Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => British & Irish Glass => Topic started by: Pinkspoons on November 30, 2011, 03:54:28 PM
-
Picked these up from a fair, more because they caught my eye than anything else. The seller told me they're by Sarah Peterson, but they're unsigned. Google coughs up a few paperweights with similar style sensibilities... but nothing overtly the same.
They're solid freeform shapes with a spiral of controlled bubbles inside, as well as a floating three-dimensional 'shell' of opal glass. On the verso surface is embedded a mix of thin sheets and rods, powdered enamel, and granular lumps of coloured glass.
Tallest is 25cm, smaller is 23cm.
Are the Sarah Peterson, and - if so - do they have a name?
Thanks for looking.
(http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/pinkspoons/1b-119.jpg)
(http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/pinkspoons/2b-102.jpg)
(http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/pinkspoons/3b-92.jpg)
-
Sarah Peterson works for Caithness :huh:
-
These look as if they belong more with the same sort of ranges and period as the "free-form" limited edition pieces produced for a short while, fairly recently, Nic.
I'm sure jakgene showed a "Cyclone" vase (amongst others), from this "free-form" sets of things fairly recently.
It's the complexity as well as the style of bubbles included that makes me think this. They do look very "Sarah Petersen" - I have no problems with this attribution, though I'm no ex-spurt on this.
And yes, Caithness, Christine, thanks, I forgot to mention that!
I see Frank's "Glass Images" are currently unavailable online, due to lack of funds to support the site. :thud:
I shall have to do a bit of organising to arrange it, but will be contributing something shortly. :thup:
It's an incredible resource.
-
Thanks for the look-in. I neglected to mention Caithness in my post - but I already knew she worked for them. :-[
The Caithness site and Frank's Scotland's Glass site were my first port of call after a bit of Googling when I got home with them, but I couldn't find anything from the same series.
The seller mentioned that she also worked for Dartington and Poole pottery for a while, but I couldn't find any mention of this online.
:huh:
-
Just re-read my above post - I meant couldn't find any link to Poole online, not Dartington.
-
The seller mentioned that she (Sarah Peterson) also worked for Dartington and Poole pottery for a while, ...
I have never heard about Poole pottery - but she certainly worked for Dartington, 2004 - 2007, when Dartington took over Caithness.
I haven't found your exact items in my catalogues, but the ones below are certainly close relatives.
-
Oh, actually, they look to be exactly the same as mine (barring height difference and the fact that mine are a little more sparse of decor). Even down to the floating opal 'shell'.
:thup:
What year is the catalogue for?
Seems I'm missing two lightboxes for them... which is fine, because they make them look a bit tacky (imho). They look great enough with natural daylight behind them (also imho).
Edit: Had a closer look at the catalogue - you might be right about them just being close relatives... mine are a lot more free and easy with the colour combinations too. Add to that the size and the less cluttered decor.... Hmm...
-
The catalogue was from 2008 - but the numbering (U07...) indicates they were issued in 2007. This means, issued in the year Dartington took Caithness over and Sarah Peterson came back to Caithness. As I haven't seen your sculptures in later catalogues, they could be studies (done at Dartington?) leading to Forest Flame - with a fair chance they were not combined a priori with a light box (which I'm not too fond of either).
-
Thanks for the information.
Do you know if the Caithness production models would have been signed? (I'm not too familiar with their output)
-
Do you know if the Caithness production models would have been signed?
They usually are, at least more recently. In the early years you'll find many (unlimited) with just a label (limited editions would carry at least the numbers); also later unsigned ones are around - either because it may have been felt obstructive (for some designs) or just missed - but these are the exception.
-
:hi:
Ummm - I have two large pieces from the Free-form, limited edition range - chargers which are not marked at all.
I believe they are probably seconds. (Found in charity shops)
-
Oh dear. I wonder if mine are seconds... although I can't see anything awry with them, but it could go towards explaining the differences from the production models.
I think I preferred 'early prototype'. :24:
-
There was a fairly big discussion of the "ways, means and ends" of the whole "seconds" thing with Caithness, just recently.
I believe is is suspected that some bits were even marked as seconds just to shift them quickly at the shop-end of Caithness - they were also remarkably fussy - it can be very hard to find any minor flaw in many official "seconds" too.
>:D It could even be a way of getting around the "limited edition" numbers.......
I think your things are wonderful, and definitely Sarah Peterson.
