Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass Paperweights => Topic started by: tropdevin on April 05, 2013, 01:51:07 PM
-
***
Now the auction has finished, an anyone help with the ID of the sulphide duck on eBay (http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-53481-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574631383&toolid=10001&campid=5336261829&customid=&icep_item=121087744726&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229508&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg) ?
I had concluded it was Chinese, quirky, worth a modest bid - but it went for a lot more than I expected. Any ideas why?
Alan
-
For me it had that 'je ne sais quoi' appeal. A bit like my tree really. Not perfect, but in the process of the making it had something that was very attractive - something personal and hand made about it.
I got distracted and forgot to bid.
m
-
I would say Chinese and different/rare enough to warrant a premium price. It is a little bit more more of a premium than I would like to have paid but not by much. Then again a few folks may have thought it was something other than Chinese.
-
Intriguing wasn't it? I left a £65 bid expecting that to be over and above what it would make as I thought it was worty of further investigation, also surpised at the final bid. Maybe the recent Swallow sulphide spurred someone on?
Nick
-
Or maybe the sulphide duck on page 25 of Paperweights From Great Britain 1930-2000 raised hopes of a possible Ysart attribution?
For those not aware of it, the one in the book is Chinese - so please make a reference note if you have a copy.
-
oh rats! I just acquired that book >:( are there any other errors in it I should be aware of please?
...no it wasn't me bidding on the p/w I'm not that brave :)
Mel
-
***
Hi. I think every paperweight reference source (book, website, museum etc) is likely to contain a number of 'errors', because although authors / curators usually do their best at the time, new information comes to light later. I say 'usually' because a few authors just repeat what others before them have said - sometimes 50 years or more ago - without considering whether it still makes sense (the online 'Hobbizine' articles on paperweights being prime examples).
Generally, the older the book, the more incorrect or outdated information it will contain.
Alan
-
thanks Alan, will just try and keep picking it up as I go :)
-
My latest paperweight book purchase was printed in 1940, have only had a quick look through so far it will be an interesting read I'm sure.
Nick
-
***
Hi Nick. I guess that is Evangeline Bergstrom's book - it is interesting to see what someone thought about makers and ID in 1940, and she deserves a lot of credit for what I believe is only the second published book specifically about paperweights. Evelyn Campbell Cloake's commentary on her collection (published 1966), with images and also attributions by her and Evangeline Bergstrom is fascinating too.
Alan
-
Hi Alan,
It is indeed Evangeline Bergstrom's book, I was browsing eBay last week and it had just been listed with a buy it now price of £15 so I snapped it up quick. It was it seems privately printed so thought I'd best get it whilst I could as possibly it was a small print run?
Haven't had time to sit down and read it yet though.
Nick
-
Nick, if you can find a copy of the second edition of Old Glass Paperweights, published 1947, buy that too. Some items from the first edition were removed as they were later found to be of different attributions. But other misunderstandings were left as they were.
Just for fun, can you find at least three items pictured in the 1940 edition, referenced in the French section, that we now know were attributed incorrectly. And how many of the pictured items related to the English section do you think may have been misunderstood at the time?
Maybe I should split out the Bergstrom posts as a new thread?
-
Yes Kevin there are quite a few errors, a quick look shows Paul Ysart and Pantin weights mis-identified, do you want a list, if so do you want to split the thread first?
Nick