Topic: factory/country for large green bowl

[Anik R]

Forgive me for playing a guessing game, but I can't resist...  :pb:  (Blame it on Mr. Benson...)

Could the bowl be Davidson?  I read that Davidson re-introduced 'antique green' glass in 1964 and that the company used old moulds to introduce new shapes. 

 :huh:

[vidrioguapo]

Now isn't that NIGEL just the cleverest kid on the block!!   :hi:

[Anne]

Looks like we'll all have to wait for the article to be published...

.... drums fingers on desk .... hums ..... checks date .... reloads topic .... hums .... drums fingers on desk .... 

:chky:

[Paul S.]

when Max said.....Nigel, you're just a big tease...  I took that literally.   You see, I am really just a simple country lad, and thought Nigel was joking (shakes locks of slightly curly blond hair, with a youthfull boyish charm and innocence :usd:)  -  so o.k. I b*****d it up.    Like Anne, I have zero patience, and I want everything yesterday  -  so how long do we have to wait?       ALSO...... to quote Nigel ....PS. Note what appears to be the lines from a three part mould on the photo of the base. N........who's vision is obviously 20/20  -  I must be candid and say that until this evening I had not seen the 'Mercedes' logo on the faux pontil depression (in fact the base has a variety of weird circular marks).    Last evening I thought that Nigel was imagining 'mould lines'  -  as there are no typical mould seams on this bowl.     But I'm big enought to admit I was wrong :usd: :pb: aghhh.   The piece must be spun to produce the elongated bubbles out towards the crimped rim - and not just slumped like a handkerchief vase.    But what threw me most of all is the evident wear  -  which really is substantial,inside and out, and equates to other pieces that I know to be much older.  Some tyke must have taken a sheet of 120 grit to the bowl, is nothing sacred :cry:  -  and I think this is the first time I have come unstuck by relying on wear to help me date a piece.     The colour and quality both lead you astray and make you think it is old.    Anyway, Nigel is of course very clever, as we know......so three cheers for Nigel.... now where is article. 

[Max]

Blimey Nigel, hurry up and put us all out of our misery!  :X: :hiclp:

[nigel benson]

Hello,

Frankly, I wish I had taken my own advice and ignored this thread. However, I thought at least put someone in the right direction, ....and at the same time explain why I did not wish to say anymore. I have seen so many of these, and their brothers and sisters, over the years which have been erroneously given the attribution of Victiorian, I thought that I'd at least get that information corrected.

The field has been narrowed considerably. You now know two important things that some 30 hours ago you did not. It is English and it is mid 20th century. No three, it's moulded. Oh, it isn't Davidson 

I never know when the Glass Association are going to publish, it depends upon how much they have to fill forthcoming issues, so that is up to them I'm afraid.

Nigel

[Cathy B]

Goodness Paul, sometimes you can take comments the wrong way. I can clearly see the three mould marks in the circular depression (which could be what you're facetiously referring to perhaps as the Mercedes mark?), and the amount of wear I can see is perfectly consistent with a relatively heavy item from the mid-20C. Nigel hasn't published his information yet - it's expecting a little to much to ask that he make the information public here and now.

Nigel, I've handled a moulded wave-ribbed vase, with I think only four waves and columns between them, in an identical colour and with a base that looks exactly the same. Do you recognise the description as something coming from your mystery manufacturer? (There is a picture of the same piece somewhere on Whitefriars.org's past auctions sites, but I've been through a few years and can't find it immediately.)

[Paul S.]

hello Cathy  -  oops, apologies if I gave the impression that "I'd taken it the wrong way" - nothing could have been further from the truth.    Unfortunately, I do have a very bad habit of not using appropriate emoticons :rn:   I would defer to Nigel any day  - although I suspect that my cynical and sometimes dark humour is not seen on the screen.  I was annoyed with myself, mostly for allowing the unusual wear to mislead me  -  and I genuinely had not seen the three way mould mark on the base.
With my limited experience, I remain ignorant - still - of quite how this piece is made, and when the word mould was mentioned I immediately felt all round for mould seams  -  and of course, didn't find any.   Regarding my comments suggesting Nigel's information was made available immediately  -  this again was regrettably a case of my slightly dark sense of humour -  and I fully appreciate this will be made public at the appropriate time.    My errors on this bowl are the first bad ones for a reasonable time  -  I am improving, albeit slowly, and I hope you will have patience with me

[Anne]

Paul, I have oodles of patience.... I just like drumming my fingers on the desk.   :24:

Nigel, we'll all wait patiently for your article - if anyone starts getting antsy about it I'll poke them with my Moderatorial stick!   :hj: