french antiques vs american antiques
lesimbert
american funiture. I know french antiques quite well now and are there
american equivalents. I am asking this because this spring on my last trip
to the new continent I was quite surprised to see what seemed to be american
copies of french antiques
thanks for your help
kathleen
--
coming to Provene visit places like Vallauris, Picasso did pottery there,
Aubagne home of beautiful potters and provençal santons, Moustiers, well
known for its faïence as early as the 18c. Our team hope that you have a
summer of great finds whether it be on flea markets or in museums worldwide.
Antiques Offshore - http://www.antiquesoffshore.com
Ronnie McKinley
>could someone give me a briefing on the different periods and styles of
>american funiture.
Bad ... 1777-1830
Really Bad ... 1831-1900
Worse than Bad ... 1901-1940
Absolute Shite ... 1941onwards.
Ronnie
=====
The non-american "Viewpoint" a free weekly for all
=====================================
Tsu Dho Nimh
>could someone give me a briefing on the different periods and styles of
>american funiture. I know french antiques quite well now and are there
>american equivalents.
We never had the equivalent of French or English "court"
furniture - the wealthy were merchants who would rather spend the
money on another ship instead of silver-plated commodes.
The styles roughly parallel English periods until the
Revolution, but only in some of the cities along the Atlantic.
Santa Fe was Spanish-influenced, while New Orleans was French
until Napolean sold it to us. Also Charleston and Savannah were
French influenced because of the Huguenot refugees who settled
there after the 1680s.
The world-wide "Victorian" styles overtook our furniture
industry in the 1850s, and designers often studied in Europe ...
there is an American version of almost any design philosophy you
can mention.
>I am asking this because this spring on my last trip
>to the new continent I was quite surprised to see what
>seemed to be american copies of french antiques
In the late 1800s French fancy furniture was popular with the
filthy rich of the East coast, and they were importing entire
housefuls of the stuff.
Called "Louis the 14" (if it's fancy) or "French Provincial"
(if it's plainer, or painted white) French furniture styling has
been popular with American designers since 1920 or so.
Also, boatloads of old French furniture land here every day.
Tsu Dho Nimh
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in his shoes.
That way, when you criticize him, you are a mile away from him and you have his shoes.
Ronnie McKinley
>could someone give me a briefing on the different periods and styles of
>american funiture.
Serious answer from a non-Yank ....
1558-1689 Early Colonial
1689-1694 William & Mary
1694-1702 Dutch Colonial
1702-1725 Queen Anne
from c1750 Chippendale
1790-1810 Early Federal
1789-1804 American Directoire
1804-1815 American Empire
1810-1830 Late Federal
1837-1901 Victorian
1900-1920 Art Nouveau
There ye go ... but I am sure one of the Tsu Dho Nimhs can speak from
their armchair on the matter and in a much more enlightening manner.
Ronnie
=====
"Cosy Armchair Antiques Inc
======================
lesimbert
Thank you very much for your replies, i'll look into them very seriously.
Keep intouch if you make any discoveries after 1920
good talking to you
another non yank
Kathleen
--
coming to Provene visit places like Vallauris, Picasso did pottery there,
Aubagne home of beautiful potters and provençal santons, Moustiers, well
known for its faïence as early as the 18c. Our team hope that you have a
summer of great finds whether it be on flea markets or in museums worldwide.
Antiques Offshore - http://www.antiquesoffshore.com
Ronnie McKinley <mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk> a écrit dans le message :
3768e012...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk...
Ronnie McKinley
>Keep intouch if you make any discoveries after 1920
>
Oh that's an easy one, after 1920 it's called "mainstream" I am led to
believe, by a number of Americans that post to this "international
newsgroup", that no "real" antiques exist in the US of A and 1920-60s
and perhaps a little later (post 1960s) is the mainstream of the
antique trade in the US of A. ..... Isn't that a shocker?
Ronnie
=====
Ronnie McKinley
>I know french antiques quite well now
Dia daoibh! Kathleen, .... can you confirm if the following chronology
is correct in the true French context? or is this a mere English
contrivance?
1558-1625 Renaissance
1610-1643 Louis X111
1643-1715 LouisX1V
1715-1723 Regence
1723-1774 Louis XV
1793-1799 Directoire
1799-1815 Empire
1815-1830 Restauration
1830-1848 Louis Philipps
1848-1870 2nd Empire
1871-1940 3rd Republic
Do I need to make any changes?
Many thanks for your assistance.
Ronnie
=====
Mary
Tsu Dho Nimh wrote:
--Snippage -- accent on the second syllable (Snip-Ahje)
>
>
> >I am asking this because this spring on my last trip
> >to the new continent I was quite surprised to see what
> >seemed to be american copies of french antiques
> In the late 1800s French fancy furniture was popular with the
> filthy rich of the East coast, and they were importing entire
> housefuls of the stuff.
