Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => Malta Glass => Topic started by: PAUL H on April 05, 2010, 04:06:19 PM
-
Hi all I have a rare and unusual Mdina piece that I'm hoping has a genuine signature by Michael Harris. Its a 'cut ice' fish vase but its unusual in that both sides have been cut and faceted.. I have never come across one like this and it has very nice colour and design. I am hoping that the signature is genuine I'm pretty sure its right but maybe Mark Hill or Ron Wheeler would be able to advise. I will be able to bring it along to the next glass fair at the motorcycle museum near the NEC in May if it helps. Regards Paul.
-
Oops sorry forgot to mention the height is 213 mm and its weight 2260 grams.
-
Lovely vase Paul, i have doubts about the signature, take it to Birmingham for expert analysis,
in my opinion , its not right, sorry :'(
Someone tell me im wrong :P
Cheers
Andy
-
Hi Paul,
Very nice vase, I gather Harris made many of these pieces, however,not completely convinced by the signature. What ever the outcome still a very nice piece of Mdina.
Good Luck.
Greg
-
Super vase Paul. I'm sorry but I have to agree with Andy, the sig isn't right at all. A good attempt - we've seen a few - but not MH to my eyes. Doesn't stop it being a wonderful piece though.
Suzy x
-
Lovely piece of glass, wonky signature.
Not sure it's even Mdina but it does remind me of Tim Harris's lollipops (very round shoulders).
Lollipop not fish vase. Genuine sigs here (http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/thumbnails.php?album=546) not sure about the one in the top left corner though.
John
-
Thanks for your replies.. I suppose I maybe clutching at straws but the signature has base wear running through it making it look scruffier than it looks in real life although I have to admit its crude in comparison to confirmed signatures.. and in reply to the comment from John I'm pretty convinced its early Mdina the colourway is to my eyes identical to the ones in Mark Hill's book (top of page 27 and page 33) and the shape being more rounder is typical of Michael Harris early production however I wont be too disappointed if it proves to be a Isle of Wight item. So how do I go about pricing such an item in terms of selling on I guess I will have wait until May and get it confirmed as to whether its early Mdina or Isle of Wight.. I wont hold any hope on the signature I just hope it doesn't devalue the vase too much. Regards Paul.
-
I don't think the signature devalues the vase, for some it might even hold extra interest. I thought of starting a fake signature collection when I had two wonky signatures on genuine bits of Mdina. Eventually I auctioned them on ebay and they did fine (pointing out the dodgy sigs), one was spelt wrong, in capital letters and in the 'wrong' place, quite comical really.
Again, lovely bit of glass, I'm quite :mrgreen:.
John
-
I would think its early Mdina, as you say, its a pattern he did at Malta.
The age wear, if someone was bothered enough to fake a signature, adding a few scratches
at the same time would probably also occur to them.
I agree with John re the value.
Andy
-
Thanks guys thats made me feel alot better. :)
-
Drop Ron an email with picture of the signature and he will give you a definitive answer on the sig.
www.artiusglass.co.uk
Regards Mike www.abfabglass.co.uk
-
Scimiman, it's not a question of whether the sig is a fake anymore (we've all established that it is a fake) but a question of Mdina or IoWSG. Some of us think it's Mdina and others that it's by Tim Harris at IoWSG. If you have any thoughts they would be good to hear.
Suzy x
-
Paul,
easiest thing is to send Ron at Artius glass the link to this thread.
I believe he is a member on the GMB
saves sending him all the photos etc.
Andy
-
O.K. So I think everyone has had their two pennuth and have come to most of
the correct conclusions.
I'll now throw in mine and say that it is definitely NOT Tim's. It
definitely is relatively early and is definitely a 'Lollipop' not a 'Fish'
as it is fully cased and not 'dipped'.
As regards signature, well, unless he was absolutely three sheets to the
wind (p..sed in other words) and I doubt that knowing him as I did, this is
someone's attempt at a copy. A lot of surprisingly good characteristics but
let down on one or two others.
So, either a crude try at a fake/forged signature or, and it is a
possibility, done at the time by one of the other employees as a result of
the purchaser asking for the artists signature and Mike not being available.
Have I opened a can of worms here?. Knowing how keen you all get on
possibilities - probably! I don't like that last possibility but it is a
possibility nonetheless. However this still means it is not Mike's signature
and therefore of no value intrinsically.
