"In the elder days of art
Builders wrought with greatest care
Each minute and unseen part,
For the Gods are everywhere."
"The point of these lines is clear. In the old days, craftsmen did not
cut corners. They worked carefully, and they took care with every
aspect of their work. Every part of the product was considered, and
each was designed and made to be exactly as it should be. These
craftsmen did not relax their thoughtful self-discipline even with
respect to features of their work which would ordinarily not be
visible. Although no one would notice if those features were not quite
right, the craftsmen would be bothered by their consciences. So
nothing was swept under the rug. Or, one might perhaps also say, there
was no bullshit.
It does seem fitting to construe carelessly made, shoddy goods as in
some way analogues of bullshit. But in what way? Is the resemblance
that bullshit itself is invariably produced in a careless or
self-indulgent manner, that it is never finely crafted, that in the
making of it there is never the meticulously attentive concern with
detail to which Longfellow alludes?"
On Bullshit
Harry Frankfurt
Princeton University
http://web.archive.org/web/20040212054855/http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/bs.html
Tom Watson - WoodDorker
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:30:50 GMT, "Michael Latcha"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Bullshit.
<snippomatic>
>To think otherwise would be like thinking that all posts to rec.woodworking
>were as poorly worded and crafted as this one. Generalizations based on
>incomplete data, and especially data that is ignored and/or inappropriately
>analyzed, are worthless bullshit. As is this post.
>
>Michael Latcha
Are you that guy who used to be on 'Taxi'?
I thought you were dead.
BTW-The post was entirely composed of quoted text.
You may have heard of HW Longfellow.
The other guy holds down a job teaching Philosophy, at Princeton.*
(* Princeton - where Einstein used to hang - until he realized it was
in New Jersey.)
Tom Watson - WoodDorker
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
Excellent post . . . very Krenovian. In fact, I think it addresses the
question that floated around the newsgroup several weeks ago regarding
Krenov. Many here seemed hung up on the particular esthetic that Krenov
builds and missed the key point about Krenov that Tom so eloquently
presents . . . "no bullshit!"
Thanks for the post.
Rick
http://www.thunderworksinc.com
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:18:33 -0500, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>(BTW ... nice troll, Tom. You definitely have a genius for On Topic trolls,
>>and illuminating the failings of an educational system, with just few
>>strokes on the keyboard. <g>)
>
>
> Hell, Swing - I don't think of them so much as 'trolls' as much as the
> kind of interrogatory mischief that the old Gadfly, Socrates busied
> hisself with in the Agora, about 2500 years ago.
>
> 'Trolls', properly executed, seek to draw the general populace into an
> unending and ultimately meaningless series of posts in response to a
> bullshit question.
>
> My post was an invitation to think about 'Bullshit' - and how it
> relates to WoodDorking.
>
> And 'Bullshit' is a serious thing.
>
> A Bullshitter lets himself get sloppy in his stock prep and joinery,
> and seeks to make the whole thing look good on the outside.
>
> A Mechanic understands that stock prep is the foundation of joinery;
> that joinery is the foundation of the piece, and that what shows, even
> if it is bright and shiny today, will not be that way for long if they
> have Bullshitted their way through the underpinnings.
>
> You build houses and you know that this extends to that area, too.
>
> I don't care if you are slab on grade or working up a full foundation
> - if the slab or top course is left a little bit out of bubble, you
> are going to chase that error all the way through the building.
>
> Sure, there are ways of compensating, and every carpenter has to know
> them but - there is no framing adjustment that can take the place of a
> good foundation.
>
> CharlieB, who is a good and thoughtful man, put up a picture on ABPW
> of a corner joint. I took issue with it because the back side of the
> intersecting members did not meet up right.
>
> There would have been no net negative result in how the piece looked
> from the outside. It would have looked fine. It would not have
> suffered in any structural way from how the joint was executed. My
> point was that the lack of attention to this detail reflected a lack
> of attention to detail that is destructive to the kind of habit of
> mind that I feel that you must have in order to do really good work.