>
> Called "Louis the 14" (if it's fancy) or "French Provincial"
> (if it's plainer, or painted white) French furniture styling has
> been popular with American designers since 1920 or so.
>
>
Well, some people call it by its correct names, but beyond that, let us not forget
theever-popular and more widely available "Louis the Hotel" (19th C. Louis XV
repro), some of which is quite good.
Mary
Rich Maxson
Ronnie wrote...
> 1848-1870 2nd Empire
> 1871-1940 3rd Republic
>
> Do I need to make any changes?
1955-present Jerry Lewis
Rich
Ronnie McKinley
Oh, the "art house" style, yea, thanks a lot, Rich, most helpful.
Ronnie
=====
13 Ghosts
> believe, by a number of Americans that post to this "international
> newsgroup", that no "real" antiques exist in the US of A and 1920-60s
> and perhaps a little later (post 1960s) is the mainstream of the
> antique trade in the US of A. ..... Isn't that a shocker?
Ronnie"
===
a long experimental hypothesis that population growth
was responsible for the high demand and low supply
of what might be called for the sake of this discussion
"real antiques".
But even though it does not show so much here on
rec.antiques, Ronnie, I think 1880-1960 would be
more accurate.This would take is cut glass, the arts and
crafts stuff, etc.
And sure, there are still antiques that do not fall within
this scope, but they are mostly sold at Christie's and
Southby's. Oh, you know, I get a few pieces of
Chinese Export now and then and the occaisional
odd old piece (there is a joke there, for you)
but by and large, for the most part, if I can come up
with a nice 1920's-30's piece of Steuben, I am pleased as
punch.
And I have seen an upward drift in some markets.
1900. Then 1920 becomes acceptable. Then, that
supply quickly runs out, due to the Great Depression,
perhaps, and Lo! all of a sudden, everyone is happily
dealing in 1940's, dealing in stuff about as old as they
themselves are.
Just some general observations,
13 Ghosts
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
Pat Dorn
> In rec.antiques, "lesimbert" wrote:
>
> >Keep intouch if you make any discoveries after 1920
> >
>
> Oh that's an easy one, after 1920 it's called "mainstream" I am led to
> believe, by a number of Americans that post to this "international
> newsgroup", that no "real" antiques exist in the US of A and 1920-60s
> and perhaps a little later (post 1960s) is the mainstream of the
> antique trade in the US of A. ..... Isn't that a shocker?
>
> Ronnie
> =====
No, it's Bull Poop!
--
Pat
You don't stop laughing because you grow old; you grow old because you
stop
laughing.
Tsu Dho Nimh
>Serious answer from a non-Yank ....
>
>1558-1689 Early Colonial
>1689-1694 William & Mary
>1694-1702 Dutch Colonial
>1702-1725 Queen Anne
(the above had varying regional styles, based on the
origin of the colonists. Things made where the Germans
settled look like German styles, etc.)
Travel between cities was difficult.
>from c1750 Chippendale
(several distinct regional styles, with the southern
areas being more ornate, but much of it based on
publications from England)
>1790-1810 Early Federal
>1789-1804 American Directoire
(blamed on Hepplewhite)
>1804-1815 American Empire
>1810-1830 Late Federal
>1837-1901 Victorian
Various fads came and went ... the rough order of appearance
is "Gothic" (similar to the English Gothic - dark and ornate),
"Renaissance Revival" (usually walnut, mahogany, or rosewood,
characteristically has raised medallions of burled wood and
ornate moldings), and then the late Victorian "Golden Oak"
pieces.
There are also "Centennials" ... pieces made circa 1876
"in the manner of" the American Chippendale and Fereral designs
(but with tell-tale traces of the Victorian love of
ornamentation).
And regional pieces often kept the ethnic flavor of their
creators. I've seen early 1900s pieces from Minnesota that are
more like Swedishpieces than "American".
>1900-1920 Art Nouveau
Also has "mission" (similar to Arts and Crafts) and the
remnants of the Victorian.
1920-1930s Art Deco
This was also the era of "Jacobethan": horribly ugly things
with bulbous legs and barley-twist, and faux french and fake
Regency ... really abysmal designs.
mcat
McKinley) wrote:
>In rec.antiques, "lesimbert" wrote:
>
>>I know french antiques quite well now
>
>
>Dia daoibh! Kathleen, .... can you confirm if the following chronology
>is correct in the true French context? or is this a mere English
>contrivance?
>
>
>1558-1625 Renaissance
>1610-1643 Louis X111
>1643-1715 LouisX1V
>1715-1723 Regence
>1723-1774 Louis XV
>1793-1799 Directoire
>1799-1815 Empire
>1815-1830 Restauration
>1830-1848 Louis Philipps
>1848-1870 2nd Empire
>1871-1940 3rd Republic
>
>Do I need to make any changes?
>
>Many thanks for your assistance.
