Antique Silhouettes - 19th Century American Silhouettes
.
Antique silhouettes are fun to look at and a treasure to behold! Acquire one 19th century American silhouette, and your curiosity will begin. Collect two examples; your curiosity will double.
Collect four examples, and you will have a nice display. Collect twenty examples; you have a nice collection. Collect a hundred; you are a fool!
All postings are written by B. M. Jones, unless otherwise noted
Links
- 19th Century American Silhouettes I Homepage
- 19th Century American Silhouettes II
- 19th Century American Silhouettes III
- Silhouette Artists Born Without Arms
- Thoughts on Some Folk Art
Items for Sale Link
Links of Interest by Others. If you know of other interesting sites, drop me a line for inclusion. If a link does not work, let me know; I will remove it.- Peggy McClard's Antique Silhouettes Inventory
- Catalogue of the Subjects Contained in the Hubard Gallery
- Materials and Techniques of American Portrait Silhouettes
- Mechanization of Likeness in Jeffersonian America
- Moses Williams, Cutter of Profiles, PDF file
- Genuine Article?(I do not agree with some of what is written there but)
- American Antiquarian Society Silhouette Collection
- Miniature Portraits(Best Site on the Subject)
- English Silhouettist William James Hubard, PDF file
- 19th Century American Silhouettes I Homepage
- 19th Century American Silhouettes II
- 19th Century American Silhouettes III
- Silhouette Artists Born Without Arms
- Thoughts on Some Folk Art
- Items For SALE
- EMAIL: nihiru@aol.com
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Tough Economy?
I am out of money and very mad about it. I ordered a book from Carolina Bookshop,612 West Main Street, Locust, NC, 28097( Gordon Briscoe, Jr. owner) and paid thru paypal. After a full month goes by with five unanswered emails to the seller, paypal decides in my favor. Unfortunately, this book seller had already spent my money and there is not a red cent left in his account for paypal to issue a refund. I ordered a book thru www.choosebooks.com, which is just as guilty as the bookseller. There is no customer service there at all. My complaint went unanswered there as well. I probably bought over 500 books over the years on the internet; this is my first bad experience. Most booksellers are good people, except for this thief!
I am out of money and very mad about it. I ordered a book from Carolina Bookshop,612 West Main Street, Locust, NC, 28097( Gordon Briscoe, Jr. owner) and paid thru paypal. After a full month goes by with five unanswered emails to the seller, paypal decides in my favor. Unfortunately, this book seller had already spent my money and there is not a red cent left in his account for paypal to issue a refund. I ordered a book thru www.choosebooks.com, which is just as guilty as the bookseller. There is no customer service there at all. My complaint went unanswered there as well. I probably bought over 500 books over the years on the internet; this is my first bad experience. Most booksellers are good people, except for this thief!
Sunday, December 23, 2007
A Superb Painted Silhouette with Gold Foil Backing
I was very fortunate enough to find this silhouette. The portrait is painted on reverse glass backed with gold foil. There is a fancy term for this: verre eglomise. I tried to photograph it the best I could, but it does not do justice. It is like taking a photo of a dag or a mirror. I am just not a photographer. Anyways, the painted portrait measures 39mm tall and 21mm at its widest, which is the bustline. He resembles Carolus III of Spain somewhat. His hair is long in the back and tied with a ribbon. The image represents that of a man ca.1790.
The roped cartouche around the profile is brass or bronze with six copper pins securing it, which passes through the backing on the reverse. There seems to have been another paper backing, now lost, perhaps the artist’s advertisement (?). The frame is fine-grained hardwood, perhaps mahogany. The backing paper is original with floral decoration. I usually have my paws under there to see how these things were made but not this time. I know I would mess it up.
Usually, the type of frame they used back then for this sort of silhouette was papier-mâché. This is much better quality than that, and someone had to pay extra for it. I scrutinized the entire piece, the obverse, the reverse, the sides, the hanger, and then some, looking for any initials but did not find any. I wonder about the artist. I doubt if any of the American artists could have created such an object. So, I am inclined to think it is English or Continental. I searched all my books but no luck. Have you any info that you could share? H
I was very fortunate enough to find this silhouette. The portrait is painted on reverse glass backed with gold foil. There is a fancy term for this: verre eglomise. I tried to photograph it the best I could, but it does not do justice. It is like taking a photo of a dag or a mirror. I am just not a photographer. Anyways, the painted portrait measures 39mm tall and 21mm at its widest, which is the bustline. He resembles Carolus III of Spain somewhat. His hair is long in the back and tied with a ribbon. The image represents that of a man ca.1790.
The roped cartouche around the profile is brass or bronze with six copper pins securing it, which passes through the backing on the reverse. There seems to have been another paper backing, now lost, perhaps the artist’s advertisement (?). The frame is fine-grained hardwood, perhaps mahogany. The backing paper is original with floral decoration. I usually have my paws under there to see how these things were made but not this time. I know I would mess it up.
Usually, the type of frame they used back then for this sort of silhouette was papier-mâché. This is much better quality than that, and someone had to pay extra for it. I scrutinized the entire piece, the obverse, the reverse, the sides, the hanger, and then some, looking for any initials but did not find any. I wonder about the artist. I doubt if any of the American artists could have created such an object. So, I am inclined to think it is English or Continental. I searched all my books but no luck. Have you any info that you could share? H
What do readers think? Feedbacks?One of the readers writes: "About 5 years ago my great uncle who lived in Kentucky sent me out this old box of family heirlooms that had belonged to his wife's mother who was my great grandmother. Everything in this box was identified by her as to who the stuff belonged to and this would have been done around 1920. It contained a lot of old photos, documents and other things that belonged to her grandmother who was born in 1845. In this box was this old silk embroidered pocketbook and it was identified as "The property of Martha Mar Winters Palmer".
She was my grandmothers great grandmother and was born in 1818 in Kentucky. Her parents were Jacob and Nancy Winter. Jacob was from Maryland and Nancy Virginia. Nancy's parents were John Ward and Dosia Anderson. John fought in the revolution in Virginia. The silhouette was cut out of black paper and pasted in the pocketbook. There are some bad spot on the edges that are from the needlework on the opposite side rubbing on it.
Anyway, I'm trying to fiqure out if this thing is American or not. I have tried and tried to find a family ancestor that matches the initials with no luck at all. One thing I've always wondered about is the last battle of the Revolutionary War ended in 1782 and was fought at Blue Licks Kentucky, a few miles from where they lived. Could there be a tie between that battle and this pocketbook, especially with the rifle and powder bag on the front???
On the top of the inside are some intials which I sent a close of. I think they are W.M.C. and also one side of the sleeve is open and the backing has some paper with letters and some numerals. The letters to me look like the old english letters that means lb. and shilling. Inside the sleeve is a real old baby's bonnet and a 1876 copy of the Declaration of Indepedence. Anyway, it would be nice to hear what you might know about something like this. Maybe you've seen other silhouette's that are similar. Any thought's would be deeply appreciated."
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Silhouettes from a recent Auction Recent Skinner auction contained a 
nice assortment of silhouettes. I only saved the photos of the ones I 
thought were interesting. Obviously, this was a collection formed by one individual. Some were genuine. Others were obviously not. There were a few with questions. (Please do keep in mind that the following assessment is only my opinion.) The prices went begging on most. These prices do not include buyer’s fees. All images belong to Skinner.Photo #1
These three silhouettes are in nice period frames from what I can see.
“Three Silhouette Portraits, America, early 19th century, hollow cut bust-length portraits backed with black fabric housed in period molded giltwood frames, including a portrait of a gentleman by T.P. Jones, with embossed signature "T.P. Jones Fecit" 4 1/4x 3 1/4 in., in a ; one of a woman, by Charles Willson Peale, with embossed eagle and "Peales Museum" mark, 5 x 4 in.; the last portraying a young gentleman, with an indistinct embossed maker's mark, the backing paper with a paper label indicating it was once in the collection Elizabeth L. Maurier, 4 3/4 x 4 in.”
I know that the one in the center is no good. This is likely the one the seller calls Peale with his mark. I imagine that one on the left is by Jones. I am not able to determine whether it is good or bad from this photo alone. The bust is a bit unusual for him. This set brought $200, which is basically the price of three early frames.
Photo #2
This pair brought $175.
