Posted 2 years ago
Daisy1000
(122 items)
Okay, let’s all agree as initiation that not all Canadians are nice — which is how the article unfortunately begins, with its determination to paint Sherman jewellery as rather nice and boring. I’m a Canadian. I can assure you that “nice” was not any part of my thoughts about this recent faulty banner CW article.
Hammond is the author of “All That Glitters,” a small out of print book on Sherman jewellery. The CW article writer Ben Marks bemoans the fact that the book is out of print. He might be one of few that does. Though the book had its time, it was long ago replaced by the more comprehensive and sophisticated “Sherman Jewellery: The Masterpiece Collection” by Sherman researchers and collectors, Sandra Caldwell and Evelyn Yallen.
Hammond is wrong in her statement that all Sherman jewellery is signed or marked Sherman. Not all Sherman jewellery is marked. Many contemporary owners of large collections hold parures that have only a single marked piece or two in a set. Some Sherman pinwheels, necklaces, bracelets and cuffs are not marked at all.
The Sherman heyday certainly did not include the 1940s. The G. Sherman Company was not incorporated until 1947. The company did not advertise for stone setters until the 1950s.
The Hammond “Nice Ice” narrative determination that nice female Canadians wore their nice boring Sherman jewellery to essentially only church (seemingly as compared to exciting American women who wore more exciting brands to more exciting places) might have driven the “nice-and-boring” narrative forward, but it is insulting as it is also simply isn’t so. Canadian women wore Sherman jewellery to many different social events. Gus Sherman was an exciting sociable man, and his advertisements for his jewellery in the 1950s, 1960s — which Hammond displays no understanding of — echo that excitement, with accompanying anticipation of multi-venue wearability.
Sherman did not use only Swarovski stones.
The G. Sherman Company did not only create rhodium and japanned items.
Calling Weiss a superior product to Sherman? Really? Where’s Eisenberg here?
Hobe, Haskell, Weiss, Schreiner certainly did make it up to Canada. Still around today, and findable “in the wild,” which likely indicates that it is directly out of original purchaser jewellery holdings. In May, I made both Schreiner and Weiss wild find purchases.
I don’t know how to describe the Sherman collection that Hammond shows on a table, that which she says she sold as a group to the Sherman family years ago. I guess I will first state that many pieces look like the pieces in her book. And those were definitely somewhat boring, if still “nice.” Her book did not show the splendour of Sherman creations, but rather mundane, common pieces, similar to the lower priced lines which every other jewellery maker of the period created. She seems to be stating that what she collected was example of the totality of Sherman design. It definitely is not.
There are many … many amazing extant Sherman items and sets. Two of the greatest private contemporary collections of 2022 are in Quebec and British Columbia. There was never a time when Hammond’s few pieces superseded these two collections. (I might in coordination propose that the reason the film industry often buys from Hammond is because they are based in Ontario, a film production area, and it is therefore close and easy … not because Hammond had or has anywhere near a superior Sherman collection.)
I suggest Hammond correct some of the many errors of her article. I also suggest she remove her hit job on the current reality of Sherman jewellery. I have checked our vibrant Sherman collector groups, other vintage jewellery groups. No Valerie Hammond. She seems to have little present understanding, at best; does not belong to prominent vintage Sherman groups, is not visible in the Sherman collectors’ community. Her selling in the Toronto and GTA market may provide some understanding of what is happening in the urban Ontario market, but it is compromised by the commonness of her Sherman pieces, and is definitely not valid sample of what is happening in the rest of Canada or the US. (Another successful three decade Toronto Sherman antique dealer/specialist would disagree with even her characterization of that market.)
Sorry for not being nice.
Sherman jewellery items in this article are mine; photo is mine.
June 26, 2022
Hi Daisy,
Excellent rebuttal to that Hammond article with apologies for her comments about Sherman/Canada. As a costume jewelry collector I have always praised and admired the fabulous jewelry by Sherman, and I so have the book "S.J. Masterpiece Collection" by Caldwell & Yallen, it's wonderful. One claim in particular irked me, that you can buy vintage Sherman cheap - NEVER, ever have I seen or purchased anything remotely cheap by Sherman. Many misconceptions there, sorry about that - Jenni
Well said! And your collection is beautiful. By knowing Phil here, even I know not all Sherman pieces are signed! Sometimes, you just have to be real, right!?!
Hi Jenni and shareurpassion. Thank you for your comments. I wasn’t sure how my words would be received. Love your collections.