>
> Longfellow's paean to the workers of old is not without merit.
>
> The argument that was made that many antiques show rough surfaces in
> those areas that can not easily be seen, is a good point. I've taken
> apart and repaired some pretty nice pieces that had some rough work
> that was hidden from view.
>
> I've also been to the conservator's shops at Winterthur and The
> Philadelphia Museum Of Art, where you can really get up close and
> personal with the innards of the hallmark instances of great
> furniture.
>
> The underpinnings of these pieces are immaculate.
>
> There is no cheating.
>
> There is no Bullshit.
>
>
> I'm not saying that they brought the back surfaces to the same
> condition as the wrought surfaces but, when a corner met, it was met
> with equal sections. There were no 'off the saw' surfaces left in the
> hidden areas. They had all seen a visit from the plane or scraper.
> When you turned a drawer upside down, the bottom was not left rough,
> nor was the bevel uneven.
>
>
> These really magnificent, 'No Bullshit' pieces showed a habit of mind
> that would not allow even a hidden surface to pass by without
> attention.
>
>
> The point, to me, about 'Bullshit', is that we must not let 'Bullshit'
> enter our making of fine objects. 'Bullshit' is a habit of mind, or a
> relaxing of standards, that informs our work, and ultimately makes the
> work less than what it could be.
>
> I truly believe that good habits of mind are critical to the
> production of good work. We must execute the fundamentals well and
> with a serious purpose.
>
> You may recall the days when a carpenter was interviewed for hiring
> and was asked to show his toolbox. If his tools were neatly arrayed
> and looked well cared for and sharp - it was an indication to the
> prospective employer that this man had the proper 'habit of mind' to
> do good work - that he was not a Bullshitter.
>
> Now we have schmucks who drag their tools around in drywall buckets.
>
> What sort of 'habits of mind' does this indicate.
>
>
> OK - my rant is pretty much done - but I would leave you with the
> final thought that 'habits of mind' direct our endeavors, and that we
> must cultivate our habits in this regard - if we are to have any
> chance at the occasional transcending greatness.
>
>
> And that ain't no bullshit.
>
>
>
>
> Tom Watson - WoodDorker
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Michael Latcha" wrote in message
<snip>
> (BTW ... nice troll, Tom. You definitely have a genius for On Topic
> trolls,
> and illuminating the failings of an educational system, with just few
> strokes on the keyboard. <g>)
Ditto !
(despite the fact "dittos" are considered poor etiquette in NGs)
Tom B
"Tom Watson" wrote in message
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:18:33 -0500, "Swingman" wrote:
>
> >(BTW ... nice troll, Tom. You definitely have a genius for On Topic
trolls,
> >and illuminating the failings of an educational system, with just few
> >strokes on the keyboard. <g>)
>
> Hell, Swing - I don't think of them so much as 'trolls' as much as the
> kind of interrogatory mischief that the old Gadfly, Socrates busied
> hisself with in the Agora, about 2500 years ago.
<reluctant snip, for brevity, of much reason and logic>
A very trenchant post, Tom ...as always you are a pleasure to read.
I'm thinking Usenet could use another term for that type of "interrogatory
mischief". ;)
Anyone?
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/05
"Morris Dovey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:c%[email protected]...
>
> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> quoted in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > "In the elder days of art
> > Builders wrought with greatest care
> > Each minute and unseen part,
> > For the Gods are everywhere."
>
> Thanks, Tom.
>
> I think I'll carve a reminder to myself - to hang on the shop wall:
>
> Build, with greatest care,
> Each minute and unseen part,
> For the gods are everywhere!
>
> HWW needed to look around a bit more - there have always been people who
> work as he describes. In our time and in this company I'd point proudly to
> people like Steve Knight, Mike Hyde, and Tom Plamann as proof.
