RINKER ON COLLECTIBLES — Column #1488

Copyright © Harry Rinker, LLC 2015

Fear of the Unknown - How to Approach Extremely Scarce Items

Beware of the unusual is one of tenets that I stress during the authenticating seminar that I teach at my Institute for the Study of Antiques and Collectibles.  Unusual is one of many mental alarm bells that should sound in a person’s mind when he/she encounters an object that does not fit the norm.

The norm consists of all the expected elements inherent in an object – period, form, shape, construction, material, surface, pattern, color, and more.  To an experienced antiques and collectibles connoisseur, the object meets every specification the person expects.  There is no question the object is what it is.

Authenticating requires a questioning mindset, one that never accepts an object at face value.  The object must prove conclusively that it is what it appears to be.  Individuals must prevent subjective love at first sight and desire from clouding the objective analysis that is required.  The tendency to trust the initial impression of an object often leads to disastrous results.  Authentication is a meticulous step by step process.

The difficulty rests with a desire on the part of those involved in the antiques and collectibles trade to adhere to fixed rules that establish the norm in each collecting category and can be applied universally.  When an object does not conform to these rules, the tendency is to dismiss it as a copycat (stylistic copy of a period piece), fantasy (form, shape, or pattern that did not exist historically), enhanced, altered, or fake.  The result is that a period object that does not conform to the fixed rules can be overlooked and undervalued.

I first became aware of this when teaching an authenticating seminar with David Lindquist, owner of Whitehall at the Villa Antiques in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.  During a discussion of the construction techniques used to attach the center splat on a period Chippendale arm or side chair and a later copy, attention was drawn to the distinction between a two-part and integral shoe.  A period Chippendale chair had an extra piece (shoe) attached to the top of the back rail into which the splat fit.  In later copies, the back rail included a raised section in the middle of the top that replaced the separate shoe.  The obvious conclusion was that if the back rail was one solid piece, the chair was a later copy.

A Chippendale period North Carolina furniture craftsman decided not to follow the standard convention.  He used an integral shoe for the back rail of his chairs.  The absence of a two-part shoe created a first impression that the chair was made later.  However, a detailed examination of the other stylistic and construction details of the chair perfectly matched the conventions of the Chippendale period.  The construction of the back rail was unusual, but the chair was period.  The North Carolina Chippendale chair is only one of many examples of antiques and collectibles that I encountered in my career that have deviated from the norm.

Reference books are essential tools in establishing norms in collecting categories.  The critical researcher understands that he/she needs to exercise caution when using any reference book.  First, reference books are not error free.  Misattributions occur far more often than is realized.  Second, some authors make assumptions that certain pieces must exist, even though they have no evidence.  Third, there is no reference book that pictures every single object in a collecting category.

Early in my career, I encountered a large custard glass punch bowl with a relief of a western plains scene that included a herd of buffalo on its outer surface.  The owner was not able to find a reference to it in any glass reference books, including a specialized guide to custard glass.  He had shown the custard glass punch bowl to dozens of glass experts who  suggested a strong distrust that it was period, a conclusion based primarily on the “I have never seen one before” philosophy.

[Author’s Aside #1:  When someone tells me “I have never seen one before,” my standard response is “where have you looked?”]

After subjecting the custard glass punch bowl to all the authenticating rules I knew, I concluded the bowl was period.  The size, color of the glass, thickness of the glass, high quality of detail in the relief decoration on the side, and wear were among the evidence that supported my conclusion.  The bowl was scarce.

[Author’s Aside #2:  I no longer use rare, the word has lost all its meaning in today’s antiques and collectibles marketplace.  When doing a search for “rare” on eBay on August 2, 2015, I received 2,694,912 hits.  A “rare +antique” search resulted in 124,764 hits, including an “Antique Vintage Glass Rolling Pin Hand Blown Apple Pie Ridge Vinegar Rare” for $16.99.  The misuse of rare is beyond repair.]

The custard glass punch bowl was not one of a kind.  Over my career, I saw several additional examples.  The bowl was made from a mold, one that had to be very expensive to produce.  Why more were not produced remains a mystery.  Perhaps it was a special commission or the production process was too tedious to produce large numbers of marketable examples.  The antiques and collectibles field is overwhelmed with unanswered questions.

The owner wanted to sell the custard glass punch bowl.  Everything suggested that it would be an ultimate unit/masterpiece addition to any custard glass collection.  Because the piece was not referenced in any book and its origins speculative, no buyer was willing to pay a premium price.  Resistance to taking a chance was too strong, unless, of course, the selling price was cheap.

Wishing to add a chatelaine to Linda’s Victorian jewelry collection, I was offered a chatelaine unlike any I had seen.  Although it had three hallmarks, I was unable to find them in my silver reference books.  I spent over an hour on the internet looking at pictures of Victorian chatelaines, none of which remotely resembled the one I was offered.  If scarce, the price was reasonable.  However, was the price worth taking a chance the piece may not be what it was purported to be?

Although the decorative motif suggested a Slavic origin, the hallmarks did not match any I found for Hungary, Poland, or Russia.  Northern Italy is another origin possibility, but the hallmarks are definitely not Italian.  Deciphering the chatelaine’s hallmarks is the type of research project I love.  Once done, I should be able to understand the decorative motifs better.

The research reminded me of how much American, English, and Continental examples prejudice my thoughts about regarding what I expect to see when authenticating at an object.   Objects copying American and European design styles were made throughout the world.  Local artisans would have altered them to incorporate regional design preference.

In the last quarter of the 20th century, collectibles collectors introduced the concept of variation, a mass-produced example that differed from the standard production run.  In the case of Matchbox cars, there are several reference books devoted just to variations.

Unscrupulous individuals started creating “fake” variations.  These false variations were responsible for ending the PEZ collecting craze.  Die-cast toy car collectors are especially vulnerable.  Clear glass is placed in ovens or exposed to the hot sun for long periods while placed in a car trunk to change the color to a light to medium purple.  “Rare” colors in glass insulators are created through heat and/or chemicals.  For these reasons and more, collectors of mass-produced items are extremely leery of any object listed as scarce.

Scarcity, condition, and desirability are the three primary value factors in today’s antiques and collectibles marketplace.  The basic assumption is that if an object is scarce, its value should be enhanced.  The truth is that scarcity is far more likely to be a value deterrent unless the authenticity of the object is beyond question.

The antiques and collectibles trade is a business where opinion weighs far more heavily than in other professions.  Reliable information about the origin of pieces often is lost, either through the passage of time or negligence.

Harry L. Rinker welcomes questions from readers about collectibles, those mass-produced items from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.  Selected letters will be answered in this column.  Harry cannot provide personal answers.  Photos and other material submitted cannot be returned.  Send your questions to: Rinker on Collectibles, 5955 Mill Point Court SE, Kentwood, MI  49512.  You also can e-mail your questions to harrylrinker@aol.com. Only e-mails containing a full name and mailing address will be considered.

You can listen and participate in WHATCHA GOT?, Harry’s antiques and collectibles radio call-in show, on Sunday mornings between 8:00 AM and 10:00 AM Eastern Time.  If you cannot find it on a station in your area, WHATCHA GOT? streams live on the Internet at www.gcnlive.com.