>
>
>
>Ronnie
>=====
>
Ronnie, I must assume that the omission of Louis XVI (1774-93) was an
inadvertant oversight? Or were you just checking to see who would
catch it?
mcat
mcat
McKinley) wrote:
>In rec.antiques, lesimbert wrote:
>
>>could someone give me a briefing on the different periods and styles of
>>american funiture.
>
>Serious answer from a non-Yank ....
>
>1558-1689 Early Colonial
>1689-1694 William & Mary
>1694-1702 Dutch Colonial
>1702-1725 Queen Anne
>from c1750 Chippendale
>1790-1810 Early Federal
>1789-1804 American Directoire
>1804-1815 American Empire
>1810-1830 Late Federal
>1837-1901 Victorian
>1900-1920 Art Nouveau
>
>
>There ye go ... but I am sure one of the Tsu Dho Nimhs can speak from
>their armchair on the matter and in a much more enlightening manner.
>
>
>Ronnie
>=====
>"Cosy Armchair Antiques Inc
>======================
From my cozy armchair, and _The Bullfinch Illustrated Enclyclopedia of
Antiques_, for what it's worth...
This reference has the American styles lagging more; William & Mary
1700-1725, Queen Anne 1725-55, Chippendale 1755-80, Federal 1780-1820,
Empire 1820-40, Revivalist Styles 1830-80, Arts & Crafts 1880-1900,
Art Nouveau 1900-1930.
mcat
Marshall Schuon
wrote:
<Snip>
> Also, boatloads of old French furniture land here every day.
>
>Tsu Dho Nimh
>
_________
They do???
Marshall
Rhiannon
Ronnie McKinley wrote:
> Dia daoibh! Kathleen,
OK Ronnie, now I'm going to be up all night trying to figure out how this
would be pronounced*. There's no family around to ask right now, and
Gaelic isn't a strong point anyway (or is it Irish?). Is it deev? dove?
dow? (doo wah diddy) Too many modifiers to keep track of.
Rhiannon
*(I know how to pronounce Kathleen)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
~~A knowledge of Sanskrit is of little use to a man
trapped in a sewer.~~
jon.d2...@ukonline.co.uk
> This was also the era of "Jacobethan": horribly ugly things
>with bulbous legs and barley-twist,
>>>>Hey, don't talk about my staff like that..8)) Jon
Please remove the YUITOM before replying by email.
***** Posted via the UK Online online newsreader *****
Go to http://www.ukonline.co.uk to find out
about other online services we offer our subscribers.
Ronnie McKinley
>Ronnie, I must assume that the omission of Louis XVI (1774-93) was an
>inadvertant oversight? Or were you just checking to see who would
>catch it?
Oops :) ..... I'll go with the trick question theory. ;>
Actually, the old story I didn't read before posting non did I use my
grammar checker.
....... sorry, yes 1774-93 Louis Seize and an important period for
obvious reasons, but from the style point of view, it marked the last
phase of Rococo and a first phase of Neoclassicism.
Ronnie
=====
up the revolution
============
Ronnie McKinley
>This reference has the American styles lagging more; William & Mary
>1700-1725,
Mary actually died in 1694, in Britain the William and Mary style
1689-1702, although strictly the period is split 'William and Mary
1689-1694' and then 'William 111 1694-1702'
> Queen Anne 1725-55,
In Britain the classic Queen Anne style was 1702-1714 and applies to
the style that began to evolve during the rule of King William III,
reached its primacy during the reign of Queen Anne, and persisted
after George I ascended the throne. The period in England is also
called "the age of walnut" The walnut period (in Britain) extending
c1670-1730
Of course in Britain the Georgian period/s prevailed after Queen Anne.
Geo1 - 1714-1727, Geo11 - 1727-1760, George 111 - 1760-1820, Regency
(covering George111 1811-1820 and Geo1V 1820-1830) and ending with
William 1V - 1830-1837, William 1V still strictly falling within the
Regency style, late, heavy and rather tasteless but characteristically
still the Regency (style) and finally the style disappearing around
c1840.
William and Mary, Queen Anne and the Georgians from c1730 are all
different periods and styles, at least over here. Around c1730 walnut
went out of fashion (for various reasons, other than mere taste) and
was replaced with mahogany which remained the fashion and the
prevailing wood until c1810. Mixed into that are revivals and separate
fashions, but the above are the defining **periods**.
The world collective styles are usually defined ....
c1558-1625 The Gothic Style
c1620-1760 The Rococo Style
c1755-1805 Neo-classical Style
c1799-1815 Empire Style
c1812-1830 The Regency Style
c1830-1880 The Eclectic Style
c1880-1900 Arts & Crafts Style
c1900-1920 Art Nouveau Style
All with clearly defining lines and characteristics that sets one
apart from the other. All of which has nothing whatsoever to do with
the French periods and styles, just filling in and passing time
awaiting the follow up from Kathleen in France, who will no doubt,
explain all the French styles and periods for our benefit.