Gorgeous pieces and good write up about Sherman
Hi Daisy:
Thanks for your comments. The blame for invoking the "nice" cliche is mine. I had hoped that people on both sides of border might find its application to costume jewelry humorous; I did not mean to cause offense.
Here is a note I just received from Val. Hope you find it helpful.
>>>>
Hi Ben:
I hope that you are able to let your readers know that the title banner and comment about Canadians were your words not mine. It seems the editorial comments have drawn some fire aimed at me.
I did actually say that the signed/unsigned issue I dealt with in the book was based not on my opinion but on the very helpful and factual information provided to me by the Sherman family, suppliers and buyers. I have no personal opinion on it one way or the other. If Daisy would like to read my book she would see that I state categorically that Sherman was the best, the Rolls Royce when compared to the Chevrolet in fact in the world of costume, especially rhinestone. I would appreciate it if you would explain that the editorial content about nice ice and Canadians was your and not mine. I have never said that Sherman is “ Nice “ jewellery. At no time did I intimate that Sherman was boring jewellery, I simply pointed out the fact that in the post war years in Canada we did not have the nightclubs or nightlife, that cities like New York did, and most women wore their brooches to church, or work and certainly to events etc. , That did not imply that they were boring brooches. No Sherman is ever boring nor are Canadian women boring. We are and always have been innovative, intelligent, charismatic vibrant and smart. All of which proves why Sherman was the top seller here in Canada for decades.
I again go to the info given to my during our research ( which predates the Masterpiece Collection, and those facts were that Gus used only Swarovski stones and used rhodium and gold plated and japanned settings as opposed to chrome. When referencing Weiss it was certainly not a comparison of quality. It was not superior to Sherman, It was a comparison of the fact that the settings were from BA Ballou and often the same styles.
It has always been the best. I would never have described them as “mundane.“ Sherman did not make mundane. The company was certainly in business before 1950 which means he was operational in the late 1940s.
As Daisy so correctly states, it is certainly possible today to find all of the American designers jewellery around the world and especially here in Canada, thanks to internet commerce. However going back to the postwar years those brands were not commonly found outside the United States. I did title the book “An introduction“ and a values guide. It was never meant to be an all-encompassing overview of the truly spectacular pieces he made. We actually had many of those incredible bib necklaces, wide cuffs, complete parures, but aimed our content of the book to the pieces which were most readily available and affordable at a time when a cuff was selling for $1500. As I told you, the pieces on the table were only a fraction of our inventory. Our showcases were always packed with spectacular Sherman. All that Glitters was a reference book and certainly not the totality of the Sherman inventory. For example it didn’t even go into the change from rhinestones to metal chains, crystal bead sets etc. That photograph you used was just one I had from some time ago.
As for the work with the film industry, we did not offer Sherman to the costume designers for the Keanu Reeves mini-series Rain, they bought Miriam Haskell, and Kenneth J.Lane, and there was no Sherman in Nightmare Alley either; Hattie Carnegie, Hobe, Trifari, Nina Ricci were just some of the brands they selected. Daisy is quite correct, I do not belong to any Sherman forums, or groups, since we no longer deal in Sherman. I have haven’t bought or sold Sherman in the past 6 years or so. So I have little interest now in following the trends and am concentrating on the lines which are growing trends.
I have never said that Sherman is "cheap," however we have noticed a drop in values over the past few years. Does that make them less expensive, yes, but Sherman is and was never cheap. However, today it is more affordable than in the 1990s. If you look in the CW shop, Sherman costume jewellery the Sherman purple Four Row necklace for $68 triple shade of blue brooch for $44 and the Sherman yellow floral cluster necklace for $66 just goes to show how reasonably priced Sherman actually is today. When our book was published that four-row Marquis would have been at least $250, the brooch would have been $190, and the Sherman yellow floral clusters necklace would have been at least $175. I have never seen or purchased anything remotely cheap by Sherman, but I'd have to say that a $66 necklace, a $68 necklace, and a $44 brooch are certainly inexpensive compared to past values.
The Masterpiece Collection is a fabulous book, full of wonderful pieces in beautiful colour , no question about that at all. The information printed in our books was based in good faith on the details provided by the people who worked with him, bought from him, and sold to him.
Val
<<<<<
The -nice- staid Canadian woman image of the 1950-60s period might relate to our Prime Minister wife at the time, a wearer of hats, floral print dresses with a natural fur stole. Mrs. Lester B. Pearson with a very nice bow tied husband.
https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/arrive-for-talks-paris-canadian-foreign-minister-lester-news-photo/515258074
My mother was a French designer clothes collector of that same period, I remember her gorgeous Vogue magazine articles, with ads for very 'fine' costume jewelry. She did pair her chosen parures with her favored Dior and St Laurent wardrobe garments. We were middle class.
