Quantcast

author shape question

Help Support Brothers of Briar:

Status
Not open for further replies.

earl

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2007
Messages
145
Reaction score
0
I'd recently picked up a Peterson Shamrock in a pipe shop as it was a shape I didn't have & wanted. I'd assumed it was an author. But the ASP pipe chart referred to authors as "beefed up" princes & the only prince I have is an 1/8 bent as was the shape on the chart. This has all the general attributes of an author shape but it's a straight. So was curious as to whether technicaly there can be a straight author. thanks, Earl
 

hazmat

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
232
Reaction score
0
earl":xln8lrhi said:
I'd recently picked up a Peterson Shamrock in a pipe shop as it was a shape I didn't have & wanted. I'd assumed it was an author. But the ASP pipe chart referred to authors as "beefed up" princes & the only prince I have is an 1/8 bent as was the shape on the chart. This has all the general attributes of an author shape but it's a straight. So was curious as to whether technicaly there can be a straight author. thanks, Earl
Consider that a Dublin is, technically, a straight pipe. Seen any bent Dublins? :D I own two, so I would think sure, there can be a straight author. I don't know that many shapes *can't* be either/or in this regard.
 

glpease

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
545
Reaction score
0
earl":kvw9u8fr said:
I'd recently picked up a Peterson Shamrock in a pipe shop as it was a shape I didn't have & wanted. I'd assumed it was an author. But the ASP pipe chart referred to authors as "beefed up" princes & the only prince I have is an 1/8 bent as was the shape on the chart. This has all the general attributes of an author shape but it's a straight. So was curious as to whether technicaly there can be a straight author. thanks, Earl
An author is certainly not a "beefed up prince." If anything, it's a rhodesian derivative.

First, the bowl of the true author is somewhat taller, more brandyglass shaped than the squatter, more spherical of the prince. Second, a prince is never more than 1/8 bent, and usually closer to 1/16, or straight, while an author is generally closer to 1/4 bent. Third, a prince is a long, elegant shape, whilst an author is short and chunky.

Rather than talk about it, how about some pictures of real pipes?

(I started that shape chart project a LONG time ago, and really need to revisit it, but for now, it is what it is.)

But, back to your question. An author is a bent pipe. A straight version of it is something else. Perhaps an apple, or a squat brandyglass. It really depends on the bowl shape, the shank weight, and things like that. Can you post a photo?
 

Carlos

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Council Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
6,752
Reaction score
15
Location
Chestnut, IL
Thanks, Greg! The pictures help a bunch.

That Comoy is a wonderful shape.
 

earl

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2007
Messages
145
Reaction score
0
Not able to post a picture (wouldn't know how anyway :D ) but it's about 6 inches in length with a tomatoe shaped bowl of quite a good size- I like them big. Round, large-sized diameter shank. thanks as always for sharing your knowledge guys. Earl
 

showme1or2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
Earl, I don't know much about Petersons, but is there a model/shape number on the pipe? We might be able to find a pic of it somewhere on the 'net for comparison.

showme
 

showme1or2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
glpease":ua3wz9zs said:
An author is certainly not a "beefed up prince." If anything, it's a rhodesian derivative.
Greg, the word "derivative" just cracked open my mind to pipe shapes in a way I'd never considered before. I've got a question and will try to explain my way up to it.

I guess if someone had an omniscient view of the history of pipes then a record of the first ever shape could be made and subsequent developments/changes tracked.

Lacking that, however, I'll take whatever opinions may come of this question: Do you mean that an author is literally a derivative of a rhodesian shape (i.e. rhodesian surely came first and author followed and is clearly related), or that an author shape simply has more in common with a rhodesian than a prince?

I'd never considered derivations of pipe shapes. I just assumed they came about naturally. But, I can certainly see how the modification of one shape may be seen, if looked for, in another. Maybe this is more easily seen in modern pipemaking than earlier...or maybe it's the other way around. I'm still working on the canadian, liverpool, lumberman shape similarities/differences.

showme
 

Carlos

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Council Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
6,752
Reaction score
15
Location
Chestnut, IL
I got to play with the camera a bit. I wanted to post a couple of my author shape pipes. The pictures are no where near the quality of some others. But will give an idea into the shape by different carvers

The first is a Rad Davis ASP 2006 sandblast. A tremendous value I might add. The second is a Mark Tinsky that I asked Mark to make similar to the ASP 2006 pipe, but in a larger size. Mark "discovered" a new stian in the process and made me a superb piece of briar.

Hmmm...guess I better work on those links.







 

glpease

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
545
Reaction score
0
showme1or2":tn0p490x said:
glpease":tn0p490x said:
An author is certainly not a "beefed up prince." If anything, it's a rhodesian derivative.
Greg, the word "derivative" just cracked open my mind to pipe shapes in a way I'd never considered before. I've got a question and will try to explain my way up to it.