I can never understand why the American periods use William and Mary,
Queen Anne (albeit out of sync), then drop all the Georgians, but
revert back to Victoria, was it something to do with Germans? ;>)
btw .. the above as far as I know is still used for teaching purposes
in Art History degree subjects, at least it was when it applied to me,
many moons ago)
Ronnie
=====
Patricia V. Lehman
>
> Rhiannon
> *(I know how to pronounce Kathleen)
Yes, that's another pet peeve of mine, all the little girls being named
Kaitlin and everybody says Kate-Lynn instead of Kathleen. Too late to do
anything about it.
I guess I shouldn't complain -- that's what happened to my maiden name.
Most of the immigrants kept the Wojciechowski spelling and lost the
pronunciation, we spelled it Voichahoske and kept the pronunciation at
the cost of the spelling. What happens in a melting pot -- or even a
salad.
Tish
Patricia V. Lehman
>
> I can never understand why the American periods use William and Mary,
> Queen Anne (albeit out of sync), then drop all the Georgians, but
> revert back to Victoria, was it something to do with Germans? ;>)
Ronnie, we were really, really angry at George III.
The slippage is even worse in doll collecting. To quote Julie Collier: "
The most sought-after all-wood examples date from the late 17C to the
very early 19th century. They are called "Queen Annes" by collectors,
even though the reign of that English queen lasted for only a tiny
portion of the dolls' period of manufacture." And, oh! despite the
inaccurate nomenclature, how I'd love to have one, or even just be
allowed to hold and inspect one.
Tish
Tish
mcat
McKinley) wrote:
>
>The world collective styles are usually defined ....
>
>c1558-1625 The Gothic Style
>c1620-1760 The Rococo Style
>c1755-1805 Neo-classical Style
>c1799-1815 Empire Style
>c1812-1830 The Regency Style
>c1830-1880 The Eclectic Style
>c1880-1900 Arts & Crafts Style
>c1900-1920 Art Nouveau Style
>
>in Art History degree subjects, at least it was when it applied to me,
>many moons ago)
>
Gothic to 1620
Baroque 1620-1700
Rococo 1700-1760
Neoclassical 1760-1830
Eclectic 1830-1880
A & C 1880-1900
Art Nouveau 1900-1920
and Art Deco 1920-1940.
I'm certainly not trying to argue with your list, Ronnie, just
pointing out the differences in my reference. Should I pencil in (or
ink in) the corrections in my book?
>All with clearly defining lines and characteristics that sets one
>apart from the other. All of which has nothing whatsoever to do with
>the French periods and styles, just filling in and passing time
>awaiting the follow up from Kathleen in France, who will no doubt,
>explain all the French styles and periods for our benefit.
>
>Ronnie
>=====
Again, for what it's worth, my reference is very close to what you
posted elsewhere for the French styles.
mcat
(who does not have an Art History degree, but can read a chart.)
Ronnie McKinley
>Tish
>Tish
Bless you.
Barking Geo111 ok ... but what about G1 and G2 and the dandy Prince?
Ronnie
=====
Patricia V. Lehman
>
> In rec.antiques, "Patricia V. Lehman" wrote:
>
> >Tish
> >Tish
>
> Bless you.
Thank you. [sniff]
> Barking Geo111 ok ... but what about G1 and G2 and the dandy Prince?
Guilt by association? I'm sorry, Ronnie, all I've go is wise cracks. I
don't KNOW!
Tish
> =====
Ronnie McKinley
>Again, my reference differs slightly here:
>Gothic to 1620
>Baroque 1620-1700
>Rococo 1700-1760
>Neoclassical 1760-1830
>Eclectic 1830-1880
>A & C 1880-1900
>Art Nouveau 1900-1920
>and Art Deco 1920-1940.
>
>I'm certainly not trying to argue with your list, Ronnie, just
>pointing out the differences in my reference. Should I pencil in (or
>ink in) the corrections in my book?
>
Should you pencil in the "corrections" in your book? Good golly Miss
Molly I'm honoured. ;>
No I don't think you should deface your book on my account, however,
"the Baroque" 1620-1700 I find interesting. Baroque and late Baroque,
and/or Rococo, are loosely defined terms, applied by common consent to
European art of the period from the early 17th century to the mid-18th
century, c.1600-1760, and in Italy (origins) slightly pre1600. The
"Baroque" was originally an undisguised term of abuse, and the Baroque
period is so varied that no single set of stylistic criteria can be
applied to it.
So, as to a single collective style I am not that sure, the style was
different in Roman Catholic countries such as Italy or Spain, than
that of Protestant countries such as Holland or Britain, and the work
that distinguishes the Baroque period is stylistically complex, even
contradictory, but a unified collective style I don't believe so.
