Posted 6 years ago
kralik1928
(202 items)
I think there were relationships between Bohemian glass companies. At first, I thought that Loetz had patents on their designs and if a competitor copied them they world simply ask the another company to NOT produce the same shape (by legal letter). Then Loetz would put there oval mark on their pieces and the other company (Kralik) would but there cursive signature on theirs.
1. Keystone variations:: you can see similarities in the body and handles with a difference in the necks- Loetz likes the flaired neck and the othe company likes the straight neck
2. Tea kettle shape: you can see the same shape variations - notice the bottom of the pieces and angular handles are exactally the same
3. Milk jug: these shapes again are very similar but the neck designs are different
4. This picture shows how theories fall apart.
The top row is stamped with the Loetz oval mark- the bottom vases are marked with the cursive signature. This means there is great difficulty in attribution based on identical shapes or marks. Either they did want their production to match or they didn’t. Are both marks Loetz? Are both exporter marks and could be made by either company? Are these shape variations natural to the handy work of the glass blower?
Tell me what you think.
I think it's a minefield......
hahah- thats right. I have noticed a third signature... very small in a straight line acid mark. I guess if there are three makers there may as well be five or fifteen.
Can you separate by exact colors and or fabrication?
The marks continue to be an inconsistent tool for identification. Varying opinions about who used them, where and when. There were probably as many different circumstances as there were years of production.
It's human nature to speculate and try for the most helpful answer. Life is usually not that acomodating and much more complex. Interesting post.
If I am not mistaken, the cursive mark is believed to be a Loetz mark also, and found mostly, but not always, on enameled examples. Those enameled examples are most often in shapes and colors similar to the production shown in your post.
Some marks are both consistent, and useful, others are not. As you know, I am a supporter of the idea that production houses applied marks, labels, etc.... even if the company ordering product wanted a specific mark placed. There is evidence in the Series II Loetz volume, that Loetz did just that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reference to an American firm ordering from Loetz, the following quote is found in the Series II Loetz volume.
"Relatively large consignments included lampshades, usually delivered by dozens of pieces, or various vases, bowls, candleholders(sic) and the like. Ordinarily it had the goods designated as “Made In Austria” or “Made In Bohemia”. The consignments were packed in Klastersky Mlyn for the dispatch to a particular branch."
That pretty much describes an order being marked for export by Loetz. To believe they were the only one engaged in such a practice would be naïve.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I continue to ask for someone that does not believe the marks were placed by the production houses, to provide an explanation of a scenario where it makes sense for exporters to unpack glass to mark it, and then repack it before exporting it. As someone with a background in running manufacturing firms, and from an economical business point of view, the scenario is not logical, at least to me. It incurs the risk of loss from unnecessary handling, and the guarantee of additional expenses to do something that could be done as it is packed by the production house.
I would love for someone to describe a set of circumstances under which it makes sense for it to be done that way. I have asked for many years now, and although some continue to insist that exporters did the marking, not one person has ever provided an explanation of circumstances under which it would make any sense at all to to do it that way. If it does not make sense, then it more than likely did not happen, and surmising that it did with no evidence at all, is empty speculation.
Separation by color is not really very practical, as the color rods were only sold by a handful of companies. As an example, if Welz, Kralik, and Loetz all bought the same color rods from Riedel, let's say a specific shade of the color red, it would be next to impossible, if not completely impossible, to differentiate by color alone, production by different houses in the same color.
I have always felt, at least for me as a researcher, that it is human nature to look for the "correct" answer.... not to speculate and look for the "most helpful" one.... But that is just me.
Some people hear what they want to hear, and they remember what suits their purposes. Experience has shown me that it's a waste of time to reply in these circumstances. As the opinion is firmly entrenched and never changes.
To have a 'one size fits all' conclusion about any part of one country's specific type of business's practices, is right there, a glaring error of judgment. Because one handled a situation one way at one time, does not infer they all did all the time....
"Experience has shown me that it's a waste of time to reply in these circumstances."
Is that why you have never provided an explanation that is plausible? Or is it because you do not have one..... an explanation that is?
"As the opinion is firmly entrenched and never changes."
Is that kind of like ignoring supportable evidence that a vase is not by Steuben, while continuing to make the claim that it is, even when simply asking a reputable expert would either confirm or refute the claim?
I have never claimed that an exporter NEVER marked a piece of glass. I have simply said that it does not make sense as a standard practice, and provided information to support the claim that glass houses were involved in the practice.
You claim certain marks, are marks found on Rückl production. Who put those on their glass???
If it was Rückl, that would support the idea that they would do it as standard practice if needed for an export order. If it was an exporter, then one would question why you study them so much on glass you claim to be Rückl.
From your website:
" The mark found can also show a distributor mark and not a company mark, this was standard practice, during this whole export process which could involved many links between the country of production and the final retail business and it's location."
You state that distributors (exporters) marking glass was "standard practice", and yet there is absolutely no supportable evidence to point to that conclusion, and when asked to provide some possible insight to support that position, no one, yourself included, ever does. Simply stating it over and over does not make it true.......Call an Apple a Banana all you want.... It is still an Apple.
This discussion reminds me mildly of another "opinion" I held for many years, and was repeatedly told how wrong I was....
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/224647-the-elusive-proof-answering-a-hotly-deba
Many opinions are put forward, some turn out to be right and some turn out to be wrong.
RAG labels for instance were used on many types of glass, from many glass houses. Did they send their glass to Welz to have it labelled RAG, or did the RAG distributor do it for all of them, before shipping?
Did they actually unpack all that glass, and took the time to apply their label? What a waste, and so illogical....
Of course I have my own beliefs-opinions stated on my site. Such as your site does. Banana or apple?
My objection is not to people having differing opinions. What my objection has always been, is when they are stated as "fact".... with nothing to support it.... such as this:
"The mark found can also show a distributor mark and not a company mark, this was standard practice, during this whole export process "
Yet no one, at least to this point in time, can even begin to prove that to be anything but conjecture..... and stating it as "standard practice" is simply not in any way supportable. Yet, when afforded an opportunity to support your statement with some actual facts, you bypass it like it was a wrong turn on your journey.....
I have always been very clear on my position. I believe that glass houses did the vast majority, if not all of the marking. We have marks that prove it, and we also have documentation to support at least one glass house marking in the manner requested by the customer.
Your claim above, presented as if it is factual, is supported by.... well.... really nothing substantive at all.
Providing you with actual facts has proven useless in the past, and also as recently as my deleted comments on your "Steuben" vase that is actually not Steuben.
Truth ir dare “can you separate by exact colors and or fabrication?” I will try on the next few posts to do that. I know the Loetz books have specific color names but in reality there are variations in the glass - Intensity, saturation, opaqueness, etc...
I won’t enter the mark origen argument because I simply don’t know... if you look at the last pic I would not have guessed my assumptions turned out that way- in fact I re-wrote the post after that last pic-
these are the facts: some shapes always have only the cursive signature (that I consider Kralik) and are always marked
Some pieces in identical shapes come with both signatures and sometimes no signatures
Some shapes come with the Loetz signature or no signature
@Jericho, there is nothing simple about this, I know. I think we deal with the financial circumstances as well, of post WWI and post Stock Market Crash in Fall of 1929. The magical period is 1925-1928 I feel, when a lot of good glass was being produced and many plans for more were in the planning stages.
This is not conjecture but based on what happened to several companies who initiated glass lines then, only to end the whole production within a few years.
I have noticed the same thing. There is a definite change with fabrication, color, etc. Thank you for trying to help and share your experiences.
You are welcome, look at the posts for color variations