Currently, I believe she is a major "tour-de-force" - almost keeping Caithness alive single-handedly (according to a major fan of hers, the engraver Bruce Walker, with whom I had a lovely discussion during the summer.)
Given the differences between yours and the "final production" model, I think "prototype" is likely to be accurate. Bruce told me that she works very hard to ensure that all her designs can be made to production standards by all the makers who are currently in action.
Perhaps yours are one she made, but when it came to production, the other makers couldn't quite manage her standard in the allocated time they have to produce each one, so the design had to be made smaller and simpler?
-
Sure they aren't Cynthia P Caster?
-
Think the 'unselected' on the label is misleading, leading some to describe them has limited editions or trial pieces and others maybe construing this to mean they are seconds and removing the labels?. I bought this Bolero piece from the dancer series by Sarah Peterson the seller claiming the unselected label meant it had never gone into production Lol
Also seen quite a few this year with the label removed with all sorts of fanciful theories has to the maker.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-by88tRQmWe0/Tjz1xRnHBFI/AAAAAAAAQAo/QFhYUdBK9f8/s912/SDC15368.JPG
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-9ICm5I75Sv8/Tjz3oCYiMrI/AAAAAAAAQBU/JPYsrmKvAvQ/s640/SDC15369.JPG
Another paperweight here probably by Sarah too same label.....
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-nPcJYoC9A9A/TljsVE-_a7I/AAAAAAAARjg/RH9bGgTn698/s640/SDC15668.JPG
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-M97VaOPhJ-Q/TljsitMoZ5I/AAAAAAAARjw/hA5eoWd1vV8/s640/SDC15671.JPG
Maybe yours had the same label and someone removed them thinking they were seconds? just a theory Nic but why put 'unselected' on the label anyway and what does it actually mean?
Chris
-
"Unselected" (label) means it is a second. Now - the previous discussion has already mentioned, that seconds (for Caithness) are not always seconds in the most obvious meaning
- second quality, i.e. not quite coming up to standards. Could also be
- a weight which never made it into production ("unselected" would even make sense here). But it also has been suggested that
- first quality weights were marked seconds when "cheaper" weights for the Studio Shop were needed. I'm not convinced about that last, however.
Apart from the ambiguity, I don't consider these "unselected" labels a good idea - they "fall off" too easily >:D.
-
I believe is is suspected that some bits were even marked as seconds just to shift them quickly at the shop-end of Caithness - they were also remarkably fussy - it can be very hard to find any minor flaw in many official "seconds" too.
Oh, it was the same when I bought a lot of Danish glass - some items were marked seconds for no discernable reason, even when placed next to a 'first' of the same design. After getting a couple of house-clearance joblots of it from Denmark, I did wonder if it was a way of friends and family of the glassmaker being able to naughtily get first quality glass for a reduced price from the factory shop. Somewhat less risky than just shoving it up your jumper on the way out!
Maybe yours had the same label and someone removed them thinking they were seconds? just a theory Nic but why put 'unselected' on the label anyway and what does it actually mean?
From what the Google-pixies tell me, 'unselected' seems to denote a second produced during a period when it was deemed unnecessary to mark them properly. I think the general concensus on here is that they're too different to be just seconds.... but never say never!
-
Sure they aren't Cynthia P Caster?
I'd be very worried about the model... and their partners.
-
From what the Google-pixies tell me, 'unselected' seems to denote a second produced during a period when it was deemed unnecessary to mark them properly. I think the general concensus on here is that they're too different to be just seconds.... but never say never!
Well - even "general consensus" might be wrong! If I have to decide what Google-pixies and a (former) Caithness worker tell me (on Glass-Forums, where they don't let me in any more), I trust the Caithness worker: "..., the unselected sticker means that it was a second quality piece, but it doesn't mean a reject as unlimited designs do still get weights destroyed if the standard is too low for sale even as a second." (plus the other possibilities mentioned in my previous posting)
-
(on Glass-Forums, where they don't let me in any more)
The 'banned from Glass-Forums' list is a long one! ;D
-
If your sculptures had had an "unselected" label on them - perhaps that could still indicate a ptototype - Sarah made them but found/decided that they were too complicated for the workers to produce to this standard in a production-line in the time allocated?
Bruce Walker was adamant about how dedicated she is to achieve the very best possible at all levels within all the limits imposed by keeping the business going.
-
Funnily enough Sue I have asked this question before about the 'unselected' labels but received no answers ;D
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,42756.msg238043.html#msg238043