Empire/Regency obviously falling within your Neo-classical time frame,
but here (Europe) Empire/Regency being defining styles on their own
with clear parameters and valid reasons to be separated.
I don't really see any need for correction, major or minor, and to be
honest, I think you're merely taking the piss, for some reason or
another, maybe an old vendetta, I really don't know. Seems like shit
on Ronnie time again, so, 13, you can take a rest, they are banging on
my castle door this week, hate mail and all. :>)
Perhaps you can talk me through the style/period of the Baroque and
explain or highlight why you believe it was a collective style between
the quoted years 1620-1700, what went before and what came after. I
would be much obliged. :)
Ronnie
=====
Ronnie McKinley
>OK Ronnie, now I'm going to be up all night trying to figure out how this
>would be pronounced*. There's no family around to ask right now, and
>Gaelic isn't a strong point anyway (or is it Irish?). Is it deev? dove?
>dow? (doo wah diddy) Too many modifiers to keep track of.
Good God, Rhiannon, you think I'm running night classes? I am
struggling myself. I went for lessons awhile back which only lasted
for about six weeks and then gave it up as a bad job, I have trouble
with English let alone a dodo like Irish. Remember in my neck of the
woods it isn't spoken that much and in my *particular* area not at
all. There are 18 letters in the Irish alphabet and 5 vowels, but
short and long so 10 vowels sounds really, about 28-30 ?? vowel
combinations and twice as many consonant sounds as in English.
... geez see what I mean, doo wah diddy .... diddy dum-dum.
There are three main dialects of Irish ... Ulster Irish, Connacht
Irish and Munster Irish. There is at present, no standard spoken
pronunciation, although important steps have been taken recently to
establish such a standard. .... HoHoHo ... if you listen to someone
like that twat Gerry Adams when he spouts his shite in Irish with that
thick West Belfast accent of his, it sounds more like fecking Double
Dutch, most I think, swear to God he's making it up as he plods along.
Anyway, Dia daoibh! is the same as HELLO!! caps and all. It's somewhat
easier to read/write than speak .... well somewhat with HELP. :)
slán
ronnie
=====
mcat
McKinley) wrote:
>
>I don't really see any need for correction, major or minor, and to be
>honest, I think you're merely taking the piss, for some reason or
>another, maybe an old vendetta, I really don't know. Seems like shit
>on Ronnie time again, so, 13, you can take a rest, they are banging on
>my castle door this week, hate mail and all. :>)
>
On the contrary, I wasn't disparaging of you at all, Ronnie. But
Kathleen (from France) did ask for American styles.
>Perhaps you can talk me through the style/period of the Baroque and
>explain or highlight why you believe it was a collective style between
>the quoted years 1620-1700, what went before and what came after. I
>would be much obliged. :)
>
>Ronnie
>=====
Ummm....did I mention that I did *not* have that Art History degree?
And that I was merely reading a chart from my reference book? I'd
need a while to study before I give that dissertation.
mcat
Ronnie McKinley
> But
>Kathleen (from France) did ask for American styles.
>
.... and I did remark in an earlier post (within this thread)
"All of which has nothing whatsoever to do with the French periods and
styles, just filling in and passing time awaiting the follow up from
Kathleen in France, who will no doubt, explain all the French styles
and periods for our benefit."
I believe her question was American antiques vs French antiques, more
precisely "period" styles. I wonder where she has gone? on a shipping
trip maybe.
>Ummm....did I mention that I did *not* have that Art History degree?
>And that I was merely reading a chart from my reference book? I'd
>need a while to study before I give that dissertation.
>
I wouldn't wish to be your G.P or even your electrician, the stress
would be too much for me. ;>
Ronnie
=====
Michele Mauro
Arts & Crafts period (roughly 1880-1915). Then, after Deco (40's-60's),
you have Modern (or Moderne).
Have fun, Michele
--
Change 'nospam' to 'chaos' to reply via email.
http://www.ao.net/~chaos - Home of NASCards Software!
Tsu Dho Nimh <aba...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:37699958...@news.primenet.com...
> mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk (Ronnie McKinley) wrote:
>
> >Serious answer from a non-Yank ....
> >
> >1558-1689 Early Colonial
> >1689-1694 William & Mary
> >1694-1702 Dutch Colonial
> >1702-1725 Queen Anne
> (the above had varying regional styles, based on the
> origin of the colonists. Things made where the Germans
> settled look like German styles, etc.)
> Travel between cities was difficult.
> >from c1750 Chippendale
> (several distinct regional styles, with the southern
> areas being more ornate, but much of it based on
> publications from England)
> >1790-1810 Early Federal
> >1789-1804 American Directoire
> (blamed on Hepplewhite)
> >1804-1815 American Empire
> >1810-1830 Late Federal
> >1837-1901 Victorian
> Various fads came and went ... the rough order of appearance
> is "Gothic" (similar to the English Gothic - dark and ornate),
> "Renaissance Revival" (usually walnut, mahogany, or rosewood,
> characteristically has raised medallions of burled wood and
> ornate moldings), and then the late Victorian "Golden Oak"
> pieces.
