Jerry Pasewicz

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jerry Pasewicz

  • Rank
    Just another guy in an apron.

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    : Raleigh, NC

Recent Profile Visitors

13047 profile views
  1. Does the first picture show the knife cut, and if so, what is the arrow pointing towards..
  2. Good idea, one would hate to have to be held accountable for one’s words.
  3. My apologies, I generally tend to take an individual’s words as representative of what they mean to communicate. My bad....I guess it stems from being humorless...
  4. Sure, debate all day. The one side is dead on or very close to square with the other how did that work, and why? Even with the debate, slides wear out, and these slides quicker than most, especially the gold bows. They are also more difficult to replace, so who replaced them? And when they were replaced do you suppose he never saw that one side was square and the other not?
  5. Because on the slides I am referring to, the pearl and the petit talon are one piece. I suspect, not my idea BTW, that the one side of the liner was made, then the petit talon was glued and pinned square to the a side with the eventual joint square, then the pearl was glued into place. The square side was filed to dovetail, then the rest of the pearl/talon slide was fit to the frog...the original side would not be touched. This would result in exactly what we see. I hope I described that well. Also, if memory serves, it is not always the same side...
  6. I have, generally before I post. You insist on making it about a character flaw; something that was a mistake, that he didn't care, or that he did tuned up on wine or absinth. That is not purposeful. Words mean things.
  7. So you point is....someone being purposeful with their work is the same as "exactly as he wants it to be, inspired by wine, absinth, never mind"? Is that the surreal part?
  8. Pearl slide. Have a look at the angle where the pearl slides meet the plate....(the petit talon for those that can order beer in Paris). Specifically, you will see that one side is at a right angle therefore the other cannot.... If the working methods you use make an obvious asymmetry, and you do not try to correct it by changing your working methods, how can it not be purposeful?
  9. All true Nate, but I have spent a considerable amount of time also specifically making bows, restoring bows, and working with people that have a great deal of French bow making history behind them. My issue is with the characterization that that it was ever seen as a flaw, or something for which he would have had to make an excuse, or claim "good enough", or that he must have been tuned up to always get wrong....I do not believe that was the thought process. And yes, Peccatte was very specifically, intentionally, and consciously creating asymmetry in his bows as we can see in his pearl slides. This is not unlike someone claiming Cremonese violins being asymmetrical is a flaw, or that Tony thought the asymmetry was "good enough", or that he must have been three sheets to the wind to always get wrong ....can you not agree that he probably did not see this asymmetry as a flaw? Maybe sometime we can discuss privately the characterization of Rene' as "sort of a French Archie Bunker".
  10. Did I write that “Pecattes bows were the result of agonizing attention to every detail”? Yep, lived it every day for a very long time. Feed back comes and through that feedback we get is a direct corolation. In fact some would say it is personality type. Every bow maker has a dominant hand, most were the right hand, and almost all had to work very fast. Yet, not every maker has this idiosyncrasy.......but at least 2 do..hmm. Once again, do not misquote me. if you care to argue with things you think I wrote, you are safer doing so in private if you really wish to avoid an argument. Also, mischaracterizing the motives of others, so you can claim to agree with them, therefore validating the intelligence of your agreement, is circular logic that makes no sense. Dominique Peccatte made good bows because he was a good bow maker. Any claim of apathy, or characterization that even though it was a mistake he would let it go, or that he did this consistently because he was half bombed, is not in the personality type. Yes, it is likely he knew he had a tendency to do this, or he may have seen it in Tourte’s bows ....that does not mean he thought it was “good enough” as much as it was part of his working style.....just like one chamfer is more open than the other, or the fact that they have chatter marks from his knife, or the fact that his his pearl slide meets the plate at different angle from one side to other.
  11. Tricked? No. However, when one spends a lifetime working at a bench, we get used to where we want the light for different things we do........regardless where we are doesn’t take long at a bench to recognize this..... So, no, it is not more likely that he was hobbling around throughout his working life with a bottle and a sugar cube while being able to create this body of work....