Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => British & Irish Glass => Topic started by: CultureVulture on October 10, 2011, 08:31:41 PM
-
Hello,
I have this heavy bowl. 7 inch diameter rim 8.75 inch widest diameter 5.5 inch tall. Weighs 2.2 Kilogram. Sapphire blue polished pontil base. I submitted it to another site and got a 50/50 vote by two people as to whether it was Whitefriars. The person who voted yes told me that he had one of them but a different version and that it was listed in the Museum of London archives and hed seen the drawing via one of the ppl who work there. Its not catalogued in any the available Whitefriars catalogues online. I tried asking more about it in their forumn but no replies. Can anyone shed more light on it.
T.I.A for any help whatsoe :)ver
-
CV — Is It Whitefriars is an interesting forum. I try to avoid it as an initial step in identifying glass as it looks as if you are being hopeful that your find is Whitefriars, rather than looking for an ID in a neutral way. Also if it turns out not to be W/F you have to do it all again for the GMB, and I'm slow and error prone on the keyboard and don't like wasting my time by doing the same thing twice. Quite naturally Is It Whitefriars has a higher proportion of single glassworks devotee commentators than the GMB, which can be both an advantage and a disadvantage, and might very occasionally produce different results.
Here's the link (http://www.whitefriars.com/isit_contents.php?pageNum_Recordset4=1&ID=10064) to your query. I had to smile when I read it. You certainly will not get any more "NO" votes after that contribution by Nigel. Attributions don't get any better than that, which is almost as good as having the original W/F label on the bowl.
Thanks for putting it on the GMB. Most useful information, which I for one might have missed.
Bernard C. 8)
-
That it is not in the catalogues may mean that this bowl was produced exclusively for a special order rather than general sale.
-
Thankyou for your help. There are alot of hairline scratched on the inside of the base maybe this is an indication of its age. I was wondering whether to leave it as it is or have it polished? Im probably looking to sell on.
-
Hello, did any my question about the scratching ..i think my message dissappeared
-
Hello,
The 'person' on W/F's dot com was me. My version is cut and from the 1930's. I thought what I said on W/F's dot com was fairly explicit. The drawing for my bowl is held in the MoL archive.
Since yours is my one's blank, I would venture to suggest that it must be Whitefriars/Powell.
The person who voted 'No' on W/F's dot com's 'Is it?' must not have the experience, or knowledge, required for an informed view on the bowl - or else they just looked through the catalogues that are available online, which ain't all of them ;)
Nigel
PS. As for polishing, that is a decision that any dealer (or collector) in glass has to make regularly and depends on the individual's outlook. N.
-
The person who voted yes told me that he had one of them but a different version and that it was listed in the Museum of London archives and hed seen the drawing via one of the ppl who work there. Its not catalogued in any the available Whitefriars catalogues online.
Hi,
The original design can be found in the factory design book for 1931-35.
It is pattern number 8985 and the design shows cutting but your bowl and probably Nigel's has none.
Regards,
Patrick. (Image shown by permission of the Museum of London.)
-
Hmmm. seems to be one of those mnights when people don't read what is written :o
your bowl and probably Nigel's has none.
Patrick, when I say my bowl is cut then that is what I mean...........just like the image you have supplied :o and the image that Ian Price showed me, and which I referred to on 'Is it?'. You have even handled the bowl I have :huh:
Nigel
-
Hi Nigel,
Yes tired and old age............................ Apologies.
Designed by Barnaby Powell 1934.
Regards,
Patrick.
-
Hello, did any my question about the scratching ..i think my message dissappeared
No, no-one replied, neither did your message disappear, it was just moved from Glass to British and Irish now we know what it is. :)
-
Thankyou, This information is amazing.
-
I apologise for my absence and like to thank everyone for this help. You must have had that feeling when you find a bowl or piece like this and you know that youve got something but dont and cant find the information anywhere on it. Once you get a tiny bit of info on "you get the buzz" and you want to know more. Thats why i came here and no offence to Nigel your words on wf were of great news. trust me i was "buzzing" when i read your WF reply and the reply did serve its purpose. Then i settled and thought what can i find out next about it. Thankyou Nigel and thankyou Patrick for putting the diagram up. I think one day when im not so busy looking for glass ill give the Museum of London a try.
So now the curiosity kicks back in if its a blank of what would or should have then been cut, why? Did someone make one smooth, did they make many smooth, or was it say an example to work from to blow the bowl before cutting.
If someone ordered it smooth in 1934 it must have looked strange along side there other pieces futuristic even.
Thanks anyway.
-
Hi,
I used the term 'blank' really to exaggerate the difference between the two bowls. It is more than likely that the uncut piece is/was the norm and the the cut one unusual (Oooo, I just realised, I would say that wouldn't I ??).
You're right it does look futuristic for the time, but there are other pieces that would sit well with it from that period by W/F's - for instance, see plate 118 on page 126 of Lesley Jackson.
Nigel
-
are we aloud to speak about possible values here?
-
Errrmmm, well.................. dealers advising other dealers about price :huh: :spls:
Be realistic, it's maybe scarce, but only a few potential buyers.
Nigel
-
If someone ordered it smooth in 1934 it must have looked strange along side there other pieces futuristic even.
Take a look at other glass from the 1930s, you be surprised how modern much of it looks. The trouble is that much of the stuff we mostly remember from the post-war era often wasn't innovative; it was conservative and harked back to earlier times. There was innovation out there, it just wasn't the norm and it didn't always sell well.
-
are we aloud to speak about possible values here?
Hi,
As Nigel says it is a limited market and undecorated bowls are not high on many collectors list of must have's. Scratched interiors also detract and are costly to repair/renovate .
In my opinion if you listed it on Ebay you would be lucky to get 30.00 to 40.00 for it.
Now if it was one of these.................. ??? ( Images by permission Museum of London. )
-
Yes ive got some of those too Patrick...
....just kidding.
I think im probably going to add it to my keeper collection. Maybe ill get it restored one day. Ive been looking at getting into glass restoration myself once ive had practice and competent ill probably give it a go. I wouldnt touch it till i was competent.
Thanks for the advice