Tenmoku Charger with BL mark? Or signature?

Just a heads up that the photos of Bernard Leach, etc, pottery and art which you've posted here and on other threads break our copyright rules and we'll have to delete them. If it goes off topic then I'll split the thread and move the majority of it to the General Pottery Discussion forum like I did with the teapot one

philpot wrote:There is a time, Bernardo when you just have to accept things for what  they are. All collectors have their 'What if' moments. But unfortunately we have to accept reality.
            The reality being that if this was put up for auction it would be described as 'School of Bernard Leach' or style of Bernard Leach. If it has all these negatives from being seen in a photo. Then when examined in hand, it will certainly have more.
             
           

I do hear you.
But again, just to reiterate, from the moment I purchased it and from the start of this thread, I myself, doubted it ws thrown by B.L
as a few auction houses had already pointed that out to me.

I was really here to look at the potential and mystery around it's decoration, given what I consider a remarkably similar painted Monogram.
and so pointed out what I thought were reasonable, (if not least, very interesting!   ) potential B.L links.

I know some members have dismissed any resemblance or link to the maker's mark, but staff at Maak and Rosebery's have acknowledged the similarity
and both welcomed a physical inspection probably only based on that.
If it is of any value to this forum, I will report back with their final assessment.
I had also previously mentioned a member of The Leach project, stating at least some potential link to B.L. although there was no elaboration and much doubt there too,
all in all, as it wasn't outright denied, I thought it might warrant bringing to the table here.

None of this is really aimed toward yourself btw Philpots, I'm just taking the oppurtunity to make some type of conclusoin.

I would love to keep this in my collection and so would only sell it if it was undeniably attributed to Bernal Leach in any case,
as it simply otherwise wouldn't make enough money for me to part with it.

studio-pots wrote:If this charger was put in auction with the description "School of Bernard Leach" or "style of Bernard Leach", which I have no doubt could/would happen, then I would dismiss those descriptions with the contempt that I do all Salesmen speak where ever I see it.

In my book, knowingly conning people to buy something because of a false attribution, however vague, is fraud. However, it's how the world works and people make money, so no one is going to be concerned with what I think.

Yea, it either is or it isn't.
I think Philpots was saying if someone were to advertise it as such, it would fall flat on it's face in any respect.

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:And I don't get what you say about using a brush there, I was refering to a pencil sketch for a design idea, which doesn't always
define a clear and deliberate decoration. (the idea of a sunset and waterfall between 2 hills is what i'm clinging to here if you'l allow me for the time being)  

Bursh/pen/pencil it makes no difference, it's still using a tool to make a deliberate design, not being dunked into a bucket of glaze, which is all that can be seen on your piece. The "waterfall" you see is simply a glaze effect, one that I am not even sure was intended.

That said, this looks like either brush or pen to me:

https://www.artnet.com/artists/bernard-howell-leach/two-dishes-with-plant-designs-oGtumB9qNyahP_tpWOC47A2

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:I know some members have dismissed any resemblance or link to the maker's mark, but staff at Maak and Rosebery's have acknowledged the similarity
and both welcomed a physical inspection probably only based on that.
If it is of any value to this forum, I will report back with their final assessment.
I had also previously mentioned a member of The Leach project, stating at least some potential link to B.L. although there was no elaboration and much doubt there too,
all in all, as it wasn't outright denied, I thought it might warrant bringing to the table here.

I don't think any of us dismissed the resemblance of the mark? Simply that a mark on it's own has no importance, when everything else is obviously wrong.

I'm sure the people at Maak know better and were simply being polite to you, most valueers seem to prefer to leave people with a bit of fasle hope, rather than just telling them how it is. Personally I think that is wrong, but I do understand it's annoying to having to often crush peoples fantasy's. Plus some people will just try and argue blind about an attribution, unless you give them some wishy washy maybe answer... on that note... "we'll never know for sure if BL decorated this pot"

Potty wrote:
Bursh/pen/pencil it makes no difference, it's still using a tool to make a deliberate design, not being dunked into a bucket of glaze, which is all that can be seen on your piece. The "waterfall" you see is simply a glaze effect, one that I am not even sure was intended.

