Topic: A Little More Info on Royo Glass

[johnphilip]

The Gordiola Glass works is a well worth visit it also has an amazing museum - not just their glass but top international pieces ,it was many years ago i payed a quick visit, the tour guide wanted to get us to the leather factory for his commision no doubt ,i think it may have been the 70s  before i had heard of Royo, i am longing to go back but cant make it till late spring, if any of you can get there i promise you will love it you can even have a go at a blow .

[krsilber]

I'm truly surprised that anyone voices a problem with speculation here when people do it so often elsewhere in this forum.  Speculation to me is just another way of stating a question, and can be informative itself.  For example, "Cirera signed his pieces 'al talon' - so on the bottom, not in the decoration. I've only ever seen "Cire" signed pieces - so for all I know this could be the (highly estimated) CIRE decoration workshop of the Catalan prison authorities, or it could be Cirera's own workshop which operated until 1960. Or even the Joan Cervera workshop - Why speculate?"  This passage is full of speculation, but it's also helpful to people who weren't aware of the CIRE or Cervera workshops; it could shed a different light on the issue.  Why is it offered now as a reason not to speculate, rather than near the beginning of the thread as additional information to consider? 

Cirera signed his pieces "al talon"?  Reference?

Some "Cxxxxx" signed pieces, at least, don't look like "Cire," the name is longer and not totally legible.  Example]http://cgi.befr.ebay.be/RARE-ART-DECO-MOSER-HEAVY-ENAMEL-GLASS-BOWL-SIGNED-CIRE_W0QQitemZ110293274318QQihZ001QQcategoryZ29556QQcmdZViewItem]Example

When I Googled "José Cire Royo" I came up with one item.  I have written the seller to ask for a photo of the signature.

"To try to censor people's words is not necessary."  I'm not sure where this comes in.

To me the statement, "The glass documentation centre of the Museo de Artes Decorativas in Barcelona is currently working on it - so leave it with them" is clearly a directive not to follow a line of inquiry that interests some of the members here, and could be interpreted as censorship.


This glass forum is full of informal discussion about a wide range of glass matters.  Nothing said here is set in stone, and I fail to see why anybody should be discouraged from following their line of interest.

[Sklounion]

To me the statement, "The glass documentation centre of the Museo de Artes Decorativas in Barcelona is currently working on it - so leave it with them" is clearly a directive not to follow a line of inquiry that interests some of the members here, and could be interpreted as censorship.

Ok, so as a moderator of this board I ought to NOT to rise to the challenge....

However, I will not duck the issue, if anyone here is prepared, as I know Ivo is, and has done, like-wise myself in the sphere of Czech glass,  the coal-face is where folks need to be, it gets dirty, political, but NOWHERE does it say exclusive club, and I am sure that anyone wishing to do front-line research will never be turned away, whether at the Museo de Artes Decorativas, UPM, Vand A or elsewhere....

You can only do your best, some respected glass-researchers have written books, and got pilloried later.....

I will be... but not because I associated Moser with Royo, but because I was/am too bothery cautious....If I do not know, I am unafraid of admitting I do not know, that the evidence has not yet been found...... BUT I will not be drawn into irresponsible public speculation, which may give rise to as many erroneous leads, neither will I be drawn into speculation, which may never be substantiated.....

I can have a gut feel that x/y/z item might be by s/d/f designer, but to put that into a public forum, where others may not be aware of all the currently available information, is irresponsible in the extreme.

Sorry, I do not see Ivo's comments as censorious, merely cautious, and level-headed.

(And yes, I can be passionate, and friendly, so please do not use my comments as an excuse to bash this board, just accept me as a self-opinionated, miserable bxxxxxd)

Regards,

Marcus

[TxSilver]

Marcus, what fun would a board be without an occasional bit of conflict? I don't think anyone feels like board bashing. Ivo's words about Cire made me realize that maybe there may be more dimensions to this question than the three we started with -- Cirera, Royo, and later pieces. If people don't mind, maybe we can put this thread aside for now or take it to the glass cafe -- is that what it is called? That may be the best forum for it.

[krsilber]

Marcus, what fun would a board be without an occasional bit of conflict?

I like your spunk!

Marcus, I think I see where you and Ivo are coming from.  There's research and there's research, and it all depends on documentation and credible references.  Any list like "what we know and can be confirmed" is questionable unless it has good references (meaning documentation, not the opinion of an antique dealer).

My point is that this kind of thing is done all the time on this board - perhaps not as obviously, but it's done nevertheless.  People commonly say things as if they were proven truths, when they are actually speculating, and sometimes wrong.  Isn't it more constructive to point out where mistakes might have been made then to tell someone not to discuss it anymore?  I've heard the same thing in a past thread or two.

Most people interested in glass like to do "research."  That's part of the fun of it, trying to find things out about what you have.  It's not usually the same kind of research that goes into writing a book.  But we're not writing books here, we're having a discussion.  We're speculating!  Because it's fun, and because sometimes it does lead somewhere productive, if only to better questions.  Fair enough to point out that it shouldn't be interpreted as The Final Word  - but why quash it???

[hazespain]

What a lively discussion - great!!

I'm longing to find out what constitutes "Proof".  Will someone need to unearth the employment records of Gordiola glassworks, for example, to prove Royo worked there and will there have to be a link between this and a birth certificate?  Or, is the email from Gordiola proof enough?

We seem to be pretty good at identifying the decoration on Royo and Cire pieces but how do we prove that a particular piece was actually made by a particular person?

Speculation and asking questions isn't just fun, it's necessary.  If we take proof as far as it can go, then no-one can say any piece can be attributed to any particular artist without examination by a museum (or similar), which kind of negates some of the assertions on this board. 

There are quite a few statements on this board, indeed in this thread, that are given without the back-up proof. 

Glass cafe it is then Anita until the Barcelona museum speaks.

[johnphilip]

Hi Marcus i will bring my Royo - Gordiola glass to Gaydon for you and anyone else to inspect
i am affraid it may be cat among the pidgeons though because if my memory serves me right
there are a couple of other signatures , oh well up to the loft i go to pack them
i hope you will have time and you can take some pictures for Ivo et al  - if you want. Regards John .JP

[Sklounion]

Hi JP,
I look forward to seeing you there....
Regards,
Marcus

[Frank]

I will start a waffle in the cafe

[johnphilip]

With maple syrup for me please Frank.JP :chky: