More
I entirely agree that the drawings presented in the ad are absolutely atrocious renderings but what is tantamount here is that the designs are described and attributed to Frank and Son which was what this discussion was all about after all.
Having established the manufacturer through information obtained by a third party and thus vetted as to being a true copy of an original document I will now present some significantly better advertising copy to illustrate these designs more clearly now that we know who made them.
Frank and Son
There is no manufacturer/designer directly attributed on any of the newer images but if you consider that these ads (including the attribution ad) are all printed within 7 weeks of each other in April and May 1953 I really don't think that there much need for further debate...
More confusion
Now we have all these pictures advertising what looks like the items except:
1. The feet are different, and most importantly:
2. No advertising of the actual table in question or the chairs.
Why would these people advertise everything BUT the most important pieces - the chairs and the Dining table?
This is even more inconclusive than before.
- A.S.
More sets from arbuck
Straylight said:
"George Nelson made a total of 6 designs for Arbuck (style #70 according to my 1958 catalog) in 1950. These designs are well documented in the Nelson archives. There are two occasional tables (one round the other square), a coffee table, a pull up chair, an armchair and a sofa. Nothing else."
Straylight has never added to those six - and there has been via communication clear implication that there is but one set for Arbucks designed by George Nelson.
However:
1. See the photo from the curator of the Vitra Museum from a real Nelson Archive, you will see George Nelson having:
1. One Square side table
2. One Round side table
3. A coffee Table.
4. A dining Table.
5. A styled chair.
We then see this advertisement from Arbucks, presenting George Nelson, showing a different:
6. Coffee Table
7. Sofa Design
8. Trolley
9. Different Chair.
In Straylights comical thread "would the real George Nelson please stand up" he shows a picture that shows a different sofa, giving us:
10. Different Sofa.
Clearly, George Nelson did not just do one set for Arbucks. That much is obvious, isn't it?
There has been a solid attitude to date that there is one, but there simply is not.
So how many did he do? Because it is not just one, is it?
As for the "drawing" from Arbucks, they are inconclusive and I have seen those drawings in their produced form, but they look quite different from our set or any George Nelson set advertised as the arches used are almost perfect semi-circles.
My point?
There are not six pieces from Arbuck for George Nelson. Period.
There are more, and at any stage where we say "this is final", it turns out it is not.
There is more research to be done.
So, would the real researcher please stand up?
- A.S.
whats your point?
The construction of the dining/occasional table here is clearly in common with the Nelson/ Arbuck coffee table shown in the ads straylight posted elsewhere. And nothing like your table - because your table was made by Frank & Sons and not by Arbuck. It really is that simple.
you missed the point
You think Straylights statements that he has clearly defined the only set of George Nelson from Arbucks is complete?
It is not - and that is the point.
We still have no attribution to our set.
And if I had not shown you the "other Nelson set" guess what? A lot of you would have said "No, that isn't George Nelson". But it is.
My point is that we have a "researcher" saying he knows exactly how many pieces were done by George Nelson for Arbuck - and he is mistaken. He has asserted many times his researhc is complete and it is not.
There is more research to be done because no one on here knows exactly what George did for Arbucks 100% and the only way to find out is to ask questions, seek answers and not be closed minded and decide once we find one picture, that that "is it".
Research has revealed more - and I am guessing there will be more surprises.
- A.S.
The point you're missing
Is that you people expressly requested Straylight help you. Asked for him by name. It's right at the top, in this very thread.
And then when he doubted the attribution you started trashing him.
He posted furniture by Frank and Sons that looks like your furniture. He posted furniture by George Nelson for Arbuck that looks nothing like yours. (It also looks nothing like the Auction ad you posted.. which doesn't even have your chairs in it.)
We know lots of people were making wrought iron furniture. We now know one specific company that made wrought iron furniture almost identical to your set. We still haven't seen any George Nelson furniture that looks anything like your set.
No, I suppose that's not not conclusive. So perhaps you can argue you're entitled a refund on the ZERO DOLLARS YOU PAID HIM FOR AN ATTRIBUTION.
You people are incredible.
PS- Your ad has two designer's names on it. All you've proven is that Arbuck produced at least 10 pieces of furniture... Which we could have probably guessed..
Nothing is obvious
6, 7, 8, and 9 are all designed by Ossiah J Arkus...
I was not personally aware of the small dining table you have shown. It appeared in none of my archival materials. Good to know that it existed. But it's still exactly the same design synthesis as the coffee table, just scaled up. And it is NOT your table or anything even remotely similar.
Call me out for sloppy research in not having scoured the ends of the earth for one more George Nelson for Arbuck design. Mea culpa. I confess I missed that one. But so what? My having missed one table has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that your table (and chairs by the rules of applied statistical logic) are by Frank and Son.
Aaron, you might not be aware that you are doing this but repeatedly when called upon to present historical evidence in support of your claims you instead present unfounded theories based upon little more than your own wishful thinking and attacks upon my own research. No proof. Nothing. Just hot air. You have represented yourself poorly sir and it saddens me to see that you feel it necessary to continue on this tact. You need not agree with me or with the weight of evidence in the historical record but I might suggest that conducting yourself with decorum and respect might serve you better in the future.
I have made no claims
I have made no claims.
You though, have.
And in fact, it was YOU who provided that very article to me as proof of George Nelson for Arbucks that above you say is not proof! And now you refute it?
You told me in the email this was certain George Nelson and the ONLY George Nelson. I have that exact image in the email from you.
Did you get it wrong?
Perhaps I should post the email. Jog our memory on your "certainty".
You have as yet to provide any attribution to Frank and Son. Sorry, a scribbled drawing from one paper, just is not going to cut it - especially when the chair is not even in the "picture."
And where is the information coming from the GN produced only one set for Arbucks?
But do not worry, we have two people digging through genuine Nelson Archives going through the 50 odd technical drawings GN did for Arbucks to see what he came up with for Arbucks.
When we have the info - hopefully they release it - because they are comparing the images we have provided from a slew of sources, we will post them up for everyone to check out.
If anything at all, it will be a fascinating look into his mind from the era - whatever it proves or disproves.
I am personally excited to see them, and I very much hope they do in fact release them. It will good info for everyone who enjoys George Nelson.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com