Arne Vodder model 27 sideboard  

Posted by: Trebor

Hi

The easy way to prove this is not a Arne Vodder model 27  is to show me a Arne Vodder model 27 .I have attached a picture of the half blind dovetails.

Trebor – this is not how skepticism works. You have made a claim. Therefore, the burden is on you to support your claim, not on others here to prove you wrong.

For example: "Clearly you, Trebor, shot JFK. The easy way to prove you did not shoot JFK is to show me the person who did shoot JFK. Until then, we should probably lock you up."

^^^See how this does not make sense? 

Zephyr's point is that what you have offered as evidence is not evidence but rather anecdotes. And the plural of anecdote is not data. 

As I stated in my original post we have a Sideboard model 27 Designed by Arne Vodder and manufactured by Sibast .No one has come forward with any evidence to disprove this, no one has even questioned any of the overwhelming evidence that is contained in this thread proving it is what it is.It is not for me to prove that it is a Arne Vodder model 27 sideboard because I know it is,it’s down to anyone saying it is not to prove so which is obviously proving impossible. 

Aaaand I challenge you to disprove that The Flying Spaghetti Monster will be our savior.

May you be touched by His noodly appendage...

Trebor, no offence. Everything is cool. You have a nice sideboard which MAY HAVE BEEN designed by Arne Vodder. What you certainly don't have is "overwhelming evidence" that it in fact WAS designed by Arne Vodder. But that's no problem for you, because you don't have any doubts about it. And it is also cool for us, because it's your sideboard, not ours. No need to argue. But you have to understand that a number and a good story is not enough to discuss the matter on a solid basis. That's why I'm affraid nobody here can help you with your question right now. Maybe in the future, when documentation of model 27 appears. Who knows.    

@Trebor What you could do is contact the folks at Bruun Rasmussen. They probably have seen more Vodder sideboards than anyone.

Hi Heringbone

Have been in contact with a Peter Kjelgaard Jensen at Bruun Rasmussen.He has never seen this sideboard before not in any catalogues ,books ,literature they have he puts it down to unknown Designer unknown Maker for this reason. Have had it appraised by Mearto a Danish Company based in Copenhagen who specialise in Danish Design they have said attributed to Arne Vodder model 27.

In the museum world, "attributed to" or "school of" roughly translates to "we have no idea".

Wiggle words.

@trebor.@leif-ericson.@zephyr.@tktoo2.@herringbone.@teakhound.

I thought you all might be interested in the following:

A sideboard attributed to  Arne Vodder, popped up for sale in the UK. It looks the same as the sideboard as above.

Have added some images from that sellers listing which give some extra details , which were missing from @trebor's posts/photos.

These might help with solving the "mystery" of this intriguing sideboard!!

Looking at the pictures I come to the conclusion that it doesn‘t only look the same. It IS the very same sideboard. Better pictures though. But I‘m still not convinced it‘s Vodder.

@herringbone; My post was "tongue in cheek". It IS the very same sideboard!! 😏 

I also doubt that it is by Arne Vodder, as does the seller ,as it is listed as "attributed" to ...

The irony got lost in translation 😀. The sideboard is strange in many ways. I don’t even find it typically Danish. I remember thinking that, if it was not Vodder who designed it, it might well have been produced by some British company.  But after a few hours of searching I gave up on it.

"Attributed to" in the museum world (same as everywhere else) begs the question, "By whom, exactly?"

"In the style of..." might be better in this case (emphasis on "might"). Otherwise, it's all so much marketing babble.

@Trebor: your point about imperial measurements and concluding it was made for export is wrong.  The Danes regularly operated in imperial measurements.  All their machinery and tooling was old imperial denominated stuff.  The designers designed in metric and the maker's converted and rounded to imperial.  

I do not see any characteristics of Sibast production here.  Ergo not Sibast.  

Also the fact that nobody can point out what Sibast model 27 is means nothing.  There are literally hundreds of companies with gaps in the known model numbers when we even know the model numbers. I have a lot of catalogs and the retailers of Sibast were almost always the sort who hid the maker's name and model number, so it is surprising we know as many model numbers as we do.

You gotta give the chap some credit for his persistence, though.  In any case, I am sure this situation has happened to all of us at some point in our collecting days, in one way or another.  The difference, I guess, is that we have learned our lesson already.  We know the allure, ... and embarrassment, of stitching together a loose collection of coincidences and common traits, to construct the narrative of optimism.  Supercharge it with some familial lore, and the poor guy never had a chance!