I will wait to pass final judgment on another question mark which cannot be
assessed without clutching for close inspection and it does involve the wear
marks
Regards
Ron
www.ArtiusGlass.co.uk
-
Now I'm totally flummoxed so to speak.. is this a rare item ? I have never come across a 'lollypop' this size and with this web like patterning, and how would I get a valuation with regards to selling it on
I'm not too disappointed about the signature though and hopefully it will turn out well in the end. I am keeping my fingers crossed that its a scarce piece and will appeal to the serious early Mdina collectors out there.
I will bring it along to the glass fair in May for Ron, Mark and any interested parties to handle. Regards Paul.
-
Valuations are always tricky and a little subjective. ;D Keep an eye on the market and see if anything similar sells. Give you fifty quid for it. :chky:
The size is not that unusual (good size though), here's one (http://picasaweb.google.com/Johnmj100/EarlyMdinaGlass#5429986536823925058) a fraction taller which is a 'cut ice' version, you can just see where the two facets meet (the straight line in the centre). Yours, from your photos looks like it isn't facet cut, i.e. with two faces ground and polished flat. The web patterning is not in itself rare but it is not as if you will find one of these on every street corner. Far from it, not that many will have been made.
Good photos by the way.
John
-
It might not always be the case, but I think a lot of people would consider a fake signature to be damage.
-
There could also be a development in collecting items with "wrong signatures".
It has happened with faked Paul Ysart paperweights from the early 80s, which can now sell for up to UK£200 ::), compared to genuine 70s period PY work which for some of the regular designs will fetch less than faked items!!!
-
Hi all.. I'm getting confused even more my vase has got both sides facet cut, here is another image that hopefully shows it better... My vase looks remarkably
like the one John points out except for its more rounded form. Thanks for the comments on the photo's John. Fifty quid indeed ::)
-
Gotta try.... >:D
Lovely proportions, still :mrgreen:.
John
-
Paul, with prices the way they are at the moment - some way up there others not - it's hard to say anything about value. It's worth what somebody's prepared to pay :-\
I followed your piece when it was on ebay so I know what it cost, I would've liked to have bid but couldn't go that high. Knew then that the sig was naughty. Apart from one that had a genuine MH sig, yours is the highest I've seen a lollipop go for in the past year. But that's ebay - no idea what they go for retail.
Suzy x
PS I think yours is the nicest I've seen though. I believe it's an early MH one, I like the intricate scrambling of the interior more than the later, post MH ones I've seen.
-
Thanks for the comments on the photo's John. Fifty quid indeed
I agree with you £50 your aving a laugh.
Hows about £51 and a surprize parcel of out of date food from the local supermarket.
Mike
-
This one finished on fleabay yesterday under Murano, although has a chip or more of a chunk missing near the base. Still a very nice piece, although in the end wasn't tempted to bid due to the final price and condition.
Is it me or is this price extremely high given the condition..?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110513464499&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.co.uk%3A80%2F%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp4712.m38.l1313%26_nkw%3D110513464499%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1
-
That's a fairly large and very nice example made by Mr H (by the look of it), the chip would have been a minor issue to me, small shallow and repairable. Value (not that tricky question again ;D), two people thought it worth that amount or it would never have been bid up to it. If I had not bought the seaward vase earlier in the week (and my car has just died) I would have bid, as it happens to about that value. There is a similar vase pictured in Mark Hill's book on Mdina valued at three to five hundred, so not a high price really. How often do they come up for sale?
John
-
Hi John,
True there certainly not that common, I did see the one in Mark Hills book, in terms of the price, prob more to do with wishful thinking on my part, you can always hope!
Greg ;)
-
I was lucky enough to see someone's collection recently, they have many :o (I'm still in shock and didn't count at the time) large and small fish vases, a good representative cross section of what was produced..... I'm still gobsmacked at what I saw and having occasional flashbacks. :-X
I would love a fish vase in that style, will just have to wait for now. Keep looking, they crop up at bootsales and the like now and then (that's what I'm hoping anyway). Need a praying emoticon....
John
-
John you will have to beat me to it lol, ive been hoping to find one at a boot sale too, well im really holding out for a crizzle :24: best i got was 2 cut ice lollipops for £20 the pair (which aint bad i must say).
michelle
-
I would agree completely that the cut-ice lollipop is early Mdina, the signature is a bad fake, but not the worst I've seen.
Sometimes they're cut, sometimes they're not. I've not seen one cut on both sides before. I do have around 5 of these.
Can't comment on faked age-related wear - I would suspect nobody would have needed to add any extra.
I personally would not think it was somebody at the studio itself putting Michael Harris' name on it. I've seen a couple more of these particular fake signatures and they have only recently started appearing. If they were from the original period, I'm sure I'd have seen them before Mark's book came out....