> There are also "Centennials" ... pieces made circa 1876
> "in the manner of" the American Chippendale and Fereral designs
> (but with tell-tale traces of the Victorian love of
> ornamentation).
> And regional pieces often kept the ethnic flavor of their
> creators. I've seen early 1900s pieces from Minnesota that are
> more like Swedishpieces than "American".
> >1900-1920 Art Nouveau
> Also has "mission" (similar to Arts and Crafts) and the
> remnants of the Victorian.
>
> 1920-1930s Art Deco
> This was also the era of "Jacobethan": horribly ugly things
Ronnie McKinley
>Then, after Deco (40's-60's),
>you have Modern (or Moderne).
>
Huh???
Ronnie
=====
Michele Mauro
40's-60's, not Deco! Or am I wrong with that too? <grin>
Have fun, Michele
--
Change 'nospam' to 'chaos' to reply via email.
http://www.ao.net/~chaos - Home of NASCards Software!
Ronnie McKinley <mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
news:376ad199...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk...
Michele Mauro
from memory (which is usually a bad thing anyway)... Modernism and Art
Deco go hand in hand time-wise (20's-30's)... for some reason I thought
Modern came afterwards...
Did I get it right this time? <big grin>
Have fun, Michele
--
Change 'nospam' to 'chaos' to reply via email.
http://www.ao.net/~chaos - Home of NASCards Software!
Ronnie McKinley <mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
news:376aee6f...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk...
> In rec.antiques, "Michele Mauro" wrote:
>
> > I meant that Moderne was
> >40's-60's, not Deco!
>
> HUH???????????????
>
> Huh!
>
>
>
> Ronnie
> ====
Gillam Kerley
>
> Okay already... so you made me look it up in my book instead of going
> from memory (which is usually a bad thing anyway)... Modernism and Art
> Deco go hand in hand time-wise (20's-30's)... for some reason I thought
> Modern came afterwards...
The last few books I looked at treated Art Moderne and Art Deco as
synonyms.
I suspect you're thinking of "Mid-Century Modern" from the 1950s, which
is commonly called "Fifties Art Deco" -- certainly identifiable as 1950s
rather than 1920s, but with similar themes (geometric forms, stylized
figures). Mid-Century Modern is hot around here; there are two shops in
Madison (pop. around 200,000) specializing in it.
GK
Ronnie McKinley
Michele Mauro
fiberglass chairs, chrome (cars, chairs, everything was basically chrome
in the 50's), and it's especially hot here too... those fiberglass lamp
shades, especially the two-tiered lamps, bring big bucks here in the US.
OTOH, I also think Guggenheim Museum (in NYC) by FL Wright when I think
Modern - not sure which decade that was built, but it's a monster in
real life!
Have fun, Michele
--
Change 'nospam' to 'chaos' to reply via email.
http://www.ao.net/~chaos - Home of NASCards Software!
Gillam Kerley <gke...@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:7kf3dl$9...@newsops.execpc.com...
Michele Mauro
you ever want to see the LC Tiffany Museum in Maitland, FL, you can come
by to visit - that's assuming we ever get my sister to move out of the
house!
Have fun, Michele
--
Change 'nospam' to 'chaos' to reply via email.
http://www.ao.net/~chaos - Home of NASCards Software!
Ronnie McKinley <mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote in message
news:376c3ae0...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk...
> In rec.antiques, "Michele Mauro" wrote:
>
> >OTOH, I also think Guggenheim Museum (in NYC) by FL Wright when I
think
> >Modern - not sure which decade that was built, but it's a monster in
> >real life!
> >
>
> ...... commissioned as early as 1943, began in 1956, and
> opened in 1959 after Wright's death ... I wouldn't mind seeing it in
> real life ... do you take B&B? :)
>
>
> Ronnie
> =====
Ronnie McKinley
lesimbert
periods, I am replying the last message sent or at least I think i am
as I am very new at this form of communication. Please to meet you all
please excuse me for being so long to participate in our discussion.
As for chronologies, I seem to look at antiques in France as pre-industrial,
when corporations existed and making of furniture et al. was 'une
privilege' (the descendants of Charles André Boulle, cabinet maker
appointed in 1672, lived in the Louvre until 1754!) as opposed to
productions of the industrial revolution that took place in the late 18th
and early 19th centuries.
It is rather funny that Ronnie would forget Louis XVI in his chronology,
could that be a freudian slip..... as there was never a revolution in
Britain and
kings and queens weren't...gulp... guillotined! ....Who said
that..........? Some of the chronolgies sound like a mere changing of
powers
and of course there is much more behind it all than kings, queens, empires
or republics etc....
