I need to be schooled in the use of 'Union Made' when you are buying something other than a shirt, dress or blouse...during mid century.
Two beautiful flip-top library tables manufactured by Marden Manufacturing, Chicago, IL, circa 1948-1950's. The company began about 1948 and dissolved in about 1996 ish. The company is described as manufacturing high end furniture sold to the trade. I've searched the deep web looking for information on Marden and have found little. My research initially began as a search for possible designers but I've only found reference to one designer outside the company and that was a reference to a piece on 1stdibs. Other than that the only designer reference was Robert Balonick, in-house designer who was a brother/relative of the owner. I've read every archived newspaper article, opened every stupid pdf file, looked at every piece of furniture I could find on the web, I've done the Illinois business entity searches along with a few other states, patent searches AND wasted a whole lot of time doing the genealogy on the family (there were like 10 siblings- family came from Russia...smh!). They can take their non- in-house designers to the grave with them- I'm over it.
It appears that most Marden furniture is marked or tagged listing the company's street on Ravenswood. My tables are marked listing the street as Halstead. Halstead street may have been their location prior to Ravenswood- or, the company maintained Halstead for special contracts? A lot of stuff on the web that I found suggested that Marden had their hands in more than just manufacturing pretty furniture for homes. The particular Marden mark on my library table may or may not be evidence of an item originally manufactured for use outside of a home. I've not seen another example of my Marden mark, not that there's a lot to compare it with. But I've also not seen a mark like this one on anything in my home.
Union Made- the table isn't just marked "Union Made", it's a paragraph size advertisement of Union Made and only under this advertisement did I finally find in small font size the name of the manufacturer and the street location. I wouldn't have found the Marden name had it not been for my loop. I did as much research on the use of Union Made as I could stand. According to Wikipedia, marking items as Union Made was to attract customers who prefer to buy union made products. I get that. And I can see a union made mark on low and higher end furniture. But a mark like this one? I'm going to post a picture of the mark. It's incredibly blurry and mostly illegible. That's not on account of my poor photography skills but rather the mark itself- which is another reason I'm questioning whether this was made for an institution and not for a home.
Can anyone confirm that they have MCM furniture specifically designed and manufactured for home where the union made mark is the primary, front and center mark and manufacturer is secondary?
Can anyone confirm that this type of union made advertisement is typically found on furniture contracted for institutions that require union made?
This is just another step in the history of furniture in the US. First was furniture handmade local to the region it was sold in. Thus 18th and early 19th century with distinct local characteristics (e.g. Newport, Connecticut, New York, Philadelphia are distinct and easily recognized). Even specific well-known makers (e.g. Seymour) can be identified, who left distinctive decorative touches on their handmade pieces.
With factory production starting in the mid 19th century came big factories turning out identical products that were shipped all over the US, thus regional differences lessened then finally disappeared. Most of these factories were in Chicago, which was a rail hub that could reach all over the US simplifying shipping. Much of the late Victorian era and early 20th century factory furniture was made in Chicago. Deplorable working conditions led to labor unrest and Labor Unions came about in the late 19th century, and much of the labor strife was in Chicago, where many of the factories (not just furniture) were located. By the 20th century the unionized workforce was well established and expected, so no need to advertise items being union made since just about everything was.
Then in the mid 20th century huge factories were being built in North Carolina, which started with fabric factories but quickly spread to other consumer goods. The advantage to the factory owners of building furniture factories in the South was not only that they did not have Union labor laws (therefore lower labor costs), but they were also close to nearby sources of raw materials (cotton, fabrics, wood forests). Thus the Chicago area Unionized factories began to advertise that they were Union made to remind consumers that buying decisions should be about more than simply price. At that time a lot of the US work force belonged to labor unions so buying from another Union member had real appeal. This is the time when your piece was made. And the Union label doesn't indicate anything about who it was made for - it would be just as appropriate for home use as any other. I've seen similar labels on furniture, and there are lots of mid-century lighting fixtures with union labels (albeit smaller ones).
Finally in the late 20th century came a political push to undermine US labor completely in the name of globalization to push down labor costs even more. Which is why there are so many abandoned factories in the US today. And why much of the furniture you find from the late 20th century on in US stores today is from China or Thailand, etc.