I don't think it would worry me unduly. It's on the base, it could easily be polished off, or simply ignored.
As to the Fish, I think it was extrememly cheap. It's an absolute beauty, most likely to be by Michael Harris - nobody else could make them that well or that big at the time, it's absolutely the right shape of shoulder and elegant neck.
I big signed one went for £1700+, not that long ago.
I've got a massive MH signed one myself - not nearly as nice as this one - swap? >:D
-
Sue after all the doom and gloom you have brightened my day. I was really a bit naive to think the signature was right maybe it was wishful thinking but I bought the piece because of its
beauty and rarity rather than the signature itself. It is a really lovely item and unusual in the fact that both sides have been cut and faceted and I'm pretty sure like you that MH himself made it.
I was thinking about having the base polished but I am undecided.Could you post some images of your big one please I would love to see it. Regards Paul.
-
eeeeeek!
I think you may have mis-read what I said, which was that I believe the Fish vase, (the ebay link, describing a Murano onion ::) ) is most definitely by Michael Harris, and that the chip would not bother me, in response to GBarfoot's comment about a "high" :24: price for this vase given it's condition!
These beasts do not grow on trees, no matter how hard-working Michael Harris was, there are only so many pieces of glass which can be produced by one man in the first three and a bit years after he finally got hold of hot glass, including leaving the RCA, and the time he spent getting the studio in Malta set up!
However, I would not, as I also said, be much bothered by the fake signature on your Lollipop, as it could be ignored or polished out, and as I didn't say, but will now, I would not be at all surprised to find that your Lollipop was also by Michael Harris.
I see there are aubergine ribbons in it - that's a definite early colour, it's got gorgeous bubbles, very well executed, absolutely lovely.
-
I should also add, that now I've studied the image showing the sides in daylight, that I do not think this has actually been cut on both sides, sorry Paul.
It is cut on one side, the other side is simply marvered flat - it's still a bit rounded, and I can see the concentric rings which appear on the marvered side. So it is definitely a Cut-Ice Lollipop, and cut on only one side, as is usual for a cut one.
Is it my Lollipops or Fish you wish to see? Think I can dig out a Fish picture, but would have to get the camera out for lollipops.
-
I have to agree Sue I have just re examined the item in daylight and with my glasses on and as you observed it is cut and faceted one side
and simply marvered but not flat on reverse. I would like to see any of your 'lollypops' with the same patterning if possible also sizes please.
Regards Paul.
-
:thup: ok, but you'll need to wait a wee bit 'til I can get them organised.
-
::)
Ok, about as organised as I can get.
Pic.1;
A Cut-Ice lollipop, signed by Michael Harris. 8 3/8" tall x 7.5" wide, marvered flat on one side, cut into two faces on the other.
A slim, tall Cut-Ice lollipop, 8.5" tall x 5.5" wide. Two marvered faces on one side, two cut faces on the other. The funny wrinkly line on this one in the pic. is an effect of the marvered face on the "join" between the two bits of paper I used as background.
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b227/chopin-liszt/wave/SGS/lollipops2.jpg
Pic. 2;
Two (later, I believe) Ice-Cut lollipops - the strapping inside is flatter, one is signed by Dobson.
a.) 9.75 " tall x 8" wide, two cut faces on the front, marvered flat on the back, signed by Dobson, 1974.
b.) 9.5" tall x 7.25" wide, two marvered faces on the front, back marvered flat, unsigned, large manufacturing flaw on the back.
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b227/chopin-liszt/wave/SGS/lollipops3.jpg
Pic.3;
Again, I believe this to be a later one - it has reddish coloured streaks rather than aubergine - the neck is very roughly finished off - heat finished, but it still looks sort of broken. 9.5" tall x 7.25" wide, two marvered faces on the front, marvered flat on the back.
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b227/chopin-liszt/wave/SGS/lollipops4.jpg
-
Ooh, very nice Sue. :hiclp:
Re your third photo, I would agree about the age and the colours used, similar to this bottle (http://picasaweb.google.com/Johnmj100/LaterMdinaGlass#5430029772930323442).
John
-
Gorgeous, John - I take it that's one of the cube vases - faceted on 4 sides?
(I reckon these are great - and seriously under-rated)
You can sort of see how it may have been developed from the Ice-cut shape and colour-design - it's not flattened, though - and you can also see the Tiger design emerging - I actually have a cube bottle which IS Tiger.
-
Yes, one of the four sided bottles, a lovely and heavy beast.
John