“Two Silhouette Portraits, America, early 19th century, both hollow cut bust-length portraits, housed in period oval molded wood frames, one portraying a gentleman backed with black paper, by T.P. Jones with embossed mark, (toning, crease u.l.), 4 x 3 in.; the other of a young boy with black fabric backing, (toning, stains), 4 x 3 1/4 in.”
This type of cutting on the right are offered from time to time. I do not know whose work this is. The Jones, however, on the left is his telltale image. This is a no-question Jones.
Photo #3
“Pair of Silhouette Portraits of Zilpha and Stephen Longfellow, cut by William King, New England, (active 1804-1806), hollow cut bust-length portraits backed with black silk, embossed "W KING" l.c., 4 1/2 x 3 1/2 in., in oval molded sheet brass frames. Condition: Minor toning and foxing, crease along bottoms.”
I cannot see the embossment, but with this pair, I do no have to see it. This man and the woman are a classic example of his work. The pair bought $300, which is very reasonable.
Photo #4
“Pair of Silhouette Portraits, Attributed to William King, New England, c. 1805, hollow-cut bust-length portraits of a lady and gentleman, backed with black fabric, with embossed "KING" mark below, (minor toning), sight size 3 1/2 x 2 3/4 in., housed in period molded giltwood frames with reverse painted blue mats with gilt rosettes in the corners.”
This pair brought only $125! I do not like this pair at all. The stamps are too large for King. Someone other than King cut the pair. The frames look good, but I question the inserts.
Photo #5
“Three Silhouette Portraits of Women by William Doyle, Boston, early 19th century, hollow-cut portraits with ink embellishments, each signed "Doyle" below, (toning, foxing, one with losses), sight sizes 3 3/8 x 2 5/8, 3 1/4 x 2 5/8, dia. 3 1/4 in., two housed in oval repousse brass frames, one in a molded giltwood frame.”
What happened here? The three brought only $90! Although the cuttings resemble very much like that of Doyle, I cannot say for sure from this distance. However, I would have been quite happy to secure even just the frames at this price. If I were the consignor, I would have been very mad.
Photo #6
“Three Portrait Silhouettes, America, early 19th century, hollow-cut portraits including one of a gentleman likely done by Charles Willson Peale, with backwards embossed "MUSEUM" below, one of a woman wearing a mobcap, and one of a gentleman inscribed "E. Webb 1809" c.l., (toning, minor foxing), dia. 4 in., housed in period round black painted molded wood frames.”
Nothing special here with these three silhouettes. Yet, there is something very simple and charming about these undecorated round frames. These frames are much more difficult to find than the rectangular ones. The problem is, however, that silhouettes must be cut quite a bit to fit into these frames. The trio brought $150.
Photo #7
“Framed Silhouette Advertisement with Three Silhouette Portraits, possibly Salem, Massachusetts area, early 19th century, original printed advertisement on rag paper for Moses Chapman, placed in a frame together with three hollow-cut portraits of a man, a woman, and a boy, (minor toning, stain, tear), sight size 9 1/2 x 7 1/2 in., in a period mahogany veneer frame.”
This is a nice set and brought $650. How often does one find Chapman’s handbill? I would have liked to have examined this one in person. Nowadays, anyone can print a handbill using old paper with a printer. My questions are: Are the letters and the two top images of silhouettes impressed into the paper? Did it go through a press? From the photo, it looks like the cutouts were made from the blank space of the handbill. It does not appear to be in two sections. If this were indeed a genuine piece, I would like to hear from the buyer. I hope it is period.
Photo #8
“Silhouette Portrait of Charles Carroll, Signer of the Declaration of Independence, attributed to Charles Willson Peale, early 19th century, the subject identified in inscriptions on the backing, hollow cut bust-length portrait backed with black silk, with embossed "Peales Museum" mark, 5 x 3 1/2 in. in a period molded giltwood frame.”“Note Charles Carroll (1737-1832) was a member of the Continental Congress (1776-1778), U. S. Senator, an original director of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad and signer of the Declaration of Independence from Maryland. It was said that Carroll was the wealthiest man in America in the early 1800s.”
This brought $1600! I do not know how anyone can attribute this to Carroll with sincerity. What pedigree does this item possess? I could have written something on the back of the frame last month. It is an odd-looking Peale.
Photo #9
“Double Portrait Silhouette of Women with Embroidered Decoration, William King, New England, (active 1804-1806), hollow-cut bust-length portraits identified on the reverse as "Elizabeth Walden" and "Elizabeth Dame," both with the name "W. KING" embossed beneath, (one signature is backwards), centered with an embroidered silk threads on paper bouquet of flowers, (toning, tears), 4 x 7 1/4 in., in a likely original molded wood frame.”
What a lovely item this is! It brought $3500. There are two very nice hollow-cuts by King. There is no disagreement there. A charming floral decoration adds to its charm. If it were a true double-silhouette, its rarity would have been enormous. (Please see my writing on true double-silhouettes somewhere on my page.) This is a combined pair or two singles made to appear as one. From the back of the paper, I am sure the split in the paper can be seen (hidden from the obverse by the decoration).
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Benjamin Franklin Silhouette by Peale
This is surely a dilemma for a physiognomist. If I were presented with two silhouettes, a Foster Brothers and Old Benjy here, which would I prefer to hang on my wall? If I were to choose between death and more taxes, of course I would prefer more taxes. So which is death in this case, Foster Bro. or Ben? This item has a mimimum of $900 starting bid. The auction company is quite well-known, not for silhouettes but for having excellent selection of coins and medals in their auctions.
The description is as follows: "Period Silhouette of Benjamin Franklin, Peale's Museum, Choice Very Fine. This hollow-cut profile silhouette bears an embossed museum label ("PEALE'S MUSEUM") with an eagle, identified as belonging to Charles Wilson Peale's museum in Philadelphia. The cream-colored, embossed mat has a cutout black fabric silhouette of Benjamin Franklin--making for a stunning profile. Portrait is enclosed in original, gilt-plaster covered wood frame, measuring 6.75" x 5" overall."
Right off the bat, "Wilson" is miss-speled. "Embossed mat" must be a new term. I do not even know what a "cutout black fabric silhouette" is. What makes the auctioneer think it is even Franklin? It looks more like my neighbor.
This is a "YUCK" item for sure.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Doyle?
From a respected auction company: "Silhouette of a gentleman, first half of 19th century, indistinct signature, possibly Doyle, in painted metal frame H: 5 1/4 in.
PROVENANCE: From the collection of Marie Evans, Alexandria, Virginia"
PROVENANCE: From the collection of Marie Evans, Alexandria, Virginia"
Without actually seeing it, it is tough to make a judgment but having done this sort of a thing for years, I believe I can make a "call" on this silhouette. Of course, I can be totally wrong too. So, let us just say this is my opinion based on my past experience.
The first thing I noticed was the whiteness of the paper. This is not to say that those silhouettes that are well preserved cannot be white. There are many such genuine examples. Also, since this is a photo, perhaps the whiteness is because of the lighting. From the photo, it is not possible to determine whether it is a hollow-cut or painted, or a combination of both.
So far, I have proven nothing. Now, let us look at the smudges and the spots. I have seen many types of foxing. They tend to fall somewhere in between light and dark brown colors. I do not remember a single instance where I observed "black." The half a dozen circular spots above the head seem to be oil based, at least to me. I cannot say whether these spots originate from the reverse or the obverse of the paper from the photo. They are, however, either drippings on the paper or came in contact when the paper was laid flat. I don't mean to sound like a coroner, but they are not spattered. The smudges to the left and right of the bust appear to be impressions left by fingers.
If this is a genuine ca. 1805 silhouette, I will recite 100 Hail Marys. I hate saying prayers, so I hope I am right. This "thing" is a 1920s print.
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Nice Bache but too Bad
Some eBayer had to ask, "Can you please tell me whether this silhouette is cut & paste with painted embellishment or all painted?"
Seller revised by stating, "Please note: I can see part of an embossed area reading Bache's - I assume for Bache's Patent - Bache was an important American silhouettist (1771-1845)."
I knew it was Bache even seeing the stamp and thought that I could get it real cheap. When someone asks that sort of questions, it is like choking your own neck. It brought $400, which is a strong price especially enclosed in that frame that is very English. What worries me is that the oval opening is way too small for Bache. I do not know whether the paper is folded to fit the opening or just plain cut off to accompany the opening. Whichever, it must be defective. As a general rule, you do not cut the silhouette to fit the frame. You find one that is large enough to accomondate it.