I guess if someone had an omniscient view of the history of pipes then a record of the first ever shape could be made and subsequent developments/changes tracked.

Lacking that, however, I'll take whatever opinions may come of this question: Do you mean that an author is literally a derivative of a rhodesian shape (i.e. rhodesian surely came first and author followed and is clearly related), or that an author shape simply has more in common with a rhodesian than a prince?

I'd never considered derivations of pipe shapes. I just assumed they came about naturally. But, I can certainly see how the modification of one shape may be seen, if looked for, in another. Maybe this is more easily seen in modern pipemaking than earlier...or maybe it's the other way around. I'm still working on the canadian, liverpool, lumberman shape similarities/differences.

showme
A good question. When I used the word "derivative," I meant to imply that the author was, indeed, based on the rhodesian, but in reality, it's only through inference that I can claim this. I've seen rhodesians and bent bulldogs dating back to the late-mid-1800s, whilst the oldest examples of the author shape I've seen are from sometime in the early 20th Century. Since there's such an obvious family resemblance, I drew the possibly incorrect conclusion that the author was derived from the rhodesian.

I've seen it claimed that the bulldog was derived from the billiard, by cutting away "un-necessary" briar. I don't really agree that the wood in the cheeks of a pipe, where the heat tends to be most concentrated, is unnecessary, but however the bulldog came about, I'm glad it did. It's SUCH a cool shape.

Oh, wait. We're talking about authors. ;) I've got a Charatan special in an almost rhodesian shape. The pipe came with a double-discomfort mouthpiece, which snapped dramatically one day under the duress of being sat upon. The pipe sate on the shelf for years, and was recently sent to LL for one of his nifty, polished and ported acrylic mouthpieces. I figured as long as it was going to be a replacement anyway, I might as well get one that 1) works, 2) doesn't turn green from exposure to gamma rays, and 3) is actually good looking. He did a nice fat taper for it, and the pipe is gorgeous. Interestingly, it looks a little more like an author now, and less like a rhodesian. I'll have to shoot a picture. (By the way, the workmanship on that new mouthpieces is exemplary, but it pales in comparison to the one he made for a Peter Klein, but that's another tale.)

I've often had it in mind to see if I can, in a more scholarly way, track down the original shapes, and track how they evolved over time. It would certainly be time consuming, but what a great deal of fun the research would be. ;)

In any case, since the briar pipe was first made in France, and since clay was the common material of the day, it would stand to reason that the first bruyères were in a cutty shape, or similar. Damn. I'll have to dig in to some research materials...

-glp (amateur pipe anthropologist in training)
 

showme1or2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
glpease":3rik1pv3 said:
Damn. I'll have to dig in to some research materials...
Sorry, I didn't mean to give you more work to do. Thanks for the reply.

showme
 

pipemaker

Broken Pipe
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
214
Reaction score
0
I see a lot of similarities between the author shape and the bull moose or bull cap shapes, although the bull moose generally has a somewhat thicker shank.

The bull moose seems to be a forgotten shape, and it would be interesting to learn if it predated the author or was developed afterward.

Topics like this really exemplify how this hobby of ours can offer unlimited avenues to explore... I think I will stick with it for a while. :D

Mike
 

Puff Daddy

Well-known member
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
6,897
Reaction score
0


My favorite derivatives of the above shapes are the #54 by castello and the further incorporation of the above with yet another shape idea, the bullcap, as (seems to me anyhow) in these photos

 

showme1or2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
PD, that last pipe is freakin gorgeous. :shock: What it is?

showme
 

Puff Daddy

Well-known member
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
6,897
Reaction score
0
The last 2 pipes are a Hedegaard (center) and a Bang (right). Sadly they are not mine, but pics of pipes I saw for sale elsewhere, could not afford, but fell in love with and saved cuz someday maybe I could :heart: The black and whites are more in line with my budget :lol:
 

ZuluCollector

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
When I look at that Peterson, I see an author shape (to get back to the original question).

I have a Savinelli Corallo pipe in the author shape that is really a good classical example of the shape. Likewise here is a Lindner author as well.

I do see some spacial relationships between the author and the prince, and between the rhodesian and the author, too, however the presence of the frustum (the conical planed top) on the rhodesian feels like a significant departure from the author (at least to my eye).



 

Carlos

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Council Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
6,752
Reaction score
15
Location
Chestnut, IL
Something about those shapes are pleasing to the eye and comfortable in the mouth. That Lindner is as graceful as any I have seen.
 

stevalla

New member
Joined
Dec 22, 2007
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Earl, I think most folks would class that shape as an apple, or slight variant thereof.
Regards,
Alan Stevenson
Wausau,WI
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top