Topic: Isle of Wight - variant of Seaward

[chilternhills]

Collectors of IOW glass may be interested in new information about a variant of Seaward called Blue Seaward.

See: http://iowstudioglass.wikidot.com/seaward

I bought three pieces from the studio archive in 2010 that were called Blue Seaward or Seaward by the studio that have a flame pontil mark. That might surprise IOW collectors since the flame mark indicates manufacture in 1974 or later and Seaward was made in 1973 with either a broken pontil mark or coachbolt prunt. I made notes at the time of purchase based on information I got from the studio and then promptly forgot about it  I now have got some pictures out to show what they look like  Based on the style of the base and the flame mark I think they must have been made in early 1974 and not later. Enjoy!

Anton

[glassobsessed]

So did the Studio actually call some or all of them Blue Seaward or not?

I find the distinction contrived, to me they are simply Seaward. I have also seen this variation in depth of colour on items with 'coach bolts'.

This globe: https://picasaweb.google.com/Johnmj100/IsleOfWightStudioGlass#5470460705210583394

Whereas this Inside Out was almost impossible to capture because it was so dark: https://picasaweb.google.com/Johnmj100/IsleOfWightStudioGlass#5986125090041101682

Variation is to be expected with such hand made items, let alone the experimentation and evolution that was occurring there at this time.

John

[chopin-liszt]

The Archive wasn't always good at getting names right Anton - it was there that the non-existent "Seawood" got mentioned which resulted in a lot of confusion.
I've seen Seaward with flame marks before too, but just considered them to be later.

But they are lovely pieces you have managed to get hold of, thank-you very much for showing!

(The image of the bottom of an attenuated bottle, showing the effects under a flash, is my pic of my bottle!  )

[chilternhills]

Thanks John for feedback. You made me check my notes, which I now know were cut-and-paste from the IOWSG web site. It describes the three pieces as "Blue Seaward Cylinder Vase", "Blue Seaward Open Bowl" and "Blue Seaward Platter" and also "Made 1974". I have corrected my web site. The two examples you link to on Picasa are definitely the darker blue typical of Seaward made in 1973. As you say there is variation in colour but all the pieces I have seen before are clearly dark blue Seaward.

My point is that the pieces described by the studio as Blue Seaward are distinctly lighter blue. The cylinder vase is particularly striking. I have never seen ordinary Seaward like this. I don't think the studio made a mistake this time.

Looking at Mark Hill's book, he says on page 74:

Seaward was marked with either a 'broken' pontil mark (early 1973) or the 'coachbolt' pontil mark (late 1973). An example with the impressed 'flame' pontil mark (from 1974 onwards) has not yet been found.

Mark was pretty thorough in his research for his book so I tend to trust him. (OK he did make a mistake about Satin and Lace on pages 112-113.) Sue, I wonder what you remember seeing with the flame mark? Were they actually what the studio calls Blue Seaward? I think the studio were making a point that the three archive pieces they called Blue Seaward were something different and specifically pointed out they had the flame mark. However, having said that, to be honest, the only piece I would describe as Blue Seaward is the cylinder vase. That is a distinctly different light blue colour. The blue on the platter could just be 'washed out' because it is such a big piece (believe me it is humungous!). The bowl is odd, and the strapping doesn't look like Seaward much (see the link to a similar experimental bowl with a purple colourway).

Sue, re: your picture of the base of the attenuated bottle, I have added an acknowledgement. My apologies for the omission. I got this picture in 2009 (just when I started my site) and I am sure I asked your permission at the time, maybe via the old IOWSG forum. I am meticulous about getting permissions, but I may have slipped up here.

Anton

[glassobsessed]

Thanks for clarifying that Anton, interesting...

I still think it is unhelpful to add distinctions like this, thankfully the Studio dropped the blue aurene and gold aurene tags and just classified all the very many variations as aurene. We did note some other (or perhaps one other) bit of seaward (probably on ebay at the time) with a flame prunt, there was I think a brief discussion on the board about it but that would have been a few years ago now.

[chopin-liszt]

No worries at all about me and images - you are always welcome to my images for your site if they are of any use to you - it's a wonderful record to be keeping - one you are freely giving to all, I'm not going to fuss about my name being on it. I feel rather chuffed you thought it was a good enough image, that's all. 
(I frequently find my own images on searches - and I have never got a clue how they got to the places that they are found in.)

The research for the book was indeed very thorough, but "things" have come to light since; pieces deemed to be very scarce started coming out of the woodwork after the book was published, so they were not as scarce as first thought (for example, the big striped Onion vases)
There is mention of green glass being used at Mdina, but as it turns out, that was actually Malta Decorative Glass, which had not been recognised at the time and was confused with being Mdina.
Mark did not have access to many large collections of early Mdina when he was writing the book, we didn't meet in time for him to use any of mine; Elizabeth Harris had not kept very much.

I do remember peering at the bottom of a piece of Seaward with Suzy, who was the one to say; "That's a flame pontil mark, not a coachbolt." It was a slightly squidged one. If I was with Suzy, it must have been at a Fair.

I am thinking that the addition of the word Blue in the Archives is just another typo, or a descriptive rather than a name for a different range. They didn't fuss about names early on, they were experimenting and developing designs. I'm rather with John in thinking it's just a red herring to be giving a different name to a few pieces in Seaward that were made a little later than most, for whatever reason.
Perhaps them being paler is because Mr. Harris' techniques had improved?
He was still pretty much a "newbie" to hot glassmaking - he only started in '67, so by '71, when he started IoWSG, he'd only had 4 years of working with it. I know he had "a knack" and his skills developed astronomically fast, but they were still being refined. 

Maybe I'm too jaded after all the kerfuffle and fuss about the completely non-existant "Seawood".

[chilternhills]

Thanks for the constructive comments Sue. There is still a lot to learn about the early days of IOWSG. It is always hard to go 'off piste' as it were and stray from well worn paths, especially with a distance of over 40 years. I don't mind making mistakes on the way to progressing knowledge.

Anton

[chopin-liszt]

Mistakes are part and parcel of the learning process Anton. 
The important thing is to recognise them when they have occurred, do your best to prevent myths being promulgated, and move on.