|
|
|
reference book updates
Section IIIGrist’s Covered Animal Dishes1. (Opaque News - December 1994:) Plate 30: Our final "update" concerns an error in Everett Grist's second edition of his book entitled Covered Animal Dishes. Although he did correct some of the many errors of his first edition, he unfortunately introduced some new errors in the second edition. One of these was spotted by member Frances Price of Bedias, Texas. On page 32, in discussing the Atterbury Duck, he states that it was "reproduced by Fenton with F mark." Mrs. Price wrote to Frank Fenton to question this assertion, and received the following reply (dated April 30, 1994) which we quote here with Mr. Fenton's permission: "The duck that Fenton produced never had an "F" mark in it. The duck was made from a mould owned by Mr. L. G. Wright of the Wright Glass Company and was produced before we started to mark anything with an "F". To add to this information, we began to use the "F" a large number of old McKee moulds from the Jeannette Glass Company. This logo is used only on Fenton moulds which have been purchased from some other producer. Thus, it would not be on the Atterbury duck." Our thanks to Mrs. Price for sharing this letter from Mr. Fenton with us. In addition to correcting the error in Grist, Mr. Fenton has also provided us with additional information concerning the date when his company introduced the "F" in oval mark as well as letting us know when and why the mark is used. 2. (Opaque News - March 1993): Plate 40 Atterbury Rooster on Lacy Base: There is no documentary evidence, to my knowledge that the Atterbury Company ever made a Rooster covered dish. Both of those pictured in Grist's plate 40 are Challinor, Taylor products. The one shown at the left is incorrectly set on an Atterbury lacy base; the one at the right is correct on its proper Challinor braided basketweave base. Additional evidence of a Challinor Rooster top is seen in the eye socket of the one at the left (without glass eye); the deep depression, unlike Atterbury's flat-disc surface to accommodate glass eyes in its animal C/Ds, is a sure sign of Challinor's Hens and Roosters. Grist's book, although not without some value, should be used with considerable caution because of its many unfortunate errors both of commission and omission. See Ann Cook's fine critique of his book in Opaque News (Vol. 3, No 1) Dec. 1987) 3. (Opaque News - September 1992): An example of a more serious error is found in Plate 64 carries the caption, "Robin on Pedestal Base made by Vallerysthal recently reproduced by Westmoreland in many colors." No problem with the caption (except that "recently" is about 30 years ago!), but the photo of Plate 64 is neither the Vallerysthal nor the Westmoreland Robin! It is, in fact, the Taiwan copy, as evident from the configuration of the rim and the much less complicated pattern of twigs and branches that form the base (see Opaque News, March 1992). It would be unfortunate if a beginning collector used this photo as evidence of a French or Westmoreland Robin on Pedestal Base. 4. (Opaque News - December 1987 - Covered Animal Dishes by C. Everett Grist - Book Review by Anne Cook - First Edition): . . .Unfortunately, the beginning collector may not have the frame of reference to recognize the errors in identification which have been made throughout the book. For example, in Plate 25, two hens are identified as Indiana Glass Co. when the smaller hen is actually an Imperial mold. I have several in my collection, some of which are signed "IG". In Plate 28, the larger hen is identified as Wright when it is actually an L.E. Smith hen. Again, I have two of these hens with paper labels purchased several years ago. I also have catalog pages from the L.E. Smith Co. which they were kind enough to send in response to my inquiry. Clearly pictured are the hen in question, a standing rooster shown in Plate 50 and wrongly attributed to Westmoreland and a turkey shown in Plate 89 and wrongly attributed to Cambridge. As a matter of fact, neither of the turkeys shown in the Plate 89 are Cambridge turkeys, although Grist identifies them as such. The larger turkey is an L.G. Wright reproduction which is nearly identical to the Cambridge turkey except for two key differences. The waffle or cross-hatch pattern on the underside of the base is a sure indication of an L.G. Wright reproduction. Feather lines are another. A true Cambridge turkey has a mottled design on the underside and smooth feathers. Plate 47 shows "the largest and smallest" hens in existence, except that I have a larger one, a Central Glass Co. hen which is 9" and E. & E. Collectibles (originally a Robert Wetzl mold) mini-hen which is half the size of the toy chick shown. . . Back to Top |
| |||||||||||||||||
|
|
