Posted 11 months ago
Here are a few "shimmy" examples that I have or had. Sorry for the poor pics, I'm not very good at combining pics...as you can tell :).
I believe a lot of what is passed off here as Ruckl "shimmy" is not ruckl shimmy and quite a few are likely not even Ruckl at all. I have decided to make a couple posts to show how I personally interpret the drawings.
Here are pieces(pics 1&2) that imo resemble the ruckl drawings. They have a pulled spatter type decor at the base which is uneven and usually very non symetrical. Pic 1, perfume 1 is the absolute closest, I recall seeing , to the Ruckl drawings. Of course the lack of confirmed Ruckl shapes, along with the fact that many companies made similiar pieces, it makes it nearly impossible to properly attribute 100%. Since I haven't seen any documentation(and they carry no marks or labels) besides for the drawings, I obviously can't say for sure that they are or aren't Ruckl.
Being pulled spatter is not enough to determine a maker imo. This is shown by the Kralik piece in picture 4.
IMO these first 2 pictures are what the "shimmy" drawings represent (some obviously more than other) and not the single colored more "uniform pulls" represent as Ruckl Shimmy on here. The exception are the 2 drawings in the middle of the 3rd row(not listed as "shimmy"). But imo they show little resemblence to the majority of the pieces on cw.
I just thought I'd post these up and give my non expert OPINION of the ruckl drawings and let other decide for themselves. I will also be making a post showing some kralik pieces often labeled as Ruckl on here.
You may wonder what the point of this post is, as it doesn't verify any pieces. I posted it so you can see these compared to known Kralik examples.
PS-I hear a lot of talk about Ruckl "documentation" but have yet to see anything beside the little bit from the tango exhibit and the pages from Truitt. I would love to see some of this info posted for others to view as it would be very useful to everyone.