Common Peale Museum Silhouettes Scarce Subject
From the seller: "This is a pair of antique Silhouttes. They measure 5 1/4" X 4 1/4" each. Each is stamped with the word "MUSEUM". The boy stamp is very light..." The pair brought $260. That is a bargain even with their ugly modern frames.
Silhouettes of children are much sought after and are scarce. I would estimate that for every 100 silhouettes, 5 will be that of children, or 5%. This estimate is very liberal. They are difficult to find. Although scarce as a subject, those cut at the Peale's Museum are the commonest. Silhouettes of children by any other cutters are rare.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Henry Williams Silhouette and Portrait Painting
The images and their descriptions came from Jane. I could only dream about owning such a painting.
Attached are photos of both the Henry Williams' portrait of Henry Burroughs, and the Williams' silhouette of Master John Day. Henry Burroughs was painted circa 1810, and he lived in Boston, Ma. his entire life. He was born in 1783, and died in 1870. His portrait is in the original gold frame and measures 25 1/2"x 31 1/2" overall. This portrait was most likely exhibited at Harvard University in an exhibition by Alan Burroughs, who graduated, I believe, in 1934. Alan Burroughs,incidently, was a pioneer in the application of X-radiography to the examination of works of art at The Harvard University Art Museum.
Master John Day was cut by Williams around the same time, in Boston, and he is also in his original frame. I haven't been able to trace John Day as of this time. I would estimate his age around 10-12 years old when his silhouette was made.
I acquired the silhouette at an antique show about 10 years ago, and recently acquired the portrait from a Connecticut dealer's website. It really is neat to have an example of both mediums in which Henry Williams is noted for being an accomplished artist! The oil portrait of Burroughs almost takes your breath away with its detail of the face. It doesn't show up as detailed in the photo, however.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Silhouette like a Close-Up Photo
This is the most highly detailed, painted silhouette I ever owned. Can someone provide a more detailed example? The delineation of her hat is so precise that one can even see its weaving. This is VERY unusual. The artist had to use a powered glass to execute it. What do you think?
Monday, June 11, 2007
Some People are Talented
It amazes me how some people have a knack for things that we call art. I invited a young student over several years ago. He looks at my silhouettes hanging on the walls. He says he can imitate them, so I gave him a razor and paper. He came up with these cuttings. My cat is a calico, and he even denineates her pattern. He is a good looking kid, but he cuts a way too masterful piece for himself, perhaps justified under the circumstances. I do not know which bustline he imitated, perhaps Peale?
Don't Wanna Pick but....
Described as "looks to be mid 1800s" is this pair of silhouette from an auction. The man looks to be in the style of or after William Chamberlain. The lady seems to be a combination of period style. These may have been done during the "period" by an amateur. I believe the word "folky" is personal. For me these are just too folky or perhaps the proper is too "funky." Whatever they are, there is something there that attracts attention, not for its artistic merits, however. I think they are cute.
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Group of Peale Silhouettes
Here is a good example of a grouping of silhouettes cut at the Museum. I believe there were half a dozen cutters working there. My favorite cutter is the one who cut the long elongated bustlines with a small notch at the tip. For reasons unknown, the sitters for this cutter always seem to be attractive young women. Check out the three silhouettes on the top center. There is a good chance that the man in the middle row, second from the left, is stamped “Peale” if it does have a stamp. That bust curve is my least favorite of the Museum bustlines.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
William King Silhouette
Another rare item, although not as rare as Jennys or Williams, is this silhouette by William King in black frame by the same auction company, Conestoga Auction Company. They also have a very rare Day's Patent. Unfortunately, the stamp does not show on their photograph. I have written them asking for the close-up of the stamp but nothing comes my way, yet. At any rate, many of King's men have similarities. To illustrate this, I have also attached a King from my collection for comparison. The auction item is the one in the black frame. Other images are mine.
Rare Henry Williams Silhouette
When I first saw this silhouette, I thought it was the same example that Carrick illustrated in her book. Upon closer examination, there are some differences with the detailing of the hair. This is also from Conestoga Auction Company. I do not own a Williams. I wish I did.
Rare William Jennys Silhouette
This is a rare artist. Groce says, "Portrait painter working in and around New Milford (Conn.) in mid-1790's and at NYC in 1797-98. After 1800 he moved northward along the Connecticut Valley into Central Massachusetts and Vermont and eastward to Portsmouth (NH). Not in McKechnie, Carrick, Harper, or Jackson.
Silhouette of Young Lady, cut paper with cloth background, stamped "W. Jennys" in black painted frame, 5" x 4-1/2". From Conestoga Auction Company
Does anyone own another Jennys?
Rare Buncombe for Sure
Although this is not an American silhouette, it is one of the important artists from the other side so decided to list it. It is from eBay with a starting bid of $800. I do not know if the seller is pulling our legs or what. If anyone bids on this, I will tear my illustrations out of books and start selling!
"This is an original work of the well known and highly praised John Buncombe. The beauty of this piece is that the illustration is followed by a caption authenticating the work as described " PAINTED MILITARY PORTRAIT OF THE 18TH CENTURY, BY J BUNCOMBE OF NEWPORT, ISLE OF WIGHT " printed on the work itself.
Damage to this piece has occured and is described as follows :
Throughought its entirity there is a very light bleeding that is concentrated just to the right of the soldier's apparel.This peice has slight mold along the top edge where it was affixed to the tilt hinge mounting originaly. There is a slight scuff bellow the numerals in the prefix 18th seen in the caption bellow the soldier.
Deminsions are 4.5 inches wide by 6 inches tall. All of the slight imperfections are minute and give the piece a truely delightfull charm."
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Rare Letton Silhouette
A very unusual silhouette appeared on eBay recently with an inscription, "this profile taken by r litton june 16 1806." There is no doubt it is by Ralph Letton (see my short bio on him somewhere on this site). The silhouette is a hollow-cut that has been folded to fit a frame with numerous sewing in the tears of the paper. It brought $31.
As Letton never signed his works, this image is an important reference/link to his works. It has some similarities to William King's hanging hair and cravat. This profile is well-cut with rounded facial details. The bust termination is unique. The only reference to Letton appears in an illustration by Carrick where she illustrates an example from a broadside. For having major similarities with the broadside, I listed a pair of man/woman hollow-cuts under "for sale" items as possibly cut by Letton. Although they differ from the bust type of this eBay item, my attribution to this artist is secure.
The present silhouette likely originated from a collection of the 19th century silhouettes and photographs that was auctioned off a few years ago. I recall having obtained several pieces from this collection with similarly sewn repairs. It is a shame that this silhouette went begging for a trifle sum. Letton is very rare; in fact, he is unobtainable. But then, how does a rarity serve when the market makers know nothing about this artist? Aside from the little information Carrick provides and the writings contained herein (Letton's bio), have anyone really read anything about Letton? If a reader knows more abou the subject, please be kind enough to provide the same.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Another Todd's Patent
I found this on the net a while ago, but I do not remember where I got it from now. Todd is a rare artist, and this is a very nice work with an attractive woman. I wonder who owns this rarity now.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
What is Appraisal?
Recently, through this page, an inquiry arrived asking for an appraisal. For privacy reasons, I am unable to give the owner’s name of the silhouettes or the museum that was contemplating purchasing it for their collection. I was first contacted by the museum asking if I could recommend a competent, antique-silhouette appraiser. It seems that after some search on the web, the museum was unable to find any. Although I had someone in mind, Peggy, I knew that she was occupied with her studies on pre-1780 American antiques.
I figured that an appraisal or an offering of my opinion was possible through email since I do this quite often, and there is no charge for it. This is my hobby, and it is one way of showing my appreciation for finding and reading what I have to write about silhouettes. Once in a blue moon, I sell a book or a silhouette through this page. The profit, if one can call that, is meager. Since I am a full time student, I am not endowed with extra blessing of $. Yet, once a week I enjoy eating a Chinese take-out plate lunch, orange chicken. It is $5.67 with tax and comes with fried rice and a choice of soup or an egg-roll. The Chinese girl at the counter says, “You always have exact change.” Last week I did not. I gave her $5.77 expecting a dime in change. For her, it was probably business as usual, thinking that I handed her the exact amount. I did not get my dime back. That day, I over-expensed myself. I begin to think. Perhaps next week, I will give her $5.57. Will she tell me then that I am 10 cents short?
