somewhat off topic; How do we define traditional?

Ice Tigre

Ice Tigre

Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
1,212
Got rather observant a bit ago, introspective as i call it, a philosophers mind set I get at times when I screw up something, and start seeing it from all perspectives, not just my own...

Anyway, I Don't know how it got me started on this thought, but it makes me wonder what others' views are on it..

I find myself with double standards, and find it just as hard to define as what seems to be the opposite; "tactical"

I can show you examples of what are, and what aren't part of the classification in my view, but I am having a heck of a time defining my criteria. :rolleyes:

Whose tradition?
After all, in certain areas, a liner lock in super steel and carbon fiber could be the traditional item used by the populace, or for the common task.

Styles and mechanics that were in use before the liner lock seems to fit, in a way. since that mechanism seems to be the embodiment of the "modern" "tactical".

Modern.... Then is the traditional, a vintage/aged point? styles of the 19th century and before seem to fit. But the the lockback is traditional, and it is quite a bit newer.

Non locking? No, the lockback comes up again, not to mention the navaja, or opinel that have been a traditionally used item in both their respective countries for a long time.

I have the definition of natural handle materials, pre micarta/G10. Woods, and bone. But then, celuloid has been around a loooong time.

:confused:

So, what defines a Traditional knife for you?

G.
 
Ice Tigre, Lock Back Knives go back well into 19th century and possibly to the 18th. Mr. Levine could possibly give you a answer to your question. To me all spring back knives and spring assisted lock bar knives even spring opening automatic knives are traditional as they were invented centuries back.
 
As Justice Potter Stewart so eloquently stated in 1964:

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it. :cool:
 
I'll give it a shot. For me, a traditional folder is based on a traditional pattern, or at least stays within a certain set of styling parameters. There were certain things that "back in the day" people didn't or couldn't do. When considering whether a knife is or is not "traditional", I think about the knife being taken back in a time machine and shown to a group of fellas in the late 1920s. If the knife fits the sensibilities of those gentlemen, then it can be called traditional.

To my mind, there is a continuum of knife development that is a line starting with chipped stone on one end, and has Spyderco's newest model (or any other high-tech knife) on the other. Every knife falls somewhere along that line. I think what we are referring to as "traditional", in the context of this forum, are American, English and German knives from the mid 1800's to the 1940's. Anything that would not be anachronistic to that time period can be considered appropriate. Updates in steel don't really count for me, because they do not affect the aesthetics of a knife or its mechanical function.
 
I figure if I could show it to the men I looked up to when I was growing up, and they recognize it as something they have used well, that must be it.

Yeah, thats traditional.:)
 
jackknife said:
I figure if I could show it to the men I looked up to when I was growing up, and they recognize it as something they have used well, that must be it.

Yeah, thats traditional.:)
Click to expand...

Hi,

Yep, that's how I define traditional.

dalee
 
I define as traditional, any knife without G-10 thumbstuds or black/beadblasted blades. Seriously I make no distinction between American traditional or traditional knives from any other country be they Opinels, Okapis, Laguioles or SAKs. Something with a few decades of useful history will do for me.:cool::thumbup:
 
Just some musings on the topic...

Two materials (among the many other points) that I think blur the line between traditional and modern are micarta and stainless steel. Micarta, because it can be considered an "old" material that could have been used for knife handles in bygone days, but apparently wasn't for some reason. Stainless steel, more for the look than the modernity of it. I want a "traditional" that I've had around for a while to look the part, with a nice deep patina. It's hard to look "traditional" with a gleaming blade. There's a little voice in the back of my head saying "don't do it" when I think about buying a stainless steel slipjoint.
 
I think traditional makers would have used stainless if good stainless had been available. If they really intended their knives to have a patina on them, they would have sold them that way. I don't really mind materials like micarta or acrylic on traditional knives. I think that knife makers would have been happy to use them if they had been available. (I don't think micarta was generally available back in the day) Lots of traditional knives have celluloid or otherwise plastic handles. G10 and carbon fiber come close to crossing the line for me. G10 has been around for a long while, but apparently no old-school knifemakers put 2 and 2 together. Carbon fiber is too high-tech a material to be used in traditional knives, as is titanium, IMO. If Tony Bose made a stockman with carbon fiber scales and titanium liners, it is would not be a traditional knife in my book, it would be a hybrid (and it would be awesome).

Other things that disqualify knives for traditional status are pocket clips and thumbstuds. Useful and functional they may be, but they were not generally used in traditional knives.
The same goes for screw construction. Traditional knives are glued and pinned. It is a bit unclear for me whether the brightly-colored knives on the market should be considered traditional. I have my grandfather's old Remington scout from the 1920s, and it is bright red, white and blue pyremite. There were plenty of brightly-colored, composite handled knives way back in the way back- pretty much as soon as those materials became commercially available. Would great-grandpa's sensibilities have been offended by Case's new tangerine-boned series? Maybe, maybe not. They do show up nicely if you drop them.
 
Last edited:
moonwilson said:
***
I don't really mind materials like micarta or acrylic on traditional knives. I think that knife makers would have been happy to use them if they had been available.
***
I have my grandfather's old Remington scout from the 1920s, and it is bright red, white and blue pyremite. There were plenty of brightly-colored, composite handled knives way back in the way back- pretty much as soon as those materials became commercially available. Would great-grandpa's sensibilities have been offended by Case's new tangerine-boned series? Maybe, maybe not. They do show up nicely if you drop them.
Click to expand...

I have a Robeson aluminum-handled Stockman that belonged to my grandfather. He worked for the North Carolina State Agriculture Dept. (or whatever it was 50 years ago) training kids in school in livestock husbandry & farming. In our family, the story goes that he actually used the spay blade for...uh...what it was meant for. Apparently he liked this knife because it could be dunked in alcohol, or dropped in boiling water for a few minutes, after use, and it would remain unaffected, whereas a regular wood or bone handled knife would disintegrate after a while if treated like that.

I have an NRA Outdoors Stockman my grandpa would have just loved - micarta scales & good stainless blades. It also has canoe-type bolsters, so even for a traditional it's out of the ordinary.

thx - cpr
 
Well, I feel better now, I not the only guy keeping a "I know it when i see it" standard. Nice quote Blues. All good thoughts.... and thought provoking too!

G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top