Topic: New Acquisitions!

[Leni]

I noticed nobody had posted on this board for a few days, so I had to do something about it.  At great personal sacrifice  :roll: I have over the last few days purchased a few new paperweights, just to keep this board going  :lol:

However, I have a problem!  The battery in my camera has died.  And while clearing the library (that's dining room to 'normal' people   ) I stupidly put away in one of the boxes the spare battery and the battery charger.  And can I remember which box it was in?  :oops:  :roll:

I have asked the vendor of the most interesting weight if I may use the pictures he used on ebay - yes, that's where I do most of my 'shopping'  :lol: - and am waiting to hear if he agrees.  He is curious to know an ID for the weight himself, so I hope he will say it's ok.  

At the moment we both are thinking 'Bohemian' but I'm not sufficiently expert on the different canes yet, and my searches in my paperweight books haven't turned up anything *exactly* like this one, although I keep feeling there's something on the periphery of my consciousness  :?

Kevin, is there a book you could recommend specifically about canes?  Those in this particular weight are incredibly elaborate, being made up of lots of tiny canes including some tiny 'rose-like' ones  :shock: I keep having to pick up my magnifier and have another look!  

Oh, it's so frustrating not having the use of my camera!   :x  :roll:

Leni

[RAY]

hi Leni
the book i have about identifying antique PW canes is called " identifying antique paperweights lampwork by george n kulles " or the one for the french weights is " antique paperweights  by paul jokelson but there was only 2000 published, but keep a look out for it, it's dam good book

[Frank]

Andrew Dohan's book fits the bill:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0933756259/ref=nosim/glassmuseumonlin

[RAY]

yep thats a good book Frank, i've got that as well,  when i read the book i did'nt realize there were so many people doing paperweights, even some of the chinese had signature canes in there weights

[RAY]

i get my book's from Allan port  www.paperweights.com and off David www.paperweightcentre.co.uk

[Leni]

Thanks very much for the book info fellas, and for the Allan Port link! Another site bookmarked!  

Just heard from the vendor of the weight - he says it's fine to use his images, as he's interested to know an ID himself, so here they are.  http://tinypic.com/4j9i4h  http://tinypic.com/4j9i61  http://tinypic.com/4j9i7b

Hope somebody can help with an ID   :shock:  :?  

It's very pretty and I'm thrilled with it anyway, but I do like to know  :roll:  :wink:

Leni

Images copyright Roger Widdows

[RAY]

a miniature clichy

[Leni]

a miniature clichy

 :shock:  :shock:  :shock:
Do you think so, Ray?  :?  I thought 'lightning never strikes twice'   :roll:

I know I'm no expert, but I was comparing the canes with my Clichy weight and couldn't see any which look like a 'match', although the quality is certainly as good!  

I thought Bohemian because there are one or two with similar canes in the Sibylle Jargstorf, particularly some of the Riesengebirge complex canes which contain 'Clichy-like' roses.

I must admit, I did think Clichy when I first saw it, but I told myself, "Don't be silly!  Your'e seeing Clichy weights everywhere!"  :roll:  :lol:

Leni

[RAY]

i'm no expert either Leni but the shape of the dome strikes me as clichy, go to go and pick kids up now, will write more later

[KevinH]

One of the fun things about paperweights is that without a definite signature cane or a cane that can easily be confirmed, it's just not very easy in many cases to give an identification.

But - just as with anything else - one of the benefits of discussing the pros and cons of a considered attribution is that the process can give us a wealth of knowledge that cannot be gained by a quick and simple identification by an "expert".

Ray's comment about how the shape of the dome steers him towards an attribution is an important point. With all paperweights of the type discussed here, the dome shape, base finish, individual cane details, overall setting of the canes, as well as the internal clarity of the glass, are all crucial aspects to consider.

And then, after considering all the points, we may still end up with no firm conclusion.  :roll:

I think it would be a good thing to let Leni and Ray, and anyone else who wants to join in, discuss their thoughts on this weight, preferably with as many book and website references as possible also being given.

I may think I know the answer to this one, but I will have to do some checking myself before I give an opinion. So ... thoughts, reasonings and references ... over to you folks, but I will raise one question - what's the height and diameter?

Oh, and Leni, in the Jargstorf book you may find a comment on Clichy profiles that is worth throwing in to the debate. And for everyone who wants to join in, don't forget to check out the PCC 1999 Exhib photos at:
http://www.kevh.clara.net/exhib99/exhib99.htm - there may be a clue in there.