>
> --
> Morris
>
Hey I resent those remarks ,I use gnomes and pixies to do the really hard
stuff, by the way not that it matters but the name is spelled hide, as in
hide and seek...mjh
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "In the elder days of art
> Builders wrought with greatest care
> Each minute and unseen part,
> For the Gods are everywhere."
>
> "The point of these lines is clear. In the old days, craftsmen did not
> cut corners. They worked carefully, and they took care with every
> aspect of their work. Every part of the product was considered, and
> each was designed and made to be exactly as it should be. These
> craftsmen did not relax their thoughtful self-discipline even with
> respect to features of their work which would ordinarily not be
> visible. Although no one would notice if those features were not quite
> right, the craftsmen would be bothered by their consciences. So
> nothing was swept under the rug. Or, one might perhaps also say, there
> was no bullshit.
>
> It does seem fitting to construe carelessly made, shoddy goods as in
> some way analogues of bullshit. But in what way? Is the resemblance
> that bullshit itself is invariably produced in a careless or
> self-indulgent manner, that it is never finely crafted, that in the
> making of it there is never the meticulously attentive concern with
> detail to which Longfellow alludes?"
>
>
> On Bullshit
> Harry Frankfurt
> Princeton University
>
>
>
http://web.archive.org/web/20040212054855/http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/
bs.html
>
>
>
>
> Tom Watson - WoodDorker
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
I think a good indication of this is St Pauls cathedral . Christopher Wren
the builder of St Pauls had argued for some time in the early 16 hundreds
that the dome could be built as a freestanding structure without the use of
columns al la US capitol building and many more . This concept was argued
against by just about every architect of note at the time ,
Wren succomed to the argument and the columns were added . Only after WW2
when the building was being inspected for war damage was it realized that
the columns were 2" or so shy of the base of the dome ....mjh
Bullshit.
The notion that "in the old days" everything was made with thoughtful
consideration to detail is nothing but bullshit. There were just as many
shoddy pieces of crap produced in every era of human existence as there are
today. To think that the pour souls that stood at a bench and planed doors
and furniture parts from sunup to sundown with no break, food or water, and
often not allowed to speak, "worked carefully, and... took care with every
aspect of their work" and that "nothing was swept under the rug" simply
ignores the reality of humanity, such that it is.
The pieces that have survived to tell the tale of how things were made "in
the old days" are, by definition, the best built, the best cared for, the
most fortunate specimens. Period.
To think otherwise would be like thinking that all posts to rec.woodworking
were as poorly worded and crafted as this one. Generalizations based on
incomplete data, and especially data that is ignored and/or inappropriately
analyzed, are worthless bullshit. As is this post.
Michael Latcha - at home in Redford, MI
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "In the elder days of art
> Builders wrought with greatest care
> Each minute and unseen part,
> For the Gods are everywhere."
>
> "The point of these lines is clear. In the old days, craftsmen did not
> cut corners. They worked carefully, and they took care with every
> aspect of their work. Every part of the product was considered, and
> each was designed and made to be exactly as it should be. These
> craftsmen did not relax their thoughtful self-discipline even with
> respect to features of their work which would ordinarily not be
> visible. Although no one would notice if those features were not quite
> right, the craftsmen would be bothered by their consciences. So
> nothing was swept under the rug. Or, one might perhaps also say, there
> was no bullshit.
>
> It does seem fitting to construe carelessly made, shoddy goods as in
> some way analogues of bullshit. But in what way? Is the resemblance
> that bullshit itself is invariably produced in a careless or
> self-indulgent manner, that it is never finely crafted, that in the
> making of it there is never the meticulously attentive concern with
> detail to which Longfellow alludes?"
