Topic: Large Woodland Vase

[Sklounion]

Oops, sorry my previous post should have read 11589, of course.
Please note when viewing the files in the Glass Gallery link given above: File 11/12, the bottom item is definitely not a "Barolac" pattern, being a design from Hermanova hut'.
regards,
Marcus

[msiscoe]

Thank you for all your help.

[gemmacler]

Hello again
  Having just read recent posts am now thoroughly confused ! Mine is the vase at the top. It is identical in every way including colour, to the vase recently posted as Lalique on ebay us to which I was alerted by msiscoe's post. I had accepted the Barolac/Inwald/Jenkins origin suggested here, particularily after seeing the online catalogue [in German alas] Re the " Lalique " post on ebay, I would have thought that the Lalique output from before the war was pretty well documented. I noted the seller did not claim the vase was signed. I am well aware that ebay items can be less than accurate/honest but I would have thought that at that price it would only be high end Lalique collectors - with their knowledge of the glass - interested, so the seller must have had some cause for confidence. I did find that at least 2 vases of the same basic description have been sold in the last few years listed on auction values sites as " in the manner of Lalique " I do not know for how much. I have not had the opportunity to examine an old - not repro - piece of Barolac glass, but I assume it is of superb quality. I say this because in one respect I was struck by the ebay us seller saying their vase was  " of museum quality ". This was what I felt about my vase. Lastly, my particular vase was acquired by me in France, nearly all the old glassware I have seen where I bought it is French, naturally enough !!!
Best wishes
Gemma

[obscurities]

Hello, There is really nothing to be confused about with the vase.  I have seen this piece both with and without the Verlys mark. I do not now if the Verlys marks have been spurious or not. IMHO the addition of a Verlys mark would not add significant value to a piece of glass such as this..... Maybe someone can clarify if Verlys actually did a similar item to this vase. I have always been under the impression that they did.

If you go to the following link:

http://rlalique.com/Sections/Fakes/Vases.Glasses.html

You will be able to locate the vase in question on that page shown in, if memory serves me correctly, at least 5 different colors including yours.....A study of the images will also reveal a great disparity in the quality of the molds used and the quality of the results for the same decor.  All of these have been identified as fake Lalique. In other words, not Lalique, but offered for sale as Lalique.

Not only is the vase relatively easy to identify, it is also relatively easy to identify as a fake in the world of Lalique.

Let us simply suffice by saying that the sellers offering it as Lalique should spend less time dreaming about their possible future income and a little more time researching exactly what it is they are selling....... That, of course is assuming that they are honest sellers who are not intentionally misrepresenting the item.....

Craig

[msiscoe]

Regarding the amber "Lalique" vase offered on Ebay, I did refer the seller to rlalique.com when they first posted the listing. I knew it was definately not R Lalique, but I have seen it listed on eBay in clear glass as R Lalique as well. The seller thanked me for the information, and continued the listing anyway. No serious collector would have fallen for that obvious fake, and a $4000.00 opening bid lets out the less serious or informed buyers as well. Regarding my vase, I do not understand why anyone would add the Verlys signature and the Carl Schmitz signature other than to try to increase it's value. It is a stunning piece of art whoever made it. My vase has the highest quality molding and finishing, so I am quite pleased either way.

[gemmacler]

Hi
Thanks for the posts. Looked at the link. Yep ! Doesn't say if the Lalique fakes are signed or not. Would have thought a deliberate forgery/fake might as well sign itself as Lalique, I believe plenty do. My fellow vase owner - in usa ? - has on the balance of probabilities a genuine post war Barolac forest vase, maybe sold through Verlys. [ good for you ] I, on the other hand, am back where I started, my argument that a piece of glass in France is more likely than not to be French turns back on itself at this point and tells me that my vase is less likely to be Barolac, and more likely to be " fake " Lalique, albeit no signature. So forever unable to describe it, [ am constitutionally unable to pretend something is what its not ] no idea of its value, will just have to gaze into the forest landscape and wonder.
Best wishes
gemma

[obscurities]

Hello,

The "Fake Laliques" are not intentionally manufactured to be fake Lalique, but Barolac pieces identified as Lalique either perpetuating a mis-attribution they have stumbled across, or called Lalique to in an attempt to deceive less knowledgeable buyers. There are actually quite a few pieces of Barolac glass on that page, several of which I own.

