help me , well other than help spend my $$$ ).

John let me try to answer all your question above with one answer. I personally consider it VERY important for custom knife makers such as those represented in my collection (with the exception of Bob Loveless) to do ALL the work themselves.
Considering this, I expect that some are surprised I added a Loveless to my collection and I'm sure some even consider it hypocrisy on my part.
However I just consider it as recognizing and appreciating an icon of a maker for his massive contribution to custom knives.

 

[RogerP]

John let me try to answer all your question above with one answer. I personally consider it VERY important for custom knife makers such as those represented in my collection (with the exception of Bob Loveless) to do ALL the work themselves.
Considering this, I expect that some are surprised I added a Loveless to my collection and I'm sure some even consider it hypocrisy on my part.
However I just consider it as recognizing and appreciating an icon of a maker for his massive contribution to custom knives.

I would say it's VERY important to me as well. Though I have a hard time conceiving why anyone would consider your Loveless purchase choice hypocritical.

I also appreciate his massive contribution to the field of custom knives. And I think that contribution is primarily one of design - thoughtful, purposeful, timeless and very aesthetically pleasing.

As such, my own preferences (and the fact that most Loveless knives are priced above what I feel comfortable spending on a single knife) would more likely lead me to purchase a knife in the Loveless style from one of the many excellent sole-authorship makers turning out such work.

Roger

 

[Kevin Jones]

I would say it's VERY important to me as well. Though I have a hard time conceiving why anyone would consider your Loveless purchase choice hypocritical.

I also appreciate his massive contribution to the field of custom knives. And I think that contribution is primarily one of design - thoughtful, purposeful, timeless and very aesthetically pleasing.

As such, my own preferences (and the fact that most Loveless knives are priced above what I feel comfortable spending on a single knife) would more likely lead me to purchase a knife in the Loveless style from one of the many excellent sole-authorship makers turning out such work.

Roger

Roger, hypocritical in that I have always held "sole authorship" in such high importance in my collecting philosophy. Some have stated in these couple threads that they consider it hypocrisy that some (such as myself) give Loveless a by in regard to sole authorship.

 

[Ed Fowler]

There was a time when functional design and cut were significant attributes of a knife, in this thread I have not read many thoughts about performance, only fit and finish.

Talking the other day a friend mentioned that he had seen very few used custom knives for sale on dealers sites or the forms.

Is it possible that the custom knives we see for sale that have been used are being 'cleaned up' by others than the origonal maker for dealers and collectors before they sell the knives? If so this may be part of the explanation for some of the strong feeling about anyone being able to clean up another makers knives. This is the owners right, but can and should have serious consequences without full disclosure to the new owner.

Cut was important when Bob Loveless, Bill Scagel, Frank Richtig and many others makers started, performance was highly sought after and a significant attribute to many. Knives that did not cut were not very popular.

Not one person has commented on the cutting performance of a Loveless knife - does it matter?

I seems as though we have two camps, one admires the plumage of bird, while others consider the bird as a whole.

The aspects of a knife we chose to like are a personal decision and we are free to select according to what we want out of a knife, but I feel we should know exactly what we are buying.

 

[John T Wylie Jr]

Not one person has commented on the cutting performance of a Loveless knife - does it matter?
.

Ed - In your opinion what % of the Loveless Knives out there are actually getting used ? I myself would guess that % is very low compared to those locked away in safes. At the $$ they bring upon resale , I can easily understand people not wanting to use them.

 

[RogerP]

There was a time when functional design and cut were significant attributes of a knife, in this thread I have not read many thoughts about performance, only fit and finish.

Perhaps because this thread really doesn't have anything to do with peformance versus fit and finish. It has to do with whether one maker refinishing a knife made by another is a contemptible atrocity. "Refinishing" generally refers to a primarily cosmetic or aesthetic alteration - such as restoring a hand-rubbed finish. It does not generally refer to significantly altering the function or performance of the knife.

Talking the other day a friend mentioned that he had seen very few used custom knives for sale on dealers sites or the forms.

Because using a knife diminishes its "collector value". Dealers, like most everyone else who sells knives, sell primarily to collectors. The condition of a contemporary custom knife is important to collectors considering the purchase of same. It should surprise no-one in this day and age that the custom knife market is primarily collector-driven. Why? Because a guy buying a knife to be used as a functional tool doesn't need more than 2 or 3 - maybe 5 at the outside - quality custom knives to last him his lifetime. That type of purchase outlay writ large is utterly insufficient to sustain the custom knife market as it exists today. Pining for the "good old days" will not alter that reality.

Is it possible that the custom knives we see for sale that have been used are being 'cleaned up' by others than the origonal maker for dealers and collectors before they sell the knives? If so this may be part of the explanation for some of the strong feeling about anyone being able to clean up another makers knives. This is the owners right, but can and should have serious consequences without full disclosure to the new owner.

As I have stated before, the "disclosure" angle is a pure red herring. I have seen no-one in this very long thread advocating that refinishing - either by the original maker OR by another maker - should NOT be disclosed be the seller. Refinishing itself is not "bad". A seller failing to disclose that a knife has been refinished - by either the original maker OR by another maker - is "bad". In my view, ethical issues are simply not engaged by WHO performs the refinishing.

Not one person has commented on the cutting performance of a Loveless knife - does it matter?

Again - it's simply not the subject of this thread. Why should it surprise you that it hasn't been a topic of comment here? And I suspect that very few 6-15k knives by any maker see much use. Why? A) because they are being bought by primarily by collectors, and B) you don't need to spend the equivalent of a new car to get a high quality, highly functional using knife. None of which is to say that performance isn't important to collectors. I'm a collector and it is important to me.

I seems as though we have two camps, one admires the plumage of bird, while others consider the bird as a whole.

We have many more than two camps. There are colours other than "black" and "white".

The aspects of a knife we chose to like are a personal decision and we are free to select according to what we want out of a knife, but I feel we should know exactly what we are buying.

I couldn't agree more. Which is why I will never understand those who disparage others whose purchase priorities differ from their own. You know, like the guys who like to deride "embellished" or "art" knives because they aren't sufficiently "hard core" for their own personal tastes.

Roger

 

[Ed Fowler]

"ethical issues are simply not engauged by WHO performs the refinishin"
I guess the man who makes the $100 bill out of $1.00 bill is in the clear - it is the man who tries to cash them?

 

[John T Wylie Jr]

Not even close to being the same Ed , you are grasping at straws there.

about the refurb stuff...
If you buy a new Vette , Mercedes or Jag , do you have to take it back to the dealer or manufacture to get it washed and waxed each time or prior to the sale ?

If a certified Jaguar mechanic works on a Vette , is that also unethical ?

You said it yourself :

I feel we should know exactly what we are buying.

Nobody has argued it shouldn't be disclosed , honest on ALL counts is always the best way to conduct business.

 

[2knife]

......