Modern Art of Metalwork - Bröhan

Transcription

Modern Art of Metalwork
International Symposium at the Bröhan-Museum, Berlin
from October 6 to 8, 2001
organized by Dedo von Kerssenbrock-Krosigk
Box
Mogens Ballin, Copenhagen, design pre-1907, execution 1916
Cast pewter
Bröhan-Museum, Berlin
Cat. Modern Art of Metalwork nr. 10
22 experts—museum curators, artists, collectors, art dealers—from all over Europe and the United States
were invited to submit papers and contribute to the discussion on Modern Art of Metalwork, which to our
knowledge has not been subject of a similar international meeting before.
The symposium was aimed to
· exchange the actual state of research, ideas, questions & problems of the various provenances, arranged
in 15 short papers with the opportunity of extensive discussion
· discuss if and how the network of experts in this field can be improved
· present the new collection catalogue of the Bröhan-Museum “Modern Art of Metalwork” to
international experts
All aims and more have been fulfilled. The symposium had an atmosphere as if everybody had previously
been waiting for years for such an opportunity—it was obvious, that many of the most distinguished
scholars in this field did not know each other yet and had not even heard about important publications in
other countries. Therefore, it was agreed among the participants unanimously, that such a reunion should
be held more or less regularly at different places.
We apologize for not having been able to invite all experts to the symposium in Berlin in 2001. We
intended to keep the number of participants as small as possible to allow an active discussion, and on the
other hand as large as necessary to include representatives from most of the relevant countries. It was a
trial event in a field not tread much before.
To give the chance of some insight in the themes discussed during the event, many participants
meritoriously agreed to publish their contributions on the website of the Bröhan-Museum. The rights on
the following contributions are kept by their authors. It is not allowed to make commercial use of, to
distribute or to alter the following texts.
Any questions regarding the symposium should be submitted to [email protected]
1
The participants of the symposium were:
Prof. em. Dr. Tilmann Buddensieg
Professor for Art History emeritus in Bonn and Berlin
Germany
Poul Dedenroth-Schou
Museum Director
Museet på Koldinghus
PO Box 91
6000 Kolding
Denmark
Lise Funder M.A.
Freelance Art Historian
Denmark
Horst Heeren
Technical Director of the Silversmithy
Hansen GmbH & Co. Silbermanufaktur zu Bremen KG.
Koch & Bergfeld
Kirchweg 200
28199 Bremen
Germany
Dr. Claudia Kanowski
Curator
Schleswig-Holsteinisches Landesmuseum Schloß Gottorf
24837 Schleswig
Germany
Dr. Dedo von Kerssenbrock-Krosigk
contact via Bröhan-Museum
Germany
Wilfried Moll
Silversmith
Bantschowstraße 22
22391 Hamburg
Germany
Wim Nys
Scientific Assistant
Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof - Zilvercentrum
Hooftvunderlei 160
2100 Deurne
Belgium
Dr. Elisabeth Schmuttermeier
Curator
Museum für Angewandte Kunst
Stubenring 5
1010 Wien
Dr. Reinhard Sänger
Curator
Badisches Landesmuseum
Schloss
76131 Karlsruhe
Germany
Dr. Klaus Weber
Curator
Bauhaus-Archiv
Klingelhöferstraße 14
10785 Berlin
Germany
Rolf Walter
Collector of Swedish Silver
Sweden
Gail S. Davidson
Assistant Curator of Drawings and Prints
Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum, Smithsonian Institution
2 East 91st Street
New York, New York 10128
U.S.A.
