Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. > France

St. Louis Crystal bowl for show

(1/2) > >>

Paul S.:
don't recall seeing a piece of St. Louis before - could be wrong but the back stamp appears to be sandblasted, it has a grainy sort of look - across the centre it reads St. LOUIS  - above is the word CRYSTAL and below is FRANCE  -  I had hoped it might have been Baccarat.                        Without doubt the heaviest bowl I've ever acquired, and we anguished in the charity shop as to what the back stamp read, but couldn't make it out.      The mitres are 20 mm deep, and the bowl weighs a ton  -  rim is beveled both sides of a cut flat surface - thickness at the rim is c. 13 - 14 mm and at the base obviously much more.              Diameter is 8.5/8 inches - c. 22 cms.   

Quality is obvious, but for what this must have cost new it lacks appeal in an artistic sense  -  I think the money must simply be for the name.          I've had a quick look on the screen, but don't think this design is a current model, so assume it dates perhaps to a handful of years prior to C21, and likely to be the most modern piece I have.         If anyone has a more accurate idea of age would love to know.     thanks for looking.

flying free:
Money for the quality as well as the name.

The backstamp I think should read Cristal rather than Crystal.

Lovely contemporary, stylish piece.  I mean, I love old glass but in daily kitchen and table life I like my glass contemporary.


Paul S.:
thank you m  -  I take your word for it about the back stamp - my eyesight not what it used to be and the manner in which this one is added makes legibility difficult.            Well, yes, I do like it  -  you know me and my cut clear glass .............  but, it lacks something that would make me say ah, this is artistic.          Probably just dependable chunkiness  -  it won't get used of course, it's in the cabinet of curiosities and will stay there until I tire of it or get bored and pack it on its way.               
Not an easy item to make I shouldn't wonder  -  the weight is such that the gaffer would have gone home with arm ache I'm sure.         I'm assuming it dates to somewhere in the 1980/90 period.

Of course I'm over the moon that you should like it - always thought you had good taste ;D

flying free:
Similarities with this one but I think yours is more attractive because the cutting is plainer.  This one's 128.
Use it.  Using beautiful things adds to the food experience :)

I'm saving mine to give to a foodie friend as a present.  I think worth a bit more than yours (because rarer, age, decor etc) but I hope she'll use it.


Paul S.:
thanks              hmmm   -  down I see from 162.         Sorry to disappoint, but I will never use it - can't bring myself to put scratches, dullness and potential fleabites on something that has the look of just having been made.        As with people who collect stamps, I prefer 'unused' quality, but each to his own  -  it's just that I know from experience that when we use glass occasionally it get broken.           the future depends for it's knowledge of our lives that we at least don't break everything - and leave them something to treasure. ;D


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version