If one goes to the trouble of actually producing a "fake or forged" Lalique piece, they at least bother to produce, usually poorly, a known Lalique piece, and those pieces are also out there and shown on the Lalique site I referred you to.  I do not use the term forged to indicate another manufacturer's piece of glass with a spurious signature put on it.

I think attributing your vase to Barolac is pretty much a sure bet, especially if the details are well defined, and cewrtainly in light of the fact that the color is among those mentioned in the literature.

For what it is worth, I also think that an assumption that glass purchased in France, is more likely to be from France, is a hypothesis, that if used as a starting place for ID of items, will make attributions quite difficult....

As an example, I am in the US, and if I started with that assumption, I would have a difficult time attributing much of the Czech, Italian and Scandinavian glass I own. To follow your hypothesis would mean that I should assume to start that the glass I buy here in the US is more likely to be from the US, and that people in Scotland, England, Italy, etc. should all make that assumption to start.... 

A much better position to start from when identifying a iece of glass is the position of "I have no idea what this is or where it is from. Let's see if we can figure it out."  In some cases your location, or the location of purchase can "aid" in the attribution, but it is generally not a good assumed initial position.

As an example, I have a piece of Victorian era art glass in a very organic form. I started with the "assumption" it was from the Stourbridge region of England based on it's form. I looked for over 5 years to identify it. It turns out, when I dropped that false assumption, and sent a picture to a good friend of mine, a resource I had known the whole time I owned the vase, he informed me it was Czech, by Kralik, and sent me an image of a known vase to confirm the identification. Had I simply started from scratch 5 years ago I would have sent him the image and saved myself a bunch of research time.... 

Simply stated, starting with false assumptions will, more times than not, lead to incorrect results.....

Maybe your Barolac vase was a post war souvenir taken home by a French soldier or tourist....

In today's world, glass from everywhere is everywhere..... the older it is, the further it has had time to travel....  I also own a pair of late 16th / early 17th Century German Roemers... I purchased them in Seattle.... 

Craig

[Glen]

The "fake" Lalique webpage has an unstated inference that all the items illustrated were intended as fakes. That is, of course, nonsense (as Craig noted above when he correctly noted that "the "Fake Laliques" are not intentionally manufactured to be fake Lalique). Many of the items shown on that page are important pieces in their own right, produced by well known glass factories such as Inwald, Libochovice, Dugan-Diamond and so on. The fact that some people appear to have claimed them to be Lalique does not make them either fakes or forgeries.

I can offer an explanation why the Barolac "In the Forest" vase was found in France. It was marketed by a French wholesaler called Markhbeinn. I have a copy of their 1936 catalogue which shows the Inwald vase (called "Foret"). Markhbeinn handled much of Inwald's glass.

I have studied the location of "finds" of rather a lot of pressed glass from this era (1920s-1930s) and I can assure you that it was widely exported around the world.

Finally a personal opinion - Barolac glass (in fact Inwald glass in general) was top notch in both quality and design. IMHO it easily equals some of Lalique's pressed glass (and yes, I do have some R Lalique glass and some Barolac glass).

Glen

[gemmacler]

Hi
Thanks for your posts, your knowledge of the subject is awesome. Re place of finds as a starting point for attribution, I generally do not give that much weight at all - I am in England currently, and my little collection features American 1900's glass, Bohemian art nouveau glass, and French opaline glass, all collected locally, I do not have one piece of old glass I know to be English ! What I mostly begin with is an appraisal of the quality of a piece, and my Forest vase is the only piece of glass I have that as far as an amateur can tell is a real piece of art, stunning, rather than just pleasing, which is why I felt it was from a top class maker or factory. I hope to be able to see more Barolac work one day, as the glass is so very lovely.
Best wishes
Gemma

[kidcobra]

"The "fake" Lalique webpage has an unstated inference that all the items illustrated were intended as fakes."

Hi Glenn. The main page of the forgeries section on RLalique.com that takes you to the various photo sections (vases, perfumes, etc) including the page with the vase photos you refer to, clearly states that most of the items were not made as fakes.

"The items in this section are from a myriad of manufacturers, and were not originally created with the intent to deceive anyone. It is only the later addition of a spurious R. Lalique signature, or the representations made while marketing the item, that put them in this Rene. Lalique Forgeries category."

Here is a link to that page: http://rlalique.com/Sections/Fakes/forgeries.html