Notice this has ignored European furniture, including the Scandinavian furniture this site specializes in and also ignores the hand made US makers like Nakashima. That tended to be on the higher end of the market, factory made in Europe or handmade in either one. Its safe to say that most of the best and innovative design was being done in Europe, with the US manufacturers by and large taking their cues from the European designers (with notable exceptions; Nakashima, Eames, etc). Shipping by boat from Europe and import duties were expensive back then, which is why this furniture was significantly more expensive. Most homeowners didn't know the difference or care enough to pay the higher prices for the imported furniture, but some did. So this is why most of the Mid-century US furniture you see is of such horrible design (it is what the customer wanted) and why the authentic Scandinavian furniture in the US is relatively rare compared to all the Chicago and North Carolina furniture you find in thrift stores across the US.
Gropius!! Did you just use me and my union made question as an opportunity to trash American design? But thank you for your response, it was comprehensive and had a funny twist of an ending that made me smile!
I can't argue the quality of Scandinavian design. I'll never own enough of it- especially the jewelry! I was introduced to MCM Italian design when I was a little girl and that's my first love. But, I also love my American MCM and I can't find one piece that's marked union made so large and sloppy. I'm leaning towards the belief that the pair of tables were originally contracted by a university or institution that required such a union made label. American design and construction good or bad, to borrow from Stevie Wonder...Her clothes are old but NEVER are they dirty! That mark is one dirty mark.
Sorry, I wasn't trying to trash ALL american design. Really just describe why there is so MUCH bad mid-century american furniture. The craze for "antique" furniture in the US started at about the start of the 20th century (books by Nutting, etc), and the Chicago factories were happy to oblige, and the popularity of this "colonial" furniture persisted well into the mid-20th century. So most of the Lane furniture, for example, from mid-century is really horrible stuff, because that was what most buyers wanted. Its always a little sad/funny when someone finds a piece of this furniture and assumes that it has some merit because it is "mid-century". Lots of examples of this in the Mahogany number thread.
Oh and I swear I've seen that exact dirty Mark somewhere before, but I can't remember where. I'm sure it wasn't in Palm Beach, though.
I've learned to take nothing for granted and to assume everything has merit until proven otherwise. I am guilty of committing horrible unthinkable crimes against furniture in a crime spree that lasted several decades. Yes, 20 years ago I purchased four not-my-taste-nondescript-boring chairs for a dime at an estate sale so my kids could have chairs to trash when doing their arts and crafts projects...and did they trash them! Three chairs went to the curb and the fourth to my garage where I trashed it even more. Charlotte Perriand was rolling in her grave! Lots and LOTS of people were rolling in their graves! It makes me want to vom when I look back at all that I've destroyed. So I destroy nothing unless I know what it is that I'm destroying. Good on everyone wiser than myself who gives merit to everything.
Now, I can't speak for the entire USA, but we had Grand Rapids and the Cranbrook Crew in my part of town- all rolling in their graves along with Charlotte. Michigan was raised up right with taste. I have not one piece of mahogany in my home because I always thought that the mahogany number meant it was cheap so I'd throw it out and I'm certain I threw out a lot of good mahogany due to my ignorance. The library tables may have been made in Chicago but they are a fine pair of mcm tables...with merit...cause 1stdibs tells me so.
So, Gropius you can take your wooden Vikings, trolls and mice toothpick holders and go play with dirty Mark on my fine dirty marked MCM Chicago union made tables...try not to scratch them.
Well, you didn't supply a picture of your library tables, only the stamp on it. So I have no idea what your library table looks like and didn't mean to offend your taste in furniture, since I have no idea what your taste in furniture is. If you want to talk about your library tables and not just the union label on them, by all means include a picture of them.
And I'll say it again, that I wasn't attacking all vintage US furniture - only trying to explain what I've observed about why there is so much badly designed vintage furniture (like the picture I included) mixed in with the occasional piece that is well-designed.
I don't think dirty Mark plays with wooden Vikings and trolls, but maybe I'm wrong.
Gropius, no need for apologies- you're awesome! I understand that removing Eames from the US design market makes your statement about not trashing ALL American design technically correct LOL!!!
Mark, the mouse toothpick holder is teak, TEAK!! Your shorts are lovely and you may have this pair. It has a nice side zipper detail!
Good morning Detroitism,
How lovely of you to think of me and my sartorial modness/madness. Unfortunately the side zipper and my plumbing would present a problem. I do like the print however. So sorry to have hijacked your thread. I drink too much. I'll try to behave. Now back to the Union Made.
Carry on,
Aunt Teak
ps. I like my shorts today.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com