mined from this thread -

the organic nature of frame building - taking a pile of parts, some tools, experience,
and a vision - has always confounded me atmo. i'm way more
comfortable with it now
than i was when i started. but it often made me
squirm as i was trying to figure out the
no two are alike. and some parts of one can be so very right, while the rest of it
just good enough. getting it nailed from end to end isn't possible, and i surrendered to
notion years ago. in some ways it's like the accuracy of a quartz watch compared to
the idiosyncrasies of a mechanical one. i say
in some ways, because i really don't know
watches well enough to know why a drug store
example may keep more accurate time
than one labored over by a skilled
watchmaker. oh, and in many ways i don't care. but i
do know about frames, and no matter what you bring to the table, and
no matter how hard
you try, or how
on your game you are, no two are alike. alas, duplication and repeatability
are just dreams atmo.
is it okay to articulate these differences and even celebrate them?
since i
can't seem to get to that elusive other side, i reckon it is.

>>> so, i submit for your critique this dropout shot right out of the dunk tank. how much
>>> work would you builders do before checking this off the list & moving on?

i'll answer that by pasting in this thought - one that hit me so deep that i xeroxed it
and added to the cover of our handmade wedding invitations
back - what, 13 or so
years ago atmo!

>>> Even things made by machine are not perfect. It's all a matter of resolution. As is
>>> everything in life.

nails it atmo. and there's something to the routine of picking up yet another pile of parts
and making them fit yet another work order that, on one hand is
a chance to redeem
oneself for all past flaws, and on the other hand
realize that it's not worth the effort since
the material always tells you
what it will be. 'would make a good koan brothers film huh.

>>> Is that a double meaning/fruedian slip - the spelling or misspelling of the name "Koen".
>>> Koan -
>>> koan |ˈkōˌän|
>>> noun
>>> a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy
>>> of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment.

yes - you get me like a book atmo. 'was intentional. ps and it's coen brothers iirc imho.

>>> then what was my slip?

hi - no slip. i was saying that you had me right with the double entendre. that means
two entendres
in french.

>>> Cool.........thanks for explaining that in a way that's not patronizing.
>>> That means not being talked down to.

is it okay to articulate these differences and even celebrate them? since i can't seem
to get to that elusive
other side, i reckon it is. well - i am not sure if there was thread drift,
or if the question was addressed
and i'm too obtuse to see the answer. but my reply to
my own post is that it's
okay to celebrate them. there. i said it.

>>> It's the result of that striving towards the ideal that is worth celebrating -

i'm a striving fool bro' atmo.
and i'm havin' a celebratin' situation -

>>> ...as we say in surgery after we've fixed something but still have that desire to make it
>>> 'look perfect'. Not to say one shouldn't always strive to improve one's work, but you can
>>> really mess something up trying to make it look perfect.

agreed atmo - and in most cases it's the head that gets messed.

>>> watch a good pro mechanic work on a real team bike.
>>> bang, bang, bang done.
>>> works well enough.

>>> never confuse slow with good.

unless you're engaged in casual sax atmo.
thanks for all the replies to my thread.
that's a wrapmo.