>
>
> On Bullshit
> Harry Frankfurt
> Princeton University
>
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20040212054855/http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/bs.html
>
>
>
>
> Tom Watson - WoodDorker
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:18:33 -0500, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>(BTW ... nice troll, Tom. You definitely have a genius for On Topic trolls,
>and illuminating the failings of an educational system, with just few
>strokes on the keyboard. <g>)
Hell, Swing - I don't think of them so much as 'trolls' as much as the
kind of interrogatory mischief that the old Gadfly, Socrates busied
hisself with in the Agora, about 2500 years ago.
'Trolls', properly executed, seek to draw the general populace into an
unending and ultimately meaningless series of posts in response to a
bullshit question.
My post was an invitation to think about 'Bullshit' - and how it
relates to WoodDorking.
And 'Bullshit' is a serious thing.
A Bullshitter lets himself get sloppy in his stock prep and joinery,
and seeks to make the whole thing look good on the outside.
A Mechanic understands that stock prep is the foundation of joinery;
that joinery is the foundation of the piece, and that what shows, even
if it is bright and shiny today, will not be that way for long if they
have Bullshitted their way through the underpinnings.
You build houses and you know that this extends to that area, too.
I don't care if you are slab on grade or working up a full foundation
- if the slab or top course is left a little bit out of bubble, you
are going to chase that error all the way through the building.
Sure, there are ways of compensating, and every carpenter has to know
them but - there is no framing adjustment that can take the place of a
good foundation.
CharlieB, who is a good and thoughtful man, put up a picture on ABPW
of a corner joint. I took issue with it because the back side of the
intersecting members did not meet up right.
There would have been no net negative result in how the piece looked
from the outside. It would have looked fine. It would not have
suffered in any structural way from how the joint was executed. My
point was that the lack of attention to this detail reflected a lack
of attention to detail that is destructive to the kind of habit of
mind that I feel that you must have in order to do really good work.
Longfellow's paean to the workers of old is not without merit.
The argument that was made that many antiques show rough surfaces in
those areas that can not easily be seen, is a good point. I've taken
apart and repaired some pretty nice pieces that had some rough work
that was hidden from view.
I've also been to the conservator's shops at Winterthur and The
Philadelphia Museum Of Art, where you can really get up close and
personal with the innards of the hallmark instances of great
furniture.
The underpinnings of these pieces are immaculate.
There is no cheating.
There is no Bullshit.
I'm not saying that they brought the back surfaces to the same
condition as the wrought surfaces but, when a corner met, it was met
with equal sections. There were no 'off the saw' surfaces left in the
hidden areas. They had all seen a visit from the plane or scraper.
When you turned a drawer upside down, the bottom was not left rough,
nor was the bevel uneven.
These really magnificent, 'No Bullshit' pieces showed a habit of mind
that would not allow even a hidden surface to pass by without
attention.
The point, to me, about 'Bullshit', is that we must not let 'Bullshit'
enter our making of fine objects. 'Bullshit' is a habit of mind, or a
relaxing of standards, that informs our work, and ultimately makes the
work less than what it could be.
I truly believe that good habits of mind are critical to the
production of good work. We must execute the fundamentals well and
with a serious purpose.
You may recall the days when a carpenter was interviewed for hiring
and was asked to show his toolbox. If his tools were neatly arrayed
and looked well cared for and sharp - it was an indication to the
prospective employer that this man had the proper 'habit of mind' to
do good work - that he was not a Bullshitter.
Now we have schmucks who drag their tools around in drywall buckets.
What sort of 'habits of mind' does this indicate.
OK - my rant is pretty much done - but I would leave you with the
final thought that 'habits of mind' direct our endeavors, and that we
must cultivate our habits in this regard - if we are to have any
chance at the occasional transcending greatness.
And that ain't no bullshit.
Tom Watson - WoodDorker
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> quoted in message
news:[email protected]...
> "In the elder days of art
> Builders wrought with greatest care
> Each minute and unseen part,
> For the Gods are everywhere."
Thanks, Tom.
I think I'll carve a reminder to myself - to hang on the shop wall:
Build, with greatest care,
Each minute and unseen part,
For the gods are everywhere!