Fried food is tricky. If I were to eat it at the restaurant, it is crispy and tastes tremendously good. However, I have to leave a tip in which I cannot afford on many occasions. So, it is take-out. I quickly rush to my car, open the container top, exposing the fried chicken, filling the car with that sweet-hot-sour odor, so that it will not get moist from the steam it creates. From the restaurant to my place is about 7 minutes drive. For the sake of savoring its crispiness, I drive fast. If all goes well, when I enter the house, it is still crispy, not cold or warm but still very hot. I have my Tabasco sauce and a large fork pre-readied. My cat says, “Welcome home; where is my food?” I love my cat, but the next 5 minutes is all mine. She understands.
This goes to show you that silhouettes and orange chicken have a lot in common. What they are, you need to figure out. It is like Paul McCartney crossing the Abbey Road.
Getting back to the subject….They were unframed silhouettes by one of the more common artists. The owner and the museum were unaware of their values. I stated only the facts about the silhouettes. The outcome of this deal between the owner and the museum? I guess one can get some sense of its outcome by reading Robert Frost’s “Design.”
I figured that an appraisal or an offering of my opinion was possible through email since I do this quite often, and there is no charge for it. This is my hobby, and it is one way of showing my appreciation for finding and reading what I have to write about silhouettes. Once in a blue moon, I sell a book or a silhouette through this page. The profit, if one can call that, is meager. Since I am a full time student, I am not endowed with extra blessing of $. Yet, once a week I enjoy eating a Chinese take-out plate lunch, orange chicken. It is $5.67 with tax and comes with fried rice and a choice of soup or an egg-roll. The Chinese girl at the counter says, “You always have exact change.” Last week I did not. I gave her $5.77 expecting a dime in change. For her, it was probably business as usual, thinking that I handed her the exact amount. I did not get my dime back. That day, I over-expensed myself. I begin to think. Perhaps next week, I will give her $5.57. Will she tell me then that I am 10 cents short?
Fried food is tricky. If I were to eat it at the restaurant, it is crispy and tastes tremendously good. However, I have to leave a tip in which I cannot afford on many occasions. So, it is take-out. I quickly rush to my car, open the container top, exposing the fried chicken, filling the car with that sweet-hot-sour odor, so that it will not get moist from the steam it creates. From the restaurant to my place is about 7 minutes drive. For the sake of savoring its crispiness, I drive fast. If all goes well, when I enter the house, it is still crispy, not cold or warm but still very hot. I have my Tabasco sauce and a large fork pre-readied. My cat says, “Welcome home; where is my food?” I love my cat, but the next 5 minutes is all mine. She understands.
This goes to show you that silhouettes and orange chicken have a lot in common. What they are, you need to figure out. It is like Paul McCartney crossing the Abbey Road.
Getting back to the subject….They were unframed silhouettes by one of the more common artists. The owner and the museum were unaware of their values. I stated only the facts about the silhouettes. The outcome of this deal between the owner and the museum? I guess one can get some sense of its outcome by reading Robert Frost’s “Design.”
Monday, January 29, 2007
More on the Same Artist
Found two more by the same artist. This artist uses old frames and makes decorative silhouettes. Looks like the artist worked in the manner of different genuine artists. The works have a charm of thier own, but why would collectors pay more than the prices of GENUINE silhouettes? I did not want to come straight out and call the two listed below as reproductions when I posted them, as my words are scarcely worth two bits. With these two additional images, however, perhaps my words are now worth three bits. Since the images are copyrighted, I best mention that the rights belong to "It's about time."
Friday, January 19, 2007
More Questionable Items
I apologize if I am sounding so cynical these days. This item appeared on eBay from the same seller as the one mentioned below. I just can not see how these two silhouettes are from the early 1800s. They are in a manner of, but at least to me, they lack the flavor of. They sold quite well with multiple bidders on their tails. Can someone point out why they can be from the early 1800s (ca.1830)?
Saturday, January 06, 2007
You Decide
This silhouette is from on eBay. It is in a gilded or gold-leafed frame made ca.1830, give-or-take. The silhouette has“flair” of ca.1830 design.
The aura of perception implements a graphic concept and the permanence of ideas; it represents something of a common origin behind a common purpose. The persistence of the concept is rooted in the association of form with function. How far this common origin explains the similarity of this item and others previously mentioned on this site is based on an actual derivation and not on an accidental coincidence. The difficulty is to know how far the premises correspond. They suggest an innate tendency to utilize similarity in techniques under dissociated circumstances. Although the material is, for the most part, very different, the element that exists in these items is tantamount. Although the beauty, itself, is remarkably appealing at first site, it is also capable of concealing sinister secrets. Having captivated the minds and souls of its surroundings, nature secretes a concoction for the defenseless.
The acuteness of her nose and the chin, along with its exaggerated eyelash, not to mention her “imposing” detailing of the hair, the “blueness” of brushwork have something of their friendliness resigned.
Saturday, December 16, 2006
$14,000 Pair of Silhouettes
From the Maine Antiques Digest comes the following: "The pair of hollow-cut silhouettes was one of 11 lots attributed to an unknown silhouette cutter known as the Puffy Sleeve Artist, for that obvious characteristic, and done between 1830 and 1831. This lot was the only pair among the 11 lots. A phone bidder won these for $15,080. The entire 11-lot group (12 silhouettes in all) brought a total of $141,520." Twelve silhouettes for $141K? That is about $12,000 per silhouette.
This reminds me of an antiquity collector in Israel I saw on TV (no relation with the silhouettes and none implied) who appeared on the History Channel. He made countless forgeries to sell to well-to-do collectors and museums throughout the world. His items were very well made, and even the real prophets of the antiquities were fooled for years. One day a geologist-archaeologist performed a number of tests on the stone engravings. He was able to scrape the patina from within the engraved channel of the charcters with a matchstick. The patina was found not to be naturally formed, being of higher temperature than the climate allows for the region in the last 3000 years (40-50C). Further tests revealed the stone came from coastal sites because of minute traces of marine fossils and not from the site originally intended. The crystaline patina was measured using isotope analysis with scientific equipment worth big bucks. All of these exciting TV moments I was saying to myself, "look at them things, it is so obvious they are not genuine." Could I prove my subjective thoughts? No, but as I mentioned earlier, somewhere on this HP, once you know good things, you always know what good things look like.
Some twenty years ago, if I remember correctly, a forger from Utah made thousands of fake documents, all well-done and believable. Most of that was Mormon stuff and early American documents. He was able to fool every buyer. He made millions! He used period paper and period handwriting. He also used a quill with artificially toned brown ink. Science is useful and sometimes not so useful. Trying to carbondate these stuff is almost always useless. The main giveaway was the ink. It contained materials that did not exist back then.
A forger of 1907 High Relief St. Gaudens Double Eagle is of another interest. He perfected the art and sold a handful to seasoned numismatists. They were all fooled. Until, too many of these excellent coins surfaced. Even then, the art of science, subjective science, or objective science is unsure of these counterfeits. The main doubt is that there are just too many around, and all of these coins display a very minute, similar characteristic between the details. This is thought to be a signature of the forger. According to this one expert, the forger placed his mark so that this forger can differentiate between genuine and forged coins. What a lousy explanation I thought.
These few examples of forging stories is only the tip of an iceberg. Formation of glacial tills is something we all have to consider. Are they tills or drifts? Till we dig (no pun intended) we never know. Seems as though I am drifting (again, no pun intended) from the main subject (just to clarify: till or until as in glacial till, and drifting as in mechanical or weathering drift).
A silhouette for $12,000 each is something we need to know why. This illustrated pair, one with a trumpet or a bugle, is out of the ordinary. If this is "kosher," it is the only known silhouette with a musical instrument. The frames are period-like, and the subjects seem to be "hollow" without displaying any genuine physiognomy. Of course, my thoughts are subjective. Any other subjective offers out there?
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Silhouette by T.P.Jones
Jones was a competent silhouettist. I like his style. Not many of his works are found. But then, he worked with duplicate cuttings, so many of his works are unattributed (see duplicate cuttings without embossment somewhere in this HP). He worked with the plain hollow-cuts and hollow-cuts with inked detailing. This embellished silhouette is from my collection, and I consider it one of the best by Jones. If you owned it, it will be the second best. You know how that works. Whatever Uncle Doddy owns is always the best.
