[oscartg]

I've got some minutes to kill so I'm going to make some obvious points about wood finish.

The goal of wood finish is to protect and enhance the appearance of the wood its on. The problem is that goal too often conflicts with production schedules.
The  two most common finishes used throughout the 20th century were lacquer and shellac, neither are very good wood (or even adequate) finishes.
The very thing that made each appealing to production is their problem, they dry too fast.
Lacquer and shellac sit on the wood, they do not absorb into the wood, that's why things like a dent or a ding will blow off finish and why they age so poorly. Just like with paint, the constant expansion and shrinking of wood inevitably leads to the finish merrily separating from the wood it's supposed to protect.

The sad fact is, manufacturers didn't select finishes for their outstanding protection qualities, but rather ease and speed of application and then of course, cost.

When I refinish anything, my goal is that the piece I'm doing will last one or several lifetimes given normal care. That cannot be expected of shellac or lacquer.
Yeah, yeah, some will shout "but it's not original!". Well, if it was junk when originally applied and it's still junk today, why repeat the mistake?