The Long-Winded Secret Life of Wood

I could post about how Google maps should have a way for you to choose your own route by like pulling the travel line a street over or what not, cause then a walker could figure out precisely how far they walked but I am a little worried that this site will get a little too techy with its ideas. Of course now I'm in the bind that if I proceed to give you a good idea it will be a second good idea and will completely undermine the subtitle of this little blog here.

But I dare to move boldly forwards. I was walking in Urban Ore the other day (that place is itself one stellar idea) and realizing that there are at least two distinct sets of things that they house on their premises. Tho' I don't discount the possibly that there are many more categories lurking around that warehouse I saw two things: junk and the worn. (Don't worry I'm getting to a good idea...I think.) The store's premise is one of rehabilitation. I am so fully behind that that if you were not behind it and somehow in between me and it--like in an obscuring better-door-than-a-window type of way--I would probably be kicking you out of anger. That's how much I'm behind it. But, but, but (and this is a big but and also many successive buts) I do think there is a fatal error. Junk is not worth rehabilitating. My point here is that there was an era when stuff was made to last. And then there were the 1960's and 1970's and 1980's when we got really good a creating keep commodities.

You see, when you build something to last that means not only that it is something sturdy but that you built it taking into account the effects of time. Meaning, even when it ages and becomes incredibly broken it is still salvageable either as parts or as an interesting new version of itself. This is essentially because its basic conception allowed for the deterioration of whatever it is made of, wood, metal &c. Tho' obviously the original design did not desire deterioration it prepared for it. A good for instance is a table I saw at UO that was clearly beat up. The top wood was covered in a type of dust I did not realize was existent. It had literally melded with the wook to create an overlayer akin to moss. It had fold down arms that would would assume had lost the ability to lift into table extensions. But no, they could be held by a simple piece of wood on a swivel that one turned to prop up the extension. Simple metal hinges--rusty--but working. And wood.

Moving quickly along cause I'm already in full on ramble mode, my negative examples come from the realm of things akin to the Ikean. They have their place, don't get me wrong. And their place is 1999. Point being their sever their function but then they should go. You can't do anything more with them except maybe break them enough to create some interesting form of mulch. I don't mean to limit it to Ikea at all, but to products that are made to fill a specific movement in fashion, temporary and functional but made to be in a landfill. Worse is their sense of time isn't one of age but of use and elimination. And again, this is not an anti-plastic point--tho' it certainly has its limit as a redefinable basic element. This is simply to say constituent parts should have some longevity.

So the idea?, you're asking. It's sort of two fold. Think about your objects as vulnerable to the same progression of time that you are. Think about their future both with and without you. This should provide you and your common human a few things. It is first of all always good to be reminded of your own mortality and to be aware of time, its progression and effect. And this adapts the consumerist motive into a number of beautiful offshoot. You don't have to feel bad about enjoying things. They are a big part of life. They can be great. And if you think about them as sharing in your life they can be a constant reminder of that first thing. And if you think about how they will be in the world without you, you are already a big step of the way towards considering the rest of the world, its people and its things. That's what we call contentiousnesses and its a good thing. Just think of all this as taking some of the negative capitalistic impulses and turning then to good. That, for even a naysayer like myself, is the wonder of the capitalo-democratism of our world. It certainly leaves the door open for the bad and greedy peeps of the world but it certainly doesn't shut it on all those that would use their freedom for the betterment of others.