Peggy McClard has the only current available silhouette by Jones, and it is on SALE. She has a friendly HP on silhouettes and folk art. Check it out at: http://www.peggymcclard.com/
Peggy is a nice person.
Two more days left for this semester, and I will have some free time till the next racket begins. Hope to write and update my HP. Have some new silhouettes for sale coming up. Some are good stuff. Check them out if time permits.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Silhouette by Willaims?
I have listed a very similar silhouette to this somewhere on my HP. I had a feeling that it was by Williams, a bald-headed, undetailed head. This one here has a bit of detailing of the hair. Whether it is comtemporary to the silhouette or not I can not say. Does anyone have a clue to who the artist may be?
Sunday, August 20, 2006
William Chamberlain Mystery Solved?
I always had a theory that William Chamberlain carted around a catalog of his images along with precut busts. The clients would thumb through the catalog and pick the design they wanted. It did not matter whether the sitters wore raggedy attire or their birthday suits. Chamberlain had a full stock of suits, pre-cut and ready to be finished. We all agree that his silhouettes are cut in two separate hollow-cuts: the face and the bust.
My theory is that Chamberlain had a number of precut bust designs. When a client chooses a certain bust design from the catalog marked “No. 12,” Chamberlain would reach into his drawer and pull out a packet marked “No.12.” The bust at this stage may even have been already delineated, penciled and inked, awaiting only the hollow-cut of the face with an addition of the hair details. Although this may sound too wild, is it possible that even the head detail was precut with hair details added on, awaiting only the cutting of the eye, nose, and the lips?
For more on Chamberlain, see my archives.
These photos may prove my theory, or at least some parts of it. The silhouette in black decorated glass belongs to me. The other is from one of the auctions. These cuttings are almost a perfect twin except for minute details. You have to look close.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
Some Useful Silhouettes & Mini Portraits Links
If you collect silhouettes, check out the following site: http://www.peggymcclard.com/
The page has informative writings on the history of silhouettes and their artists. In addition, a fine selection is offered for sale. I know I saw a rare TODD a while ago, but I don’t see it now. That piece was finer than mine. I wonder who the lucky owner is now. Peggy McClard also has some wonderful folk art items.
Another site of interest is: http://www.archibaldminiatures.com/
This site is by Christine Archibald, and she specializes in miniature portraits. There are informative links on the subject as well as attractive miniatures for sale. She currently has a portrait by William Doyle. Check it out!
Don, the collector, New Zealand, also has a nice site for those interested in miniature portraits: http://www.portrait-miniature.blogspot.com/
There are informative links too.
The page has informative writings on the history of silhouettes and their artists. In addition, a fine selection is offered for sale. I know I saw a rare TODD a while ago, but I don’t see it now. That piece was finer than mine. I wonder who the lucky owner is now. Peggy McClard also has some wonderful folk art items.
Another site of interest is: http://www.archibaldminiatures.com/
This site is by Christine Archibald, and she specializes in miniature portraits. There are informative links on the subject as well as attractive miniatures for sale. She currently has a portrait by William Doyle. Check it out!
Don, the collector, New Zealand, also has a nice site for those interested in miniature portraits: http://www.portrait-miniature.blogspot.com/
There are informative links too.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Peale Museum Embossing Part One
(Rather than to default or place this paper into a stack of "unfinished" projects, I have decided to go ahead with it, as "Part One." If you find erurs, let me know.)
Embossing and Stamping of Silhouettes at Peale’s Museum
Almost nothing, except for bits and pieces for attribution purposes only, have been written on this subject; this matter requires a thorough research. When reliable information does not exist, one cannot possibly improve, add, or even formulate existing material on the subject and hope for a meaningful sum. Every query has a reason, but not every query develops into a pursuit for answers. Any article of item that existed had a reason for its existence. In this study of dies (stamping tools) used to impress upon paper for commercial and identifying purposes, generalized questions must first be asked in order to examine, in details, not of the results of the tools but as to their causes.
Who engraved the dies?
Were they a single male die for stamping or did they consist of both male and female dies for embossing?
Were they engraved on wood or metal?
Do varieties exist of any given die?
Some of the better-known silhouette cutters who made an impression on their finished artwork were King, Bache, and Peale. There are numerous others. Perhaps the most studied and scrutinized artists are Charles Willson Peale and his siblings. This is not due to their countenance as silhouette artists but as painters of excellence. Even then, information on their “stamps” goes unchallenged. From countless silhouettes that survived for the better part of the last two centuries, it is evident that there were three distinct embossing used for those silhouettes cut at the museum: Peale’s Museum, Peale, and Peale’s Museum with an eagle. The problem is that there is no supporting evidence for attributing any of the “stamps” to any particular period, place, or to any particular individual cutter. Theories are abundant; hypotheses are few. Theoretical dogmas are suspicious, and hypothetical analysis must be disproved when found to be inconsistent. Accuracy of facts needs verification.
The following sentence is from an article written by a curator-director of a “major” university museum. “Charles [Peale] taught the art of silhouette painting to Moses Williams, a Peale family slave, who used the proceeds from his art to purchase his freedom.”
The title of the article, the name of the University, or the Doctorate holder of this curator is not of importance here. It is mentioned here only as an example. For a college student or a researcher who relies on published accounts, especially from finely pedigreed individuals, the “words” are true to them. However, the truth lies only with the substance. Usually, the substance is not present in any single source. If a reader has not already noticed an inaccuracy in the statement, it is the word “painting.” This may be trivial to most readers. Yet, a simple err may change all that may be published in the future. This writer is not aware of any painted silhouette from the early years of “Peale’s Museum” nor does he know of any so-called “painted” silhouette by Moses Williams. Where did that writer find the evidence of Charles Peale teaching “the art of silhouette painting to Moses Williams”? It must have been written in haste or written without consulting the proper reference works on the subject. Whether some readers, based on that statement alone, will decide to make a firm judgment on the matter is unclear; nevertheless, it may influence them into believing that the statement is factual.
A few writers mention the die, “Peale’s Museum” with a spread eagle, belonged to Rubens Peale while he was responsible for the “Peale’s Museum” in New York City. The years are post-1825. This is unsubstantiated. Originally, someone made such a claim, and a few writers in progression, thereafter, repeated the words. The words are now “wedged” into the minds of imprudent individuals.
Some years ago, an album containing twenty-three hollow-cuts with impressions of “Museum” and “Peale’s Museum” with spread eagle was purchased. The attire of the subjects were all ca.1800-1810. From this singular evidence alone, one can summarize that the “stamp” with the spread eagle did not solely belong, if at all, to Peale’s Museum of New York. Moreover, post-1825 silhouette by “any” Peale’s Museum is yet to be observed, at least by this writer. Perhaps, a few readers will disagree and be able to disprove the statement. Such, if possible, is everyone’s wish; evidence will and can have an effect towards much needed further inquiries. A few writers even suggested that those reproduction silhouettes of the 1920s with this particular embossment were from reproduction dies. Several comparison of the embossing from the 1920s and the early nineteenth-century were made, but the dies did not differ in type or variety.
Others have suggested that an embossed “Peale” belonged to Raphaelle Peale during his itinerancy who established the “Peale’s Museum” in Baltimore during the late 1790s and, again, in 1814. With an arrival of the new pantograph invention by Hawkins in 1802 to the main “Museum” in Philadelphia, Rembrandt and his older brother Raphaelle traveled throughout the south and parts of New England for a profile cutting tour. This was a short-lived tour lasting less than two years. The craze of a “machine-assisted” contrivance was also quite short-lived. This was due to infringement of its patent. Every profile cutter during this period possessed one, making minor adjustments to the original patent and attaching fancy scientific labels, thus avoiding patent infringement.
It is quite plausible that “Peale” stamp belonged to one or both of the brothers, and its use was limited only during their period of itinerancy. The rarity of those silhouettes embossed with this stamp is an enigma. Whether the brothers enjoyed a brisk or a sluggish business is difficult to determine. If a survival rate is any indication, the latter speculation may be in order, or perhaps, some or even most of the cuttings were never embossed. Is it possible that the stamping device was misplaced or even stolen during their travels?