Dominique Forest
Curator, Departement moderne et contemporain
Musée des Arts Décoratifs
Palais du Louvre
107 rue de Rivoli
75001 Paris
France
Dr. Widar Halén
Chief Curator
Oslo Museum of Decorative Arts and Design
St. Olavs Gate 1
0165 Oslo
Norway
Dr. Rüdiger Joppien
Curator
Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe
Steintorplatz 1
20099 Hamburg
Germany
Werner Kittel
Archive Werner Kittel
Corneliusstraße 5
22607 Hamburg
Germany
Annelies Krekel-Aalberse
Netherlands
Sabine Niesen M. A.
starting with a phd on the Berlin silversmith Emmy Roth
Germany
Judy Rudoe
Assistant Keeper
The British Museum
Great Russell Street
London WC1B 3DG
England
Jörg Schwandt M. A.
Expert in Danish Silver and Art Dealer
Keithstraße 10
10787 Berlin
Germany
Eric Turner
Assistant Curator, Department of Metalwork
Victoria and Albert Museum
South Kensington
London SW7 2RL
England
Dr. Christianne Weber-Stöber
Chief Executive
Gesellschaft für Goldschmiedekunst
Altsädter Markt 6
63450 Hanau
Germany
2
Remarks on Current Research
JUDY RUDOE
Assistant Keeper, The British Museum, London
To introduce our colloquium I would like to quote the words of the German emigré silversmith Peter
Müller-Munk who wrote from his NY studio in 1929 that the machine would not out the silversmith out
of business: “I still have the outmodish confidence that there will always remain a sufficient number of
people who want the pleasure of owning a centre piece without being forced to share their joy of
ownership with a few thousand other beings”. But he was soon to be proved wrong. The demand for
silver was hit by the Depression and he turned to industrial design, producing an astonishing piece of
domestic metalwork. You all know the Normandie pitcher, so-called because its shape was blatantly
derived from the smokestacks of the celebrated French ocean liner launched in 1935. Made of chromiumplated brass, of tear-drop section, the body formed of a single sheet of metal bent to shape, the join
concealed beneath a strip which runs round the base, along the edge and round the rim. The handle is
formed of a flat strip of metal expanding at the top to blend with the line of the rim. In its economy of
parts, its streamlined form and its eminent functionality—the spout pours perfectly—it is perhaps the
greatest piece of American Depression age metalwork. It has become what Müller-Munk is known for.
For someone who had trained with the renowned German silversmith Waldemar Raemisch at the
Kunstgewerbeschule in Berlin, this was a sea change. In these incertain times, I would like to ask Herr
Moll if he thinks the market for handmade silver will survive and whether if he found himself in MüllerMunk’s position, he could change direction so totally.
There are three areas that I will consider in my opening remarks—the first is social change in the 20th
century and its effect on the use of silver, the second asks some questions about the interwar years, and
the third looks at issues of the manufacturing industry which have arisen in my work on the British
Museum collection, both metalwork and jewellery. I shall ask far more questions than I shall answer and I
should stress that I have done far more research on jewellery in recent years than I have on metalwork
more generally. The pieces I illustrate are all from BM.
Social change
It is common knowledge that the decline in the use of silver in the 20th century is a consequence of the
decline in servants. Servants continued among the professional classes in Britain at any rate right through
the 1930s. It was the Second World War that killed off the tradition of servants. The nanny survived, so
did the maid, usually from the third world, but there was no one to clean and polish the silver. With no
servants to look after the house at all times of day, burglary became a serious threat and today is the most
often cited reason for not buying silver. But the real reason I suspect is that people don’t know what to
do—the culture of using silver is gone. The arrival of the washing-up machine in the 1960s was a further
death-knell. When my sister-in-law was offered my grandmother’s silver cutlery in1971 she refused it
because she wanted stainless steel that would go in the dishwasher. My mother was mortified. Even if you
just display silver without actually using it, the pollution now in big cities is such that it tarnishes almost
overnight. In a museum context we can barely stop it and in the home it is completely impossible.
