Kralik bulbous fire polished spatter glass vase | ||
| welzebub's loves2315 of 3070 |  |  |
scottvez loves this.
smiata loves this.
Rick55 loves this.
AnneLanders loves this.
Michelleb007 loves this.
blunderbuss2 loves this.
antiquerose loves this.
Justanovice loves this.
welzebub loves this.
kivatinitz loves this.
Midnight1208 loves this.
Ivonne loves this.
SEAN68 loves this.
martika loves this.
philmac51 loves this.
vetraio50 loves this.
swfinluv1 loves this.
katherinescollections loves this.aura loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Posted 9 years ago
IanBrighton
(573 items)
I wouldn't have initially thought this Kralik without seeing it side by side with a Bambus in the same shape. The rim is fire-rounded and the vase has a thick base with ground pontil mark.
It stands 20cm high x 8.5 base x 5cm rim diameter.
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
A less bulbous but similar - http://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/38659-kralik-decor-2--bambus
By Jericho btw.
Nice one, but I think I'd need more than the shape of the Bambus vase to say Kralik. This has a very distinct and quite large foot. The Bambus vase doesn't
That is so incredibly similar in colour and texture to a Wedgwood bowl I own by Daisy Makeig-Jones, the famous artist who produced Fairyland Lustre design from 1915.
I will get out of my comfy bed and take a photo of mine but here's one I found on ebay just to show you the colour. There's two reasons why I'm showing you these.
Here's an ebay version, smaller than mine but you get he picture...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Beautiful-1914-Wedgwood-Fairyland-Lustre-Daisy-Makeig-Jones-Mottled-Boston-Cup-/172096664642
1) There's no suggestion that Wedgwood made your vase. They didn't. What I am showing you is the correlation in the period of time. It's what I refer to is being evocative of the time. So therefore as we know colours in the century plus back from 1980-1850 are very helpful in pinpointing whether something is correct for it's period. To me your vase sits on my theory right in the middle of the decade 1915-1925. This is because I have it in mine and it's made then. If you think of Victorian times you think of greens, purples, crimsons. The 20's reds, orange, yellows. The 50's blues, pinks, silver-chromes, black. The 60's-70's red, retro orange, browns. And those unforgiving 80's brass gold, pale pink, pale blue and god forbid Apricot! Colour represents a time.
2) The colour and the look being so similar to my glass piece then rise up and literally hit me. It's as if they were sitting next to each other. The potters wheel with her salt glaze and enhancers being immersed in the pot and your glazier twirling his pole (in the nicest sense of the term) and them saying to each other, "will we do mottled orange?"
Now you might think me completely bonkers. But because I collect both I can pop a gorgeous turquoise tango vase, right next to a Slaters Patent vase with turquoise insets and know they were most likely made within two years of each other, the synergy in style and look is evident ....Ian, up I get, it's photo time. Better check first that I havent already posted... :) thank you for your patience in ready my analysis....
Darn, I missed the light....will do tomorrow :) Anne
Anne, I loved your post and it resonated with me in many ways - I often see ceramics and have to check if they are really interesting glass pieces.
Yesterday's peregrinations saw me checking out an Art Deco ceramic vase that had been made to look like cut glass with simple diamond flashes. I almost bought it.
:-)
And here's another almost identical one:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Kralik-orange-red-yellow-glass-vase-Art-Deco-Czech-Bohemian-end-of-day-spatter-/151996797237?hash=item2363b71135:g:CU0AAOSwe7BW0Veh
Same seller, Phil. He sells q a lot of Czech glass. They were originally a pair.