Topic: Whitefriars production colours

[Paul S.]

thanks - obviously I was wrong with my assumptions then   -  serious collectors of W/Fs seem not so frequent these days, at least not on the GMB  ………   that is apart from Tom

[Anne]

I seem to recall that Harrow Museum acquired a lot of the paperwork from Whitefriars. https://headstonemanor.org/
The Museum of London also has a Whitefriars collection. https://collections.museumoflondon.org.uk/online/group/24222.html

[Paul S.]

Should have remembered the Museum of London connection  -  Leslie Jackson's book was produced to accompany that exhibition in the 1990s - plus the exhibition also spent some time in Manchester.

The opening page shows a Whitefriars goblet described as 'made in Flint (colourless) glass' - with production date c. 1970.
Not impossible of course that this piece might have been made using flint pebbles, though highly unlikely, but surprising and misleading that the MoL should equate clear glass with the word flint for a piece as recent as c. 1970.          Since this goblet shows some v.g. cutting, then it might be assumed to have some lead content.
Surprisingly, Jackson's glossary for 'flint' reads …...…….      "Clear colourless glass.    Mainly used to describe lead glass, but during the early 20th century colourless soda glass was sometimes described as "soda flint"  -  no wonder we get confused

Perhaps someone might ask the MoL if they have any of the workbooks mentioned here.

[glassobsessed]

Whitefriars gave the name Flint to their clear glass.

[Paul S.]

yes, thanks John  -  I was drawing attention to the possible confusion, since, as we know, there was/is a genuine description of clear glass, where the silica, instead of being sand, was composed of crushed flint pebbles, and the resulting clear glass being called flint.    When I looked at the goblet in the link, my first thought on reading the description was that it had been made from crushed flints rather than sand.
W/Fs. use of the word was in the sense of a sales appeal - sounds much better than saying simply clear glass, and I see the appeal - and in future I'll be forewarned.

[Paul S.]

have been speaking to Danielle Thom at the MoL, who confirms that the museum does hold much of the W/Fs business records and 'some' of the work books.
I've explained details of Tom's question re quantity of colours/shapes produced regarding Baxter designs, and the museum have promised to make an investigation in the coming days.
Fingers crossed the response might help with this thread, and will post the museum's reply as and when. 

[Paul S.]

Reference my last comments, have received the following email reply from the Museum of London.

""Dear Mr Stirling,
 
Thank you for your recent enquiry, regarding our Whitefriars glass archives. We have a quantity of material in our collection which may answer your question regarding the Baxter ‘Banjo’ vases; primarily the three boxes of Baxter’s personal papers, working notes and sketches.
 
We also hold the Whitefriars catalogues for most years between 1967-78, and a large number of glassblowers’ workbooks covering the same period.
 
Regrettably, we do not have the resources to go through these archives in detail. However, you are very welcome to make an appointment at the museum to look through these archives, for the information which may answer your enquiry. If you would like to make an appointment, more information (including the booking request form) can be found here.
 
Best wishes,
Danielle""

I had tried, obviously without success, to assist the Museum's efforts in economizing their time searching on our behalf, by indicating that this request be restricted to data concerning Mr. Baxter's Indigo 'Banjo' design only.          Apparently Indigo was one of the initial colours used in 1967 for this design.          Cutbacks, cutbacks and probably yet more cutbacks - with the result that museums now lack curators, and curators lack time to research.

So, now rather a dilemma then   -  having encouraged the lady to assist with our enquiry, I'm unsure that I have the stamina to wade through all of the museum's archive of which Danielle Thom speaks, consisting of the factory material, plus Mr. Geoffrey Baxter's personal notes, though I suspect there are some here who might give their molars for such an opportunity.          However, assuming offers are not forthcoming, then I guess that somewhere in the coming weeks I shall have to bite the bullet.
Presumable Tom's location is too far distant to London??