I think you might have to allow me my opinion as to what the scene depicts.
Although I think it is quite clear, I certainly havn't wanted to press it upon anyone else.
I don't think I need correcting on that point.

I'm not sure about "dunked into a bucket of glaze"..
But then again, if you don't see a sunset, mountain and lake scene..
then I understand your assumption for the manufacturing process.

Potty wrote:I'm sure the people at Maak know better and were simply being polite to you, most valueers seem to prefer to leave people with a bit of fasle hope, rather than just telling them how it is.

I feel you might be right about the auction houses just being polite to me.
Though I don't think they "want to leave people with false hope" more perhaps they have professionalism to not dismiss so abruptly?

Potty wrote:
Personally I think that is wrong, but I do understand it's annoying to having to often crush peoples fantasy's. Plus some people will just try and argue blind about an attribution, unless you give them some wishy washy maybe answer... on that note... "we'll never know for sure if BL decorated this pot"

I like to think you are not tying me in here, with someone who would be having their 'fantasy crushed'
or who is arguing blindly about attribution?

But I must say, I do very much appreciate and approve of your wishy washy conclusion!    

more of that, thank you  

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:I think you might have to allow me my opinion as to what the scene depicts.
Although I think it is quite clear, I certainly havn't wanted to press it upon anyone else.
I don't think I need correcting on that point.

I don't deny anyone their own opinion.

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:I'm not sure about "dunked into a bucket of glaze"..
But then again, if you don't see a sunset, mountain and lake scene..
then I understand your assumption for the manufacturing process.

Having done pottery lessons on a weekly basis for about a year, if we wanted to recreate this, that is what we would do. 2 different glazes with a bit of an overlap to give the mountain scene appearance.

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:I feel you might be right about the auction houses just being polite to me.
Though I don't think they "want to leave people with false hope" more perhaps they have professionalism to not dismiss so abruptly?

I don't think false hope is the direct intention, but it's often the end result. I worked in an auction house for a few years and saw this on a frequent basis, often with the valueer afterwards expressing to colleagues what a load of rubbish something actually was in their opinion.

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:I like to think you are not tying me in here, with someone who would be having their 'fantasy crushed'
or who is arguing blindly about attribution?

The fantasy bit was people in general. The argue blind part was mostly people in general, plus a bit pointed towards you, with a hint of comedy   I'd not call what you have been doing blindly arguing, but you have been flogging a dead horse for a while with this one.

Bernado Duckworthy wrote:But I must say, I do very much appreciate and approve of your wishy washy conclusion!    

more of that, thank you  

Potty wrote:
Having done pottery lessons on a weekly basis for about a year, if we wanted to recreate this, that is what we would do. 2 different glazes with a bit of an overlap to give the mountain scene appearance.

Nice work, what took you so long? 
No, that's inspired me, I know everyone says it, but I'd also love to give it a go.
...And ok, I'l have to take your word on that one, the red glaze in places does looks
pretty spectacular to me. I'l have to join up and try and recreate it myself!

Potty wrote: I don't think false hope is the direct intention, but it's often the end result. I worked in an auction house for a few years and saw this on a frequent basis, often with the valueer afterwards expressing to colleagues what a load of rubbish something actually was in their opinion.

I'm with you, I can imagine.

Potty wrote:
The fantasy bit was people in general. The argue blind part was mostly people in general, plus a bit pointed towards you, with a hint of comedy   I'd not call what you have been doing blindly arguing, but you have been flogging a dead horse for a while with this one.

Thanks for clarifying that Potty..and refraining from using that particular emotive   . I suppose I was seeing it as being put in the postition of having to back up my thought process. (I thought everything I added was at least quite logical)
But I do understand now, that has to be done with solid information and merit.
I know you guys must have seen and heard it all before a million times before.
I'l be very mindful from now, to not waste time.  



....One for the road

Potty wrote:

Again the comparison is irrelevant sorry, the above are clear/deliberate designs, not dipping with “Hare’s-Fur” style glaze and hoping for the best.

Upon dusting off this charger ready for display, it occurred to me I needed to acknowledge the merit of the above comment. I now understand that any B.L sketched design concepts, would transfer as very similar, clear and deliberate designs/brush strokes on his cermaics.