I am not very nice either (tongue in cheek).
Just a brief add to my earlier comments, Ben:
Regardless of where Hammond received information from, all G. Sherman Company costume jewellery pieces are not signed with cartouches. Sometimes paper hang tags were used to mark items, hang tags which have disappeared and not over the years. All pieces that were part of greater sets were not signed. This information was provided by various actual workroom employees to several Sherman researchers and writers, including the authors of “The Masterpiece Collection.” The Sherman family never worked in the Montreal workroom. I will add that some discovered Sherman pieces have as many as three metal cartouches.
Though Sherman crystal pieces are best known for their use of Swarovski stones, the company did not only use Swarovski stones, not in the early years, not in the later years.
Canadian women did nor come home from the vibrant London and British social life of World War II to go to church and do little else in their new jewelry. The post-WWII years were the heyday of restaurant building and big band culture in Canada (and the US, as well). Nightclubs and dance halls flourished. The big bands travelled throughout Western and Eastern Canada to urban and rural popular resorts — which included restaurant/hotels with dance floor and an on-site regional dance halls. Our family actually owned restaurants, hotels, a dance hall resort, and booked the bands into three provinces. This is my research area.
The 1940s were not the big Sherman years. Those were the 1950s, which included the introduction of Swarovski aurora borealis jewellery, and the 1960s, and even somewhat the 1970s, which was a decade of change. G. Sherman Company began business in the very late 1940s, after Gus had been a successful salesman for another eastern jewellery company, and started ever so slowly. The big placements at Birks, Mackenzies, Eatons, the large advertising is not in place until 1952-3.
I will state that if Hammond does not have Sherman jewellery in stock, of course she cannot offer it to such as Keanu Reeves, of course he cannot choose such. If it is her desire to simply echo what everyone else in the US film supporting industry is doing and hohum offer Haskell, Hobe, Trifari, Lane, etc., so be it. One would think she would want to promote Canada’s most famous ever jewellery company, but I guess not.
Hammond uses what appears to be the initial auction listing price (eBay?) of two items as example of Sherman jewellery price collapse. I could not find those pieces, because of course they did not remain at that price. I could likewise illegitimately state that I saw a Schreiner grasshopper listed on eBay for $45 last week, and fail to add that it closed at $400. Both my examples and hers would then though momentarily be true, actually would not be.
I stand by my assertion that the article has many errors. I also wonder why there was a hit article written stating that Sherman is out of favour when antique dealers in Vancouver, Abbotsford, Edmonton, Calgary, Thunder Bay, Toronto and Montreal would all vehemently refute that. I had a discussion with a major antique store owner yesterday, whose aunt knew Gus Sherman, who doesn’t want to go on the record, who says Sherman has never ever been out of favour in the last forty years. Hammond is no longer in the Sherman world, does not buy Sherman, therefore does not sell any, which I believe is a more accurate reality than that it is not being asked for or sold by anyone. Truly sorry she felt the need to write as she did.
This was all written in the little CW square provided at once. Likely should have had an edit.
Beautiful Examples of Sherman Jewellery you show. Your write up is excellent and reflects the feelings I had when reading the article about Hammonds book.
Talking to everyone in this, even though I replied to shareurpassion and Newfld previously —
Hi shareurpassion. Thank you for saying so. The SMC book authors are clear about signed and unsigned Sherman. And support their statements with many … many examples.
Thank you, Newfld. Appreciate your comments. Glad you have the book. It’s excellent.
Hello Mrstyndall. Thank you for being here and commenting.
Great conversation Ben. Appreciate your writings here.
Hello Dawnlady1 — Always appreciate your Sherman wisdom.
Thank you for the Loves on this:
Newfld
Vynil33rpm
Manikin
fortapache
blunderbuss2
shareurpassion
Mrstyndall
truthordare
Leelani
GianaMZ
sherilou
Drake47
Reise
vcal
rhineisfine
Dawnlady1
Referred to your articulate, informative and well-stated article by Dawnlady1 as a must read. I feel like it's a "drop the mic" kinda of moment.
Hello RhinestoneRookie. It was a fun discussion. So good to see you here. I don’t actually know what to say about your chosen name, though. At first sight I laughed. Was that wrong? :) I sure do like it …. even thought everyone knows there isn’t anyone on the planet who knows more about rhinestones and crystals than you do. :)