Robert & Sheila Fournier, (Various locations).

Oops  

unmarked tankard
Note: David McDowell took over Lacock Pottery when the Fourniers retired in 1987

I think this piece is attractive. But I suspect it is factory-made. What do you think?

(The guy who sold it to me said it looked like Hamada. When I laughed, he joined in.... )

There appears to be a scratched "F' or possibly "TF" on the base. (Or could it be an incomplete "H"?   )

for me it looks handmade...

Looks like a nice studio piece to me.

Decoration and glaze looks very like my Lacock Pottery mug -

https://www.20thcenturyforum.com/t15430-fournier-lacock-pottery?highlight=Lacock

NaomiM wrote:Looks like a nice studio piece to me.

Decoration and glaze looks very like my Lacock Pottery mug -

https://www.20thcenturyforum.com/t15430-fournier-lacock-pottery?highlight=Lacock

It does, doesn't it? Maybe my eye is better than I thought .... I bought it & then got it home & had my doubts.

Not sure that the scratched mark is a mark - maybe just scratches that look like a mark.

I think it looks hand-made but quite difficult to tell from the images with something that hasn't been thrown.

The wax resist decoration does look similar to the Fourniers decoration but difficult to say who might have made it.

It is not the right shape for a Hamada and the decoration isn't something he did but it looks more like one than many pots attributed to him that you see offered for sale.

I'm fairly sure it's right. The base is like Sheila Fournier's cubes, and the decoration and glaze colour is like Lacock Pottery's items.
Although they stamped their items in various ways, some, like my mug, were left blank. Maybe it's a coincidence but the mark on the base could be F for Fournier.

Another shot:

If I saw this on eBay attributed to Lacock Pottery I would have no quibble with it.

Hi all, any ideas on this piece? Fournier or Wallwork are my initial guesses. Base is slightly concave with no marks. 6" tall.

base pic please

Looks very much like Robert Fournier. Wallwork did not use a glaze as dark as that. They both shared Studio space in London in the 60's. Hence a lot of cross fertilisation.

Like it

The base

Looks like a Fournier pebble vase. Looks the right shape and glaze.
A Wallwork piece would be marked.

Not all Wallwork are marked

http://www.miararts.com/gallery/robert-fournier-ceramic-pebble-pot/

22 Crawford St. wrote:Not all Wallwork are marked

Which of course is probably right. But then how you prove that an unmarked one is by Alan Wallwork?

This one is Fouriner .

Joe asked Alan. He did sometimes scratch in the W after firing if he forgot. One time Joe took a piece to Alan for confirmation and Alan newly scratched in a W.

Thanks for all you help. £15 well spent me thinks.

Best £15 spent! you can probably add a 0 at the end :) Unmistakably Fournier and a cracker at that...

philpot wrote:Looks very much like Robert Fournier. Wallwork did not use a glaze as dark as that. They both shared Studio space in London in the 60's. Hence a lot of cross fertilisation.

I am not sure "cross fertilisation" are the words Alan would use.

A 9 1/2 in plate not unlike the one at the top of the thread.