HWW needed to look around a bit more - there have always been people who
work as he describes. In our time and in this company I'd point proudly to
people like Steve Knight, Mike Hyde, and Tom Plamann as proof.
--
Morris
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 01:23:30 GMT, the opaque Lew Hodgett
<[email protected]> spake:
>I didn't answer, not knowing what to say.
>
>Finally she said, "Well the white stuff is also chicken shit".
>
>Score another one for mom.
>
>She turned 100 this spring, and is still a step ahead of me.
Give her a big hug, some KUDOS! and an Atta Girl! from me the next
time you see her. I come from a line of long livers, too. My great
grandmother on my Dad's side would have made it past 100 if she hadn't
fallen and broken her hip 2 weeks before her centennial birthday. She
died on the operating table. The rest of my grandparents lasted well
into their 90s.
Now, to confirm that "long livers" comment, mine was very large and
long before I sobered up. After a week of detox it was back to normal
in all respects with all hepatic counts normal.
----------------------------------------------
Never attempt to traverse a chasm in two leaps
http://www.diversify.com Comprehensive Website Design
===========================================================
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:39:52 -0400, "mike hide" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>I think a good indication of this is St Pauls cathedral . Christopher Wren
>the builder of St Pauls had argued for some time in the early 16 hundreds
>that the dome could be built as a freestanding structure without the use of
>columns al la US capitol building and many more . This concept was argued
>against by just about every architect of note at the time ,
>
>Wren succomed to the argument and the columns were added . Only after WW2
>when the building was being inspected for war damage was it realized that
>the columns were 2" or so shy of the base of the dome ....mjh
>
And he's probably still laughing his ass off... Good one, thanks.
To Tom's point, I think HWW's observation that bullshit involved
"deliberate misrepresentation" is the key to shoddy workmanship - it
is an attempt to provide something that dupes the purchaser/observer
into believing it is a work of craftsmanship. Those who know
craftsmanship can see through the bullshit.
TWS
RE: Subject
Takes me back to when I was about 10-12 years old.
Every time something didn't go exactly planned, I would make a "shit
comment".
Chicken, bull, hog, it made no difference, I used them all at will.
One day my mother, a red headed fire eater of German extraction, said,
"Lewis Arthur, you seem to be quite an expert on shit, especially
chicken shit, so I have a question for you".
(You know you are in trouble when your mother addresses you using your
middle name).
"I'll try", I answered.
"Well chicken shit consists of white stuff and dark stuff". she said.
"The dark stuff is chicken shit but do you know what the white stuff
is", she asked.
I didn't answer, not knowing what to say.
Finally she said, "Well the white stuff is also chicken shit".
Score another one for mom.
She turned 100 this spring, and is still a step ahead of me.
Lew
"mike hide" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:c%[email protected]...
> >
> > "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> quoted in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > "In the elder days of art
> > > Builders wrought with greatest care
> > > Each minute and unseen part,
> > > For the Gods are everywhere."
> >
> > Thanks, Tom.
> >
> > I think I'll carve a reminder to myself - to hang on the shop wall:
> >
> > Build, with greatest care,
> > Each minute and unseen part,
> > For the gods are everywhere!
> >
> > HWW needed to look around a bit more - there have always been people who
> > work as he describes. In our time and in this company I'd point proudly
to
> > people like Steve Knight, Mike Hyde, and Tom Plamann as proof.
> >
> > --
> > Morris
> >
> Hey I resent those remarks ,I use gnomes and pixies to do the really hard
> stuff, by the way not that it matters but the name is spelled hide, as in
> hide and seek...mjh
Oops! Sorry. 'Fraid I paid too much attention to the work and not enough to
the guy who did it (the work /is/ more attention-grabbing :-)
--
Morris
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:30:50 GMT, "Michael Latcha"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>The pieces that have survived to tell the tale of how things were made "in
>the old days" are, by definition, the best built, the best cared for, the
>most fortunate specimens. Period.