What is most interesting, I find however, is the influence that special
events had on different styles and furniture. Such as Napolean I 'retour
d'egypte' where decorative bronzes on empire pieces that represent
sphinxes or palms became popular. The discovery of Pompei in 1748
and Herculanum in 1719 stimulated the simplicity of
the style of Louis XVI. The early archeological discoveries that
correspond to the
above two dates makes Louis XVI style an imposter in the short reign of
Louis .XV.
.
Other influences that seem to take place in french creativity are the
different reactions of one style as opposed to another. Louis XV is a
reaction to the pompous style of Louis XlV. Even that isn't as blunt as it
sounds because the lighter regency style allowed the Louis XV style to
evolve. Even Jean Jacques Rousseau's naturalist stream of writings
influenced the frail, light Louis XVI.
1900, 1925(art deco) and the contemporary movement are reactions
to the second empire. Napoleon III style was more of a copy
of all the other monarch styles. The reign of Napoleon III as
leader of the 3rd French Republic and his influence on the styles
were in the nostalgia of whatever was lost of previous kings and queens.
Who knows maybe even fear of guillotine ll!
1900, 1925 and after were all movements seeking independance and
innovation and with the progress of machinery, the types of materials used
broadened.
I can't help thinking of what effect landing
on the moon made on different styles of furniture and other objects.
I find that some of the contemporary creators, Philippe Stark for example
makes his kitchens, bathrooms and other rooms look like a waiting room for
the next lunar expeditions--
The original essence of my request of american antiques that seem to
copy french antiques was more in this way of thinking and the
french and the americans have 'a revolution in common.
One probably influenced the other.
my references are Le Traité d'Ebenisterie, Lucien Chnson,Ed VIAL 1980
Styles Meubles Decors, Larousse 1972
ps
Hope to be hearing from you all soon. I'm sorry if this text ends up in the
wrong place? i'm not sure on what butons to push.
--
coming to Provene visit places like Vallauris, Picasso did pottery there,
Aubagne home of beautiful potters and provençal santons, Moustiers, well
known for its faïence as early as the 18c. Our team hope that you have a
summer of great finds whether it be on flea markets or in museums worldwide.
Antiques Offshore - http://www.antiquesoffshore.com
Ronnie McKinley <mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk> a écrit dans le message :
376c3ae0...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk...
Patricia V. Lehman
Well, you certainly pushed the right buttons for me. This is precisely
the kind of thing I find interesting: the evolution of style as one part
reaction, three parts continuity, with a dash of genius here and there
and a bit of luck. Do go into more detail.\
Tish
Ronnie McKinley
>It is rather funny that Ronnie would forget Louis XVI in his chronology,
>could that be a freudian slip..... as there was never a revolution in
>Britain and
>kings and queens weren't...gulp... guillotined! ....Who said
>that..........?
Hi, Kathleen, great post many thanks for returning.
No freudian slip, I am all into revolutions, just my brain wasn't in
gear so I unintentionally missed Louis Seize from the list.
I don't entirely follow the above, is this just French humour? So what
about Charles I for example, and the resulting Civil War?
Where I come from (currently part of the UK), revolution, has been a
household name for centuries. The 1798 Rebellion ( and perhaps the
most important one of all, failed or otherwise) in my country was not
only inspired by the French Revolution but aided by French. Rather
ironic, but if the French had not been taken in and duped by the
British propaganda war machine of the day, had listened to the ground
forces and leaders in Ireland at the time, and had landed per the
plan, the course of history and outcome in my country would have been
totally different ... thanks a bunch!!! ;-)
Ronnie
=====
lesimbert
> about Charles I for example, and the resulting Civil War?
>
>
> Where I come from (currently part of the UK), revolution, has been a
> household name for centuries. The 1798 Rebellion ( and perhaps the
> most important one of all, failed or otherwise) in my country was not
> only inspired by the French Revolution but aided by French. Rather
> ironic, but if the French had not been taken in and duped by the
> British propaganda war machine of the day, had listened to the ground
> forces and leaders in Ireland at the time, and had landed per the
> plan, the course of history and outcome in my country would have been
> totally different ... thanks a bunch!!! ;-)
Ronnie
don' you dnow that french never follow the rules or what they are told to do
!
will get back on Charles l and that civil war thin soon. maybe in a new
posting!
I think people are having a hard time finding the suite of my discussion,
13 ghosts for example!
Be talking to you soon
Kathleen
--
lesimbert
> Well, you certainly pushed the right buttons for me. This is precisely
> the kind of thing I find interesting: the evolution of style as one part
> reaction, three parts continuity, with a dash of genius here and there
> and a bit of luck. Do go into more detail.\
>
> Tish
Will do in exchange for some american insight
best regards
Ronnie McKinley
>don' you dnow that french never follow the rules or what they are told to do
>!
>will get back on Charles l and that civil war thin soon. maybe in a new
>posting!
>I think people are having a hard time finding the suite of my discussion,
>13 ghosts for example!
