Posted 5 years ago
bohemiangl…
(647 items)
There some pieces out there that, at first glance, appear to be Loetz Cephalonia m. Patina, but they differ in that they lack the inclusions in the glass that make Cephalonia what it is. Rather, on these pieces, the spots are actually painted on the surface. There are a couple of possible explanations: 1. They are Loetz, but another decor, i.e. Olympia m. Patinadekor, or 2. They are another maker, i.e. Kralik. Before dismissing the Kralik comparison out of hand, see the last photo, which shows a vase in roughly the same shape and size in a decor that is thought to be by Kralik. What does it all mean? Inquiring minds want to know... :)
KNo ? .... inquiring minds want to understand and to learn ...
In an age where claimed (or claims of) Knowledge is used as an absolute ... a tool of dismissal ... perhaps it is time for a little Philosophic fundamentalism ...
We do need to partition learning and understanding (wisdom) from Noing ...
I Know nothing ... I No nothing ... I No No thing ...
...
No ledge is inherent to an object ... Bea leaf is taught ... Wiz dom is acquired.... :-)
By jove!.. I think you're onto something here Warren.
That piece - pic 4, on right - is a decor attributed to Kralik?? Gosh - I still have so much to learn!!
Attributed - I'm not 100% sold on the idea - looking at other makers, too.
For what this is worth, I would want to see the two shapes in image 4 in the same decor before I would be comfortable referring to them as a variation on a single shape by one maker. Personally, I see too many differences in the forms, which lead me towards them being quite similar shapes, but possibly by different houses. Interesting comparison though.....
I have other images, but only four are allowed here - the interesting comparison is the reason I included that image. I'm still researching these - the purpose of this post was to illustrate that some things are not as obvious as they first appear.
" the purpose of this post was to illustrate that some things are not as obvious as they first appear."
A take on research that I agree with 100%. I was simply adding my 2 cents worth.... If it is even worth 2 cents..... :-)
I thoroughly enjoy learning, by watching the methodology of other people involved in what I consider to be serious research of a medium so many of us love.
Very interesting this post Warren. It was in December 2009 that I bought my first vase with this decoration, which I attributed to Kralik since I had no evidence that it was Loetz, although some shapes coincide with Loez Cephalonia. And I kept investigating. Now I have in my collection three pieces that you can see at: https://madforglass.com/index.php/family-glass-31.
Some photos that I have found searching for Interned of vases with this decoration that have Egyptian drawings, and a piece in particular whose decoration makes me think of Mormopal Heckert may be the key. As I can not put all the photos in this comment Warren, I send them to you by mail, and I would be grateful if you can give me your opinion about it. Also if you want you can use the information for another post in CW.
madforglass.com