In order to establish the usage of any of the three stamps, to any cutter, associated with the “Museum,” one must rely on those “shades” with unquestionable provenance. However, this is not possible due to lack of multi-examples. By studying the bust contours, it is quite simple to divide the works into several types. Although one cutter could have used all of the “types,” as seen from numerous other artists of the period who utilized varieties in their cuttings, one must assume that those “shades” executed at the “Museum” bear telltale individualism due to their brief period of execution, ca.1803-1810.
.
A well-written article by a competent author, writing about Peale’s Museum, had this to say:
"The established method for attributing these images, according to Alice Van Leer Carrick, author of American Silhouettes, A Collector’s Guide, is that those made at Peale’s Museum generally bear the embossment “Museum,” while those made by Raphaelle in his independent practice are marked “Peale.” Further, there are certain stylistic details that link these profiles, such as ink-drawn curls on the head of a female sitter, or the way a lock of hair falls over the forehead of the man. "
The statement about Raphaelle’s “Peale” stamp does not do justice to Carrick, as she never attributed a “Peale” stamp to him. Furthermore, other profilists also delineated hair details. The statement about the “inked” details is quite peculiar as the readers are influenced to believe that such a trait is an attributing factor for those profiles made at the Museum. This is far from the truth, as profiles made at the Museum are hardly ever ‘inked.” In addition, “a lock of hair” falling “over the forehead” is not a decisive factor. Other artists practiced similar methods.
A “stamp” benefited the cutters, as it was free advertisement but most silhouettes that survived are plain without embossment. This is not to say that artists never stamped most silhouettes. In fact, if they owned the dies, they did. Contemporary newspaper advertisements by artists offer us a glimpse of their products along with their prices. Typical advertisements will mention such prices as 8 cents, 25 cents, or even 6½ cents. The reality was that an artist would not cut a single, hollow-cut profile for a few pennies. A pair and a double pair were the norm. For a quarter, sitters took home more than a single profile, while an 8-cent profile advertisement was a “come-on.” Upon entering the “hall,” an artist likely explained, to the sitters, that there was a minimum of two profiles at 8 cents each or four profiles cut at a bargain price of 25 cents.
The scarcity of embossed silhouettes lies because of multiple cutting. When a pair or a double pair was cut, only the topmost image received the full pressure of the die. The second image received nothing but a weak shadow of its pressure. For this simple reason, there are more silhouettes without stamps than there are those with stamps. For every embossed hollow-cut, there exist one, two or even three comparable hollow-cuts without the embossing. Agreed, that some artists never signed or embossed their works, especially, if amateurs. Although a few artists, who cut for a living, never did sign their works, a signature, in one form or another, was the norm.
Friday, February 03, 2006
Todd's Patent Silhouette ca.1805
Who was Todd of "Todd's Patent"?
Carrick’s detective work begins. After considering several Todds, she decides that George was the most favorable of the Todds. Her reasoning has merit, and her decision to choose George appears on pages 41-42 of her book. Once a mystery, it is now a fact. For the last seventy-seven years, collectors and researchers, alike, respected her conclusion. No new information was forthcoming, and a desire to explore further was not an option. The information, provided to us in 1928, was plausible and it satisfied our curiosity.
When a hollow-cut silhouette with embossed “Todd’s Patent” appears on the market, its attribution is usually to George Todd. After all, why would anyone question such an attribution? Carrick etched his name in stone. However, a detective’s work never ends. If Carrick were alive today, she would be pursuing her endless quest for the truth, and she would uncover numerous mysteries once thought unsolvable.
Carrick mentions that Todd was in South Carolina so a quick look in the index of Artists in the Life of Charleston by Rutledge was in order, but there is no Todd. This went nowhere, and it seemed like a dead-end until NYHS Dictionary of Artists by Groce was consulted. Groce mentions Rutledge as a reference for George Todd but does not cite a page number. Since Todd was not in Rutledge, Groce made an error in his citation — obviously, another dead-end. Thumbing through Rutledge, out of boredom, a shadowy name appears in small print, “Todd.” A very scarce double error had occurred. Groce, inadvertently, forgets to insert a page number while Rutledge forgets to index Todd.
Rutledge cites an advertisement in the January 22, 1807 of the Times, “All the profiles will be stamped, ‘Todd’s Patent.’” In the July 23, 1807 of the same newspaper, appears what seems to be the final advertisement by Todd while in Charleston, “Profiles…has taken down his Physiognotrace, and will leave the city in a very short time.” The timing is very harmonious and everything seems to fall in its place. This Todd cannot be George Todd, but another Todd, Isaac Todd.
Words, sometimes, seem to possess a unique habit of their own and “bury” themselves into oblivion within the text. Such was the case with the paper published as "1803-The Year of the Physiognotrace" by Ellen G. Miles in Painting and Portrait Making in the American Northeast, published by Boston University. Resilient echoes of her verses, almost daily, resonate as numerous, enjoyable hours were spent reading it, at redundant levels. Yet, the last paragraph of her paper “deluded” any personal recollection of the printed text. The name, Isaac Todd, is clearly mentioned, “Other enterprising artists…including William Bache, Augustus Day, and Isaac Todd, who jointly, patented a physiognotrace on 14 June 1803.”
What was the reason for Todd’s abrupt departure from Charleston in 1807? Todd had a sweetheart waiting in New York. The Mormon genealogical site mentions of one Isaac Todd who married Pamela Higgins in “8 September 1807 at First and Second Presbyterian Church” in New York City.
Carrick mentions of a folio containing 2000 silhouettes by Todd, owned by the Boston Athenaeum. Searching through their homepage, the existence of the collection was confirmed. An inquiry was made about the folio and any information pertaining to the massive collection of silhouettes, but unfortunately, their response was not in order. Perhaps they cater only to “paid” members. This is very unfortunate. The collection seems to be uncataloged and unpublished. Perhaps someday, if a three-digit membership fee seems reasonable to belong to a “faction,” of sort, then, more can be published on Todd. Lavater or Franklin might have said, “Whether public or private, institutions have the responsibilities to, further, benefit “mankind.” However, Lavater nor Franklin am I, and the weight it carries is only measured in decimals.
*The illustrated silhouette by Todd is from the author’s collection. It was reframed in slightly later period frame (Todd is ca. 1805 but the frame is perhaps ca.1820 (?) with an addition of an acid-free, black, paper mat (uncouthly executed). Nevertheless, it is one of only a handful of known survivors (excluding Boston Athenaeum’s holdings).
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
William? William Who? Williams?
Something just crossed my mind so here I sit, writing. I should be watching the "American Idol" but....
If your name was "William" you could have been cutting profiles in the early 19th century:
William Bache, William Doyle, William King, William Chamberlain, William Henry Brown, Henry William(s), Moses William(s). Did I miss some? Probably, but that is a lot of Williams!
I did not sleep well last night as many unanswered questions kept popping in my mind.
1. If sitters paid a shilling for a pair of hollow-cuts, did they take home the "inside" cuttings that Carrick called "hole in the doughnut" as well? Or were they the property of the cutters? I understand that Moses Williams kept two full barrels of those "hole in the doughnuts."
2. Where did artists get an idea of making hollow-cuts? It seems more appropriate to present the sitters with the "insides."
3. Artists never used black paper for hollow-cuts and then back them with white paper? Why?
4. Why couldn't cut-and-paste artists use white paper cut-outs and then mount them on black paper?
I "think(ed)" myself to sleep yesterday! It looks like it is back to square one again tonight.
Did Moses Williams walk around with an embossing device in his pocket? Or was the device mounted on to a wall for anyone to use? What is this silhouette that is being attributed to Moses William with the inscription, "Moses Williams, cutter of profiles"? Some writers have "etched" its attribution in stone. The penmanship, at least to me, does not even resemble that of early 19th century, and there is no provenance attributing the profile to Williams either. A simple inscription can always be added by anyone, anytime.
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Silhouette Collectors Club
There is a very interesting, and a very informative, as well, "club" across the Atlantic. The writer/publisher is one knowledgeable researcher on the subject of British silhouettes. Each quarter, she sends a club bulletin packed with new information on silhouettes. I understand that she does not make a use of the internet nor does she have an access to a computer. Everything is done the "old-fashioned-way."She would take photos of silhouettes; make enough duplicates for each member of the club, and cut-and-paste the same onto each article contained in the bulletin! So each issue is filled with clear, actual photos on the subject. She also covers the auction routes (no internet auctions), providing readers with "prices realized," comments on rarity, condition and the like.
The cost of a year's subscription, four issues of the bulletin, is a nominal twelve pounds or about twenty us dollars within UK. Since airmail postage overseas is quite costly, as common courtesy, it is a good idea to remit double the required amount.....$40 US.
SILHOUETTE COLLECTORS CLUB
5/13 BRUNSWICK SQUARE
HOVE, BN3, 1EH
UK
Update 1/23...Just rec'd the latest edition and she is now using a word processor. The newest edition has a "clean look" but I thought typewritten pages were nostalgic and charming.
The cost of a year's subscription, four issues of the bulletin, is a nominal twelve pounds or about twenty us dollars within UK. Since airmail postage overseas is quite costly, as common courtesy, it is a good idea to remit double the required amount.....$40 US.
SILHOUETTE COLLECTORS CLUB
5/13 BRUNSWICK SQUARE
HOVE, BN3, 1EH
UK
Update 1/23...Just rec'd the latest edition and she is now using a word processor. The newest edition has a "clean look" but I thought typewritten pages were nostalgic and charming.
c1805 Hollow Cut Silhouette
This is a very interesting piece for study. The frame seems to be original to the silhouette, made of wood over plaster, with the glass being an older replacement. Originally, the frame was quite chipped so I have taken the liberty to "fill-in" the plaster and touched up on the paint. Not the best job for sure but it is quite displayable.The wove paper has toned to a light coffee brown color and it is an even toning. To the observer's right, you will notice vertical stress marks of the paper along with a hairline stain. The actual cutting measures 85mm from the tip of her head to the tip of the bust, while the frame measures 4.5 inches in diameter.The image is a typical machine cut, c1803-1810, somewhat resembling the works from "Peale's Museum." It has no maker's mark. I believe I was able to attribute this work to a particular artist, with good confidence. Who do you think it may be? And why?
Gotta Have This Book
Don't let the word "British" have a negative affect here, please! I bet this author must have taken three lifetimes to complete this monumental work. This book weighs a ton, printed on quality stock with 800 pages! Talk about "illustrated." There is no other work on the subject that is more thoroughly illustrated! How can anyone write such a reference is totally mind-boggling. In order to understand American silhouettes, one must first understand its origin. Let's face it; British artists were "the cream of the crop." Mckechnie introduces the readers to different types of silhouette frames, which in most part were used here in this country as well. Then there are clearly defined illustrations of men, women and children, and what to look for in an attire to date the silhouettes. She goes even further with details of headgears etc. etc.and to top that of, there are very detailed biographies of artists, many American as well. And then, in-between those pages are ....You just gotta get the book!
Book You Must Have
This is the "bible" on the subject of American silhouettes. Although the original edition is long out of print, it is quite commonly available. The publisher must have printed plenty as it was the roaring twenties and the silhouette collecting was very popular. If one can not locate the original, which is unlikely, a collector can acquire a reprint edition under another title. Carrick (1875-1951) was born in Tennessee, married Prescott Skinner in 1901 and lived in New Hampshire. She was a contributing editor for The Magazine Antiques. After 77 years since its publication, collectors and dealers, alike, still thumb through the pages of this book, almost daily! It is just an amazing book with a wealth of information. This is not a catalog-like reference but a well-written book that is totally readable and quite charming and fun. I must have read each and every line well over one-hundred times! The book was published with its dust-jacket. Today, most copies are without it. This is a well-bound book and can take some real "kicking." if you can find a copy with "minty" jacket, price unclipped, with nice content and binding, you got yourself a real treasure. I have been looking for such a copy with no luck.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Silhouette Identification Guide
My Carrick's book is all torn apart. You may not believe this but I read it every night in bed. I fall asleep with it. I must have read about Saint Memin, Bache, Peale, Williams and the like over a thousand times. It is tough to remember what I read half asleep so I read them again and again. Still, I scarcely remember what I have read.
Why would anyone want a reprint of this book is beyond me. The original is quite common, priced right and "smells" good.
I have cut out most of the illustrations from the book and made identification guides, at a quick glance. They are pasted onto two panels of poster boards. I can see them from my bed. Perhaps that is why I dream about them. I am working overtime about silhouettes even in my dreams. A real nut case, you may say. I can not argue with you.
I think I found an unfinished Williams, quite similar to what Carrick illustrates. This, too, looks ugly and bald headed. Get the Carrick out and compare her silhouette with mine. Carrick does not mention whether that specimen has an embossed "WILLIAMS." Mine does not. Why would any artist put a signature on an unfinished work? But then, without the embossed mark how would Carrick know that it is by Williams? Strange! Many mysteries go unanswered.
With all due respect, and more, to Carrick, I believe she was shooting the breeze sometimes with her writing. I am not talking about Williams. Carrick sometimes got carried away with her words. Perhaps that is why the book is so enjoyable and readable. Nevill Jackson, a superb author on silhouettes, could not write like Carrick. Desmond Coke wrote with interest. But then, he was a novelist as well.
Carrick wrote about a hollow-cut silhouette by Martha A. Honeywell in the Magazine Antiques, in 1925 if I remember correctly. She does not mention it in her book. Did it turn out ot be misattributed or a bogus? Does anyone know?
Sunday, December 25, 2005
C'mon Folks, Post a Comment
I am beginning to think that I am talking to myself in these pages. That is OK too as I am having lots of fun. But from time to time, I would like to see some comments. Comments are easy to post, and you can be anonymous as well. If you feel like writing something on silhouettes I will post them for you. You do not have to be a good writer or a good speller. Afterall, we are not handing out clock radios for first prize and no awards are given. This is all for fun. If you have a silhouette that we should be aware of, this is a good place to post. You can brag like me or be modest. This is also up to you.
Sunday, December 18, 2005
John Wesley Jarvis Portrait Artist
This is an interesting ad of Jarvis from an 1820 New York newspaper. See Carick for a good write-up. She says she has never seen a silhouette by him. Have you?
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Jarvis Hanks (Jervis Hanks) Silhouette Artist
Jarvis F. Hanks was born in upstate New York in 1799. He served in the War of 1812 as a drummer boy. His experience during the war can be found on the internet; it is good reading. In addition, his autobiography is also on the net. Although he is listed as having cut or painted silhouettes, I have never seen his work. Illustrated is a newspaper ad from 1834 "New York Transcript Daily" (author's collection).
Jarvis Hanks is not the same fellow as Master Hankes. Although Master Hankes is listed as a British silhouettist working here in America, I believe he was an American. He may have originally spelled his name "Hanks" but the promoter added an "e" to make the name appear as though he was British. There is no question that he worked in British style busts, almost an exact copy of that of Hubard's style. There is no question in my mind that Hankes was trained to work in that particular style.
Remember the British invasion of the 1960s? American bands imitated the sounds and the looks of the British bands. I believe this was what happpened to Master Hankes. The promoter did a fine job with him.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
William Chamberlain (Chamberlin)
He is one of my favorites if not THE favorite but a tough artist to get any background information on. The only reference one finds on this artist is through a group of 89 cuttings donated by his granddaughter way back in 1916. Of those 89, only seven were of women! Why are so few women represented in this collection I do not know, as from what I have seen in the past, the ratio between men and women were just about equal, though I do admit I have seen more profiles of men than that of women. This granddaughter gives her name only as “Mrs. Frederick McClure.” She sounds so obedient! Was she Permelia Nichols? Genealogy is so fun to pursue as after spending many hours on it, it usually leads us back to square one. At any rate, this collection of silhouettes is still held intact at the American Antiquarian Society.
CHAMBERLAIN was born c1790 and although we know nothing of his early years, we know that he worked on profiles in the 1820s and the 30s. Harper, in Early Painters and Engravers in Canada does not mention CHAMBERLAIN ever working north of the border. He seems to have traveled only within New York and New England states. He must have had quite a long list of clientele, as his work is quite common, just as common as those of Peale’s Museum are. Although the cuttings made at the Museum were quite alike and somewhat boring, though I do admit that I like one particular bust shape, those cut by CHAMBERLAIN are challenging and almost all differ in one way or another.
CHAMBERLAIN had a unique way of cutting his sitters. He was probably the only cutter who had made hollow-cuts into a form of art using a technique of partial cuts, cutout head and bust, then improved upon his works by inking, applying a wash, or drawing the neck area, in which le left uncut! Although his granddaughter mentions that he used a “profile machine” this type of hollow-cuts are difficult to make and it took someone with real artistic vision.