>
>Be talking to you soon
>
Why do you keep disappearing, Kathleen?
Ronnie
=====
lesimbert
I was surprised to see the french directoire style in some of the tôle
lamps.
Was wondering where thqt come from?
thanks
Kathleen
--
Our team hope that you have a summer of great finds whether it be on flea
markets or in museums worldwide.
Antiques Offshore - http://www.antiquesoffshore.com
Tsu Dho Nimh <aba...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message :
lesimbert
Because I sleep and I work away from my machine! you don't seem to thought
Kathleen> >
cind...@my-deja.com
frontiers class at Southwest Missouri State
University. Will you help me fulfill a required
assignment on antiquing by answering a couple of
questions?
1. Where are your favorite places to antique?
2. Why are these your favorite places?
3. What are the nearest towns to these places?
Thanks!
Cindy
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
cind...@my-deja.com
jon.d2...@ukonline.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> > This was also the era of "Jacobethan":
horribly ugly things
> >with bulbous legs and barley-twist,
>
that..8)) Jon
>
> Please remove the YUITOM before replying by
email.
>
> ***** Posted via the UK Online online newsreader
*****
>
> Go to http://www.ukonline.co.uk to find out
> about other online services we offer our
subscribers.
cind...@my-deja.com
Gillam Kerley <gke...@execpc.com> wrote:
> Michele Mauro wrote:
> >
> > Okay already... so you made me look it up in
my book instead of going
> > from memory (which is usually a bad thing
anyway)... Modernism and Art
> > Deco go hand in hand time-wise (20's-30's)...
for some reason I thought
> > Modern came afterwards...
>
> The last few books I looked at treated Art
Moderne and Art Deco as
> synonyms.
>
Modern" from the 1950s, which
> is commonly called "Fifties Art Deco" --
certainly identifiable as 1950s
> rather than 1920s, but with similar themes
(geometric forms, stylized
> figures). Mid-Century Modern is hot around
here; there are two shops in
> Madison (pop. around 200,000) specializing in
it.
>
> GK
>
cind...@my-deja.com
jon.d2...@ukonline.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> > This was also the era of "Jacobethan": horribly ugly things
> >with bulbous legs and barley-twist,
>
> >>>>Hey, don't talk about my staff like that..8)) Jon
>
> Please remove the YUITOM before replying by email.
>
> ***** Posted via the UK Online online newsreader *****
>
> Go to http://www.ukonline.co.uk to find out
> about other online services we offer our subscribers.
>
class at Southwest Missouri State University. Will you help me
cind...@my-deja.com
mc...@cecomet.net.nospam (mcat) wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 15:05:15 GMT, mcki...@netcomuk.co.uk (Ronnie
> McKinley) wrote:
>
> >In rec.antiques, "lesimbert" wrote:
> >
> >>I know french antiques quite well now
> >
> >
> >Dia daoibh! Kathleen, .... can you confirm if the following
chronology
> >is correct in the true French context? or is this a mere English
> >contrivance?
> >My name is Cindy. I'm a student in a recreational frontiers
class at Southwest Missouri State University. Will you help me
fulfill a required writing assignment on antiques by answering a
couple of questions?
1. Where are your favorite places to antique?
2. Why are these your favorite places?
3. What are the nearest towns to these places?
Thanks!
Cindy
> >
> >1558-1625 Renaissance
> >1610-1643 Louis X111
> >1643-1715 LouisX1V
> >1715-1723 Regence
> >1723-1774 Louis XV
> >1793-1799 Directoire
> >1799-1815 Empire
> >1815-1830 Restauration
> >1830-1848 Louis Philipps
> >1848-1870 2nd Empire
> >1871-1940 3rd Republic
> >
> >Do I need to make any changes?
> >
> >Many thanks for your assistance.
> >
> >
> >
> >Ronnie
> >=====
> >
> Ronnie, I must assume that the omission of Louis XVI (1774-93) was an
> inadvertant oversight? Or were you just checking to see who would
> catch it?
>
> mcat
cind...@my-deja.com
"Patricia V. Lehman" <p...@umich.edu> wrote:
> Ronnie McKinley wrote:
> >
> > In rec.antiques, "Patricia V. Lehman" wrote:
> >
> > >Tish
> > >Tish
> >
> > Bless you.
>
> Thank you. [sniff]
>
> > Barking Geo111 ok ... but what about G1 and G2 and the dandy Prince?
> My name is Cindy. I'm a student in a recreational frontiers
class at Southwest Missouri State University. Will you help me
fulfill a required writing assignment on antiques by answering a
couple of questions?
1. Where are your favorite places to antique?
2. Why are these your favorite places?
3. What are the nearest towns to these places?
Thanks!
Cindy
> Guilt by association? I'm sorry, Ronnie, all I've go is wise cracks.
I
> don't KNOW!
>
> Tish
> > =====