1001 Art Nouveau Tiles Errata
There's a few silly mistakes like a couple of obvious Boote designs in the Corn section, two manufacturers who are now entirely doubted, Warwick Savage and Stubbs and Hodgart, and a good number of designs attributed to Boote are clearly Malkin as a catalogue has come to light. Most comments here are about design judgements, there's a handful of designs which are now marked not art nouveau at all, a few that are more gothic than art nouveau but mostly it is clarifying where the art nouveau component is considered to be small or negligible.If you spot any errors please send an email.
Pilkington's tile business closed in 2010.
In the Piracy and Plagarism essay the Blue Corn Bros tile is not by them, it is by another, a third company. Yet another version has been found by J C Edwards.
Boote tiles. It now is clear that several (a dozen or more) attributions to Boote are in error (the better moulded designs) and should be attributed to Malkin which really does explain why so few art nouveau tiles to date have been attributed to Malkin.
Observant readers will have noted that Austwick attributes pic 201 page 70 to Pilkington which I have as Malkin and is definitely is correct. The mistake apparently occurred in Austwick because the mottled reactive glaze and was noted and thought to be Pilkington (though it is too good for their tiles of the period), and verso matches 113. This tile also appears with Malkin's later verso which Austwick attribute to Pilkington c1930 but is earlier from around 1908 onwards.
My mistake was in noting that two designs made by Boote appear on this (now known to be) Malkin verso. It is unknown if one company copied the other or if there is a third common source for the designs.
Also to be aware of is that there are several variations of verso similar to Austwick 113 made by Malkin and not so disimilar by others including by Lea and Boulton.
As ever continuing to research........
Lewis Day tiles (Pilkington). Joan Maria Hansen in her book Lewis Foreman Day (1845 - 1910) Unity in Design and Industry makes the point and includes quotes from Day that he loathed Art Nouveau. In this context it is for sure that he would not have called his designs of the time art nouveau although it is difficult to exclude the fact that he was working in those times and that his work could barely escape contemporary influences.
Moulded designs now available branded W S & Co (previously taken to be War(w)ick Savage) have registration marks showing that W Sherwin was the registrant of the designs late in 1907.
Stubbs & Hodgart Having handled approximately one-third of the designs shown on the leaflet in Lockett it is quite certain that they were made by T & R Boote with the excluson of a single design appearing to be by Corn Bros (one of them, see below). It appears then that Stubbs & Hodgart never made tiles, starting off as decorators (printing and painting) they diversified in to slabbing of panels and hence became recorded as manufacturers - but of slabs rather than tiles. As was common practice at the time they registered designs and had them made for them, probably the pressings only which they then glazed in their own works.
Corn. There were three companies including the name Corn, "At the same time, the existence of two other concerns bearing the family name -"Corn Bros." and "Corn Bros. & Co." - having led to confusion, the name of W. & E. Corn was allowed to lapse and the firm became "The Henry Richards Tile Company Limited", that inconveniently long name being reduced to its present form (Richards Tiles Ltd.) in 1931." From: "A Century of Progress 1837-1937" a publication to commemorate The Centenary of Richards Tiles Ltd when Edmund Richard Corn (the Richard in Henry Richards) was chairman.
Corn Bros & Co was apparently owned at least in part by Reginald A Corn, the younger sibling of Edmund Richard and Alfred Henry and appears to have continued trading through most or all othe edwardian era or even longer. It is assumed that both W & E Corn and Corn Bros were under the control of A Henry and E Richard Corn with possibly the name Corn Bros being introduced c1896 for the tile business (as reported by Steve Birks) whilst the pottery business continued as W & E Corn.
Style Judgments. It can be very subjective looking at a tile from any period and making a judgment on the balance between realism and style. Stylised flowers can be so much style and so little realism that it is impossible to determine what kind of flower; or so realistic that it is impossible to say what the style is. Pretty flowers never go out of fashion, the form just differs slightly.
Whenever a bold style becomes fashionable there is a backlash, a return to conservatism that runs parallel with the new style. In the art nouveau period this was most clearly with classical style, then of course there are many fusion designs that draw influence from both styles. Every style has elements of previous styles within it, every artist is a product of historical influences and influences in the world around.
Manufacturer
Row
Column
Image
Comment
Adams
May not be Adams at all, may be a continuance of Lea (& Boulton) as tiles with both "Adam's Crown" mark and "L & B T" have been seen however there is an absence of decorative similarities (colours, styles, techniques) with the tiles here shown as Adams and most marked L & B T. Definitely not the Adams who joined with George Cartlidge. Wm Adams are known to have made some tiles, or at least had some tiles made for them and branded with their name etc. Lea (& Boulton) were quality manufacturers and were likely OEMs for branded pottery company names.
Barratt
3
5
01763
Now unsure - unattributed
5
2
j1027
Now unsure - unattributed
Boote
10
5
j1536
Meakin
16
4
j01309
Not Art Nouveau
Bottom
2
01523
Classical/nouveau fusion but mostly classical
Corn
8
4
j1190
Now unsure - unattributed
11
4
j1563
Boote
15
1
j1648
Boote
Gibbons Hinton
1
4
j1498
Poole
Marsden
5
1
j1827
Not strong art nouveau
Bottom
4
j1320
Not art nouveau
Maw
1, 2, 3
middle
These although from an art nouveau installation have good gothic influence
3
1
j1072
Not really art nouveau, too floral
Mintons China Works
2
1
j1125
Not art nouveau
Bottom
1
j1820
Not art nouveau
Ollivant
2
3
j1299
Weak art nouveau
Pilkington
1
1
j1034
Weak art nouveau
4
3
j1810
Gothic/aesthetic
4
4
j1418
Gothic, quite possibly by Pugin (copied)
Henry Richard
1
4
00031
Weak art nouveau
12
4
01420
Gothic, quite possibly by Pugin
20
2
01602
Weak art nouveau
31
5
01801
Weak art nouveau, more a majolica floral that coincidentally looks art nouveauish
32
5
j1432
Weak art nouveau
33
1
j1650
Weak art nouveau
38
3
01294
Not art nouveau
T A Simpson
2
2
01648
A lot of classical influence
3
5
01020
More 'swirling floral' than art nouveau
5
1
10026
Weak art nouveau
Wade
8
1
j1517
Strong gothic influence
Smaller
1
1
j1793
Not strong art nouveau
1
5
j1842
Boote
Stubbs & Hodgart. In the 19thC they were tile decorators, mostly painting but some printed and painted. In the 20thC it seems most likely they had a few exclusive majolica patterns made for them (probably by Boote) and distributed designs by Boote, Henry Richard etc. The back shown as theirs in Austwick is Boote, one of if not the most often used verso by Boote who used many including the three basic; ring, bar and grid.
Warick Savage - W S & Co, W Sherwin rather than Warwick Savage - Warick Savage being a typo in Austwick. W Sherwin & Co registered a handful of designs in 1907, it is not known if this Sherwin is related to James Sherwin of Sherwin & Cotton. All W S & Co tiles seen are on Johnson's biscuit (with the distinctive patent locks), most are moulded hence made by Johnsons but decorated in Vine Street as Johnsons didn't have decorating skills at the time. Warwick Savage were long established traders in Stoke on Trent, amongst other activities they were printers and suppliers of decals, brushes and other materials for the ceramic trades.
Unattributed
2
5
00021
More floral than art nouveau
|
|
|
|
Updated 5th June 2011
Copyright 2000 - 2011, All rights reserved