Agreed on the whole, since it makes sense that the better made do
survive. But there remains the argument of how much of today's
produce will remain a century or so from now, as chainsaws are used to
cut twisted 2x 4s [a misnomer] and banged together with too few nails.
Plywood floors, full of large unfilled knots, are laid in less than an
hour on minimal spec beams, as they begin immediately to separate and
squeek when walked on, and paint is thinned to transparency.
I lived in cheap row housing as a child. The buildings are being
cleaned of old soot, and still stand as good as new.
"Morris Dovey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "mike hide" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:c%[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> quoted in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > > "In the elder days of art
> > > > Builders wrought with greatest care
> > > > Each minute and unseen part,
> > > > For the Gods are everywhere."
> > >
> > > Thanks, Tom.
> > >
> > > I think I'll carve a reminder to myself - to hang on the shop wall:
> > >
> > > Build, with greatest care,
> > > Each minute and unseen part,
> > > For the gods are everywhere!
> > >
> > > HWW needed to look around a bit more - there have always been people
who
> > > work as he describes. In our time and in this company I'd point
proudly
> to
> > > people like Steve Knight, Mike Hyde, and Tom Plamann as proof.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Morris
> > >
> > Hey I resent those remarks ,I use gnomes and pixies to do the really
hard
> > stuff, by the way not that it matters but the name is spelled hide, as
in
> > hide and seek...mjh
>
> Oops! Sorry. 'Fraid I paid too much attention to the work and not enough
to
> the guy who did it (the work /is/ more attention-grabbing :-)
>
> --
> Morris
>
>
"Michael Latcha" wrote in message
>The pieces that have survived to tell the tale of how things were
> made "in the old days" are, by definition, the best built ...
<snip>
LOL ... now go back and note carefully the _subject_ of the first line, of
the _quoted_ treatsie on Longfellows little verse.
> To think otherwise would be like thinking that all posts to
rec.woodworking
> were as poorly worded and crafted as this one. Generalizations based on
> incomplete data, and especially data that is ignored and/or
inappropriately
> analyzed, are worthless bullshit. As is this post.
>
> Michael Latcha - at home in Redford, MI
I am thinking that perhaps Michael Latcha, while at home in Redford, MI,
missed entirely the point of both Longfellow's verse, and Tom's posting of
that little bit of quoted reflection on BS?
(BTW ... nice troll, Tom. You definitely have a genius for On Topic trolls,
and illuminating the failings of an educational system, with just few
strokes on the keyboard. <g>)
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/05
Tom Watson wrote:
> "In the elder days of art
> Builders wrought with greatest care
> Each minute and unseen part,
> For the Gods are everywhere."
>
> "The point of these lines is clear. In the old days, craftsmen did not
> cut corners. They worked carefully, and they took care with every
> aspect of their work. Every part of the product was considered, and
> each was designed and made to be exactly as it should be. These
> craftsmen did not relax their thoughtful self-discipline even with
> respect to features of their work which would ordinarily not be
> visible. Although no one would notice if those features were not quite
> right, the craftsmen would be bothered by their consciences. So
> nothing was swept under the rug. Or, one might perhaps also say, there
> was no bullshit.
>
> It does seem fitting to construe carelessly made, shoddy goods as in
> some way analogues of bullshit. But in what way? Is the resemblance
> that bullshit itself is invariably produced in a careless or
> self-indulgent manner, that it is never finely crafted, that in the
> making of it there is never the meticulously attentive concern with
> detail to which Longfellow alludes?"
>
>
> On Bullshit
> Harry Frankfurt
> Princeton University
>
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20040212054855/http://www.jelks.nu/misc/articles/bs.html
>
>
>
>
> Tom Watson - WoodDorker
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
My only addition would be to add "self-righteous" after "careless or
self-indulgent." The desire to be correct all the time makes some
workers cover up flaws, lying to themselves and the observer.
Bob