Over the years, he seemed to have “browsed” through many different types of bust design. He made rounded busts, angular busts, pointed busts, busts with central notch and a combination of them. It is a shame that he did not “mark” his work. I have never seen or heard of a marked example. Have you? I believe those “Family Registers” with a pair of male/female figures are his work. These are usually dated in the early 1830s. Have you seen those fully painted silhouettes in color, black face of course that are seated? They are the works of this man, no doubt. Whether CHAMBERLAIN carted around an album full of precut figures, I do not know but his men and women seem to be all good looking and share some common traits. Could it be possible that the collection of 89 silhouettes presented to the American Antiquarian Society is not really duplicates of his work but remnants of his precut inventory? Almost all of his men look boyish and resemble Captain Kirk of the Enterprise!
There are plenty of Chamberlain’s works out there. So you need to be picky in adding an example to your collection. With this particular piece I think I’ve done it right. It is in its original frame with reverse painted decoration. I have never seen another decorated glass as this. It almost looks like a mourning piece but unlikely. The paper has an embossed “DOW SMITH.” Whether Chamberlain or its owner did this, I do not know. The embossing uses singular punches and not pre-made or customized. The original bubbled glass is cracked but this adds to its originality, and I will not attempt to repair it. This is a very good example of Chamberlain’s silhouette. I am sure this is his frame too. He probably made an additional dollar for his labor.
Ralph Letton RARE Silhouette Artist
Most information cited about LETTON, whether genealogical or as an artist, mention that he was born in 1778, at Rockville, Maryland and give the year 1825 for his death in Kentucky. If this is correct, then this LETTON married Sarah with marriage taking place in 1798 in Maryland. He moved to Kentucky in 1814, built a horse racetrack, and called it Latonia. In the Bourbon County Church records, it is mentioned that in “1822, RALPH LETTON and wife Sarah, dismissed by certificate” probably a contemporary way of saying “divorced.” At any rate, this RALPH LETTON may not be our traveling showman.
We know LETTON liked wax figures! From this single “link,” we may be able to pursue another R. LETTON, a LETTON of Ohio connection. In Henry Howe’s Historical Collections of Ohio, 1898, there is an account “Deluge of Ohio River 1832" in which Howe writes, “Mr. R. Letton, proprietor of the museum, appropriated the entire proceeds of their houses...for the relief of the sufferers.” The following account was taken from the writings of Cincinnati Art Museum, “Automated organ with moveable wax figures....This piece, commissioned by Ralph Letton, proprietor of a small private museum (Cincinnati, Ohio)....Letton and Joseph Dorfeuille, owner of the Western Museum, competed not only for local recognition as proprietors of the greatest museums in the city....” Furthermore, from the Cincinnati Enquirer dated March 9, 1998, “Ralph Letton, proprietor of Cincinnati’s Western Museum, found a spring south of Covington and called it Lettonia Springs. Either that evolved into Latonia, or the town was named for a Roman Water Goddess, Latona.” It is interesting to note that Latonia/Cincinnati area is just north of Kentucky border!
LETTON was an itinerant showman who exhibited his wax figures and as with other profilists of his time, he obtained a tracing device for making profiles to offset his business for a while. In the American Antiquarian Society, there is a trade card, “R. Letton taker of profile likeness.” This is undated. Carrick illustrates a fine broadside of LETTON, ca.1808. The silhouettes on this broadside were likely cut as an example only, for advertising, as to my knowledge, there are no identical bust form located anywhere. We know that he was in Albany, New York, with his museum of natural curiosities and wax figures, ca.1810. Price charged was a quarter for a pair of cuttings but the ones in color were $1.50. LETTON does not mention whether his colored profiles were wholly painted, like miniature portraits, or hollow-cut with some colors added. For $1.50 apiece, it was probably the latter. In either case, there must have been not very many takers for those colored profiles, as none seems to have survived. What is even odder is that even his hollow-cuts are not located. Since we know he used a machine to trace profiles, his works were predominantly that of hollow-cuts. There are no records of his blind stamp so he must not have embossed or marked any of his works.
Aside from the “shades” on his broadside, we do not know anything about his bust line, I thought. Then I found Letton or at least I think I did. These two silhouettes have uncanny resemblance to the broadside Carrick illustrates. It is almost by an accident that I found this pair. This pair sat in my unattributed lot for quite a spell. This may sound corny but I had a dream, and in that dream, someone told me that this pair is by Letton. I am quite confident of the attribution. Does anyone out there own a similar pointy bust? With Letton’s blindstamp?
Sunday, November 27, 2005
Foster Bros. Decorative Silhouettes
In the 1920s and 30s, Foster Brothers of Boston made quite a few decorative silhouettes, reproductions. They charged pretty pennies for them too. We see a lot of profiles printed or transferred onto glass but they present no danger for collectors. The scary ones are the silhouettes on paper. I am not familiar with the techniques they used but it is likely they used photographic means. It captures not only the wove paper texture but embossed maker stamps as well.
Just the other day at an antiques show I saw a nice silhouette by William King. When framed, sometimes it is difficult to say whether an item is actually a hollow-cut or just a print. When the paper is pressed tightly against the glass this can spell trouble. I looked at it using a magnifying glass from different angles but was still unable to make a decision. Good thing that it was in a frame with Foster Bros. marking on the hanger and still sealed on the back after all of these years. But the silhouette looked so good and I asked the dealer if he would cut the back and remove it for inspection. I told him that it if was a hollow-cut I will pay his price. It was a print.
Just the other day at an antiques show I saw a nice silhouette by William King. When framed, sometimes it is difficult to say whether an item is actually a hollow-cut or just a print. When the paper is pressed tightly against the glass this can spell trouble. I looked at it using a magnifying glass from different angles but was still unable to make a decision. Good thing that it was in a frame with Foster Bros. marking on the hanger and still sealed on the back after all of these years. But the silhouette looked so good and I asked the dealer if he would cut the back and remove it for inspection. I told him that it if was a hollow-cut I will pay his price. It was a print.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Timothy Gladding. Silhouette Artist
He was one of nine children born to Josiah Gladding and Mary Allen and was born in 1775, Newport, Rhode island. Timothy seemed to have traveled to Albany, New York in the late 1790s , married twice at Albany and died in 1845.
Not much is known of his profiles, except for a few surviving hollow-cut examples embossed with his mark, either simply "Gladding" or "T. Gladding." From a few contemporary advertisements in Albany newspapers, one finds that he worked with his brother as an ornamental painter. Rather than working as an itinerant profilist, Gladding worked as a “stationary” cutter from his brother's painting business at Albany.
From the profiles in the collection of New York State Library at Albany, one can see that his cuttings were obviously made with the assistance of a tracing device, physiognotrace. His bust shape is so typical of the period resembling that of William King, Moses Williams at Peale's museum and others of c1803-1810. Those profiles are plain with no ink detailing. Luckily for us collectors, his works are embossed with his name, but for those cuttings without the embossing one can still attribute his works by the unique sharp pointed bust tip.
His career as a portrait cutter fades around 1810. In the "Annual Register and Albany Directory of 1815,” he is listed as a "sign painter" at "180 state street."
The following images are from my collection. I believe this is the only known example with inked detailing of the hair and the only “Gladding” in private hands.
Not much is known of his profiles, except for a few surviving hollow-cut examples embossed with his mark, either simply "Gladding" or "T. Gladding." From a few contemporary advertisements in Albany newspapers, one finds that he worked with his brother as an ornamental painter. Rather than working as an itinerant profilist, Gladding worked as a “stationary” cutter from his brother's painting business at Albany.
From the profiles in the collection of New York State Library at Albany, one can see that his cuttings were obviously made with the assistance of a tracing device, physiognotrace. His bust shape is so typical of the period resembling that of William King, Moses Williams at Peale's museum and others of c1803-1810. Those profiles are plain with no ink detailing. Luckily for us collectors, his works are embossed with his name, but for those cuttings without the embossing one can still attribute his works by the unique sharp pointed bust tip.
His career as a portrait cutter fades around 1810. In the "Annual Register and Albany Directory of 1815,” he is listed as a "sign painter" at "180 state street."
The following images are from my collection. I believe this is the only known example with inked detailing of the hair and the only “Gladding” in private hands.
COPYRIGHT © 2005-2009 Robert M. Jones
All Rights Reserved
Links
Archives
