Topic: Venetian techniques and correct terminolgy.

[twists]

 Hi  

 
I am concerned and frustrated  that today's teminolgy  of Venetian techniques are becoming muddled, and missinterpretated. Does  any one know  of a  good book that lays out the correct terms that relate to techniques that one can  rely on.  
My old school terminolgy appears to be out dated  and I am beginning  to feel that my understanding of these terms  is out of step, or perhaps the British have  reinvented history.
For example is a lattice with out the bubble trapped in the middle of the clear diamond a reticelo?  and does  subistuting a threading machine  count as fine cane work?
 It appears to be a popular subject at present, but  everyone has a different opinion.
I  would like to write an article on the subject but  would like to make sure my own terminolgy is correct first.  
If you views on this subject or  can suggest a book . I  would be greatful.
 :spls:

[Ivo]

The Venini Catalogue Raisonné 1921-1986 by Anna Venini Diaz de Santillana has an excellent 2 page summary of techniques in the back. It is where I would start.

[twists]

Thanks 

I think I may have just brought  that book in August , not had time to look at it yet.

I would love to collect some of the 1950  Murano glass  but  I am not sure I would know what to look for.

S :bat:

[Frank]

The terms Mike use can't be outdated? But they might have been re-purposed by the collecting community in which case getting back to traditional glass-makers terms would make some sense. After all many of these terms are still kept alive by glassmakers using them. It is also likely that the terms vary between glassworks and locales even as they do the UK and elsewhere.

So a definitive source on the subject will always be open to discussion and would need to be flexible to re-purposing of terms in different time periods as well as determining the source of the mistakes that are in popular circulation. Which can often be traced to a single book written by/for collectors. Latticino is widely misused, Millefiori widely misspelt.

[langhaugh]

Anther book that you might find useful is Murano Glass: Themes and Variations (1910 - 1970) by Marc Heiremanns. I like the book as it steps back from the process and categorizes techniques into some basic groups.  Less expensive--and with a more encyplopeadic approach--is the Loschs' site at http://www.the-loschs.com/technik/technik1.html 

I also find useful Harold Newman, An Illustrated Dictionary of Glass from 1977.

I agree with Frank about terms being re-purposed. However, I think there are other factors that help create confusion. A few terms are  consistently misused, encouraged by their use on Ebay.  It's also worth remembering that many of the terms are proprietorial, describing a technique which has been developed by one company. Other companies might have another name for the same technique. It's not as if there is a central clearing house for glass blowing techniques. Also, the definitions are dynamic in much same way language is dynamic. Finally, there is ongoing debate about the appropriate usage of some terms. See this thread, for example, about the use of latticino, which is on going discussion on this board. http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,35257.msg191960.html#msg191960

Goodl uck.

David

[Frank]

There was not a central clearing house for glassmaking techniques in the past but today with the web it is feasible. It is only in the last 10-20 years that 'well' researched books on glass for have really surfaced although poor efforts do still surface. The web and networks like the GMB give no excuse for sloppiness today.

However, that does not mean that it can lead to definitive usage of a term, but what can be achieved is a bringing together of technique names and in time evolve where the earliest to latest uses of a term are referenced. This might not lead to a change in usage but it could give researchers and historians a centralised reference. That in time could help to reduce confusion for collectors who will have adopted terms from different sources. Most on-line references, but not all, fall down in settling for a single use of a term and not giving sources. Starting point must be your own knowledge and defining where you learned that, then those of your peers in the industry. For example Alastair could be a useful sounding board. Then add-in and cross reference all the published definitions. After that contacting as many Venetian glass-makers to get their input. In parallel bringing those terms, that you discover being used oddly, to places like the GMB to get a random feedback sample.

[KevinH]

... I also find useful Harold Newman, An Illustrated Dictionary of Glass from 1977. ...

... but what can be achieved is a bringing together of technique names and in time evolve where the earliest to latest uses of a term are referenced. ...

I agree in principle with Frank's point.

Newman's book, which I found one to be one of the most useful when I began my collecting interest, sadly fails as a research tool because it has no references to the sources or dates relating to its entries. All that can be said is that all of the 2,442 entries were in existence in, or shortly before, 1977.

But to add the source data to Newman's book may have increased its size to a point where a couple of extra volumes could have been needed! If an internet version of such a book could be produced, it could be added to over time. But it would need a dedicated editorial team to ensure accuracy of updates.

[Artofvenice]

Hi guys,
as  langhaugh it is a very dynamic slang and very often for the same techniques one master glassmaker uses a word and another master uses another word. Also some words can have a different meaning depending the contest.
For example "incalmo" (encalmo) is often identified with the connection of two blown parts (like them (http://www.artofvenice.com/art/immagini/VTG013.jpg)), but some master glassmakers call incalmo practically all the connections of hot parts of glass, like the flowers on a goblet stem.
Also, very important, some definitions are just in dialect and, if they are hard to be translate in Italian, you can imagine how hard they can be translated in English.
Here there is a short glossary http://www.artofvenice.com/art/glossary.html, but it is not complete for sure.
If you have a question about a specific technique or detail, please let me know and I will tell you the common local word (dialect) to identify that.

Sincerely

Alex
www.artofvenice.com