The second war also killed off the cook. To make life easier for the housewife who now had to do
everything, “oven to tableware” was developed—initially I believe in glass and ceramic by Pyrex and
Corning, so that immediately other materials usurped the function of metalwork. This had of course
already happened in the 19th century with the taste for elaborate centrepieces in glass or ceramic. I can
remember my mother asking my father to bring back one of the new Corning casseroles with removable
handle on his first trip to the States in 1959. Eventually she went over to Corning ware completely and
discarded the aluminium saucepans and cast-iron frying pans with which she had set up home during the
War. She still uses her Corning ware today—it’s easy to clean, doesn’t stick, goes in the oven, on the hob
and the table. While my generation is obsessed with Le Creuset cookware which does all of this, she finds
them too heavy. The other crucial point here is that by the 1960s the kitchen and living room were one—
it was perfectly acceptable to entertain in the kitchen, and so cookware had to look good, in which case
why bother with a second smart set of dishes or cutlery at all.
3
No-one is discussing any of these issues in this colloquium—perhaps you all find them too commonplace.
But if we wish to encourage the use of silver today we have to look at why people who could afford it are
not using it and try to promote not only the material for its unique properties, but also the kind of
domestic interiors and lifestyle in which silver has a place. How easy is it to get good silver ? How many
commercial galleries are there ? There are none for contemporary silver in London (though there are two
for modern designer jewellery). Ironically it is easier in terms of the number of shops to buy antique
silver. What kind of modern silver if any can you buy at IKEA for example ? How do the big department
stores promote it ? Is it in a separate section or interspersed with other household goods ? How is it
displayed ? Can you handle it or is it all under lock and key ? No-one to my knowledge has looked at the
history of commercial display of silver, whether in galleries that specialise in silver alone or in
department stores—which have a crucial role in that they already have an audience who has come for
other reasons. In his article on silver in Germany for the exhibition catalogue Silver of New Era 18801940 (Rotterdam, Ghent 1992) Rüdiger Joppien described the shop of Emil Lettré in Berlin’s fashionable
Unter den Linden in the 1930s with its decor of red marble and Italian Renaissance furniture. That is one
extreme, but I hope there will be some useful comments on this over the next 3 days.
The interwar years
I began with Muller-Munk who worked in a period of sudden change and is an interesting case of
someone raised in the European tradition who adapted to new circumstances in a new country. But I
remain deeply unclear as to what the different effects of the Depression were in the US and in Europe ? In
the US there was great emphasis on aluminium and chrome (Russel Wright).
Lemonade Jug
Russel Wright, New York, ca. 1930
Spun aluminium, lacquered wood
They were heavily promoted as modern materials for informal entertaining (without servants). There were
huge companies who were pushing it— aluminium needs vast supplies of electricity, the costs of
producing the metal are enormous, but the machinery for spun aluminium is relatively cheap so it was
easy for firms to add a domestic line (domestic metalwork has always been only a small part of the
industry as a whole). But in Europe I am not aware that aluminium was ever that popular for table ware—
it seems to have remained confined largely to cookware.
Jug with six beakers
Harald Buchrucker, Ludwigsburg, ca. 1945–1949
Hammered aluminium
Likewise chrome never seems to have become widespread for table and ornamental ware, as opposed to
bathroom fittings, in the way that it did in America. Is the situation distorted by recent collectors’ interest
in America ? Their large-scale production means that they are still widely available and it is actually
possible to acquire everything in Revere or Chase catalogues. There is no doubt that the American pieces
are good, and, more significantly, that one particular museum exhibition played a key role. The Machine
Age in America exhibition at Brooklyn Museum of Art in 1986 was a landmark. But they did something
inspired—at the end of the exhibition, instead of the usual “products” in the museum shop, they had
4
examples of objects that were actually in the exhibition, rows of them—presumably on sale or return from
dealers—you could begin your collection then and there. And that is precisely what I did—for it was
there that I purchased my first piece of Russel Wright.
But to return to the Depression years in Europe. What was the effect in France for example ? When you
look through the magazines of the period you see Puiforcat exhibiting throughout the late 1920s and early
1930s. It doesn’t seem that the Depression had any effect on him—is this the case ? Perhaps Gail
Davidson can expand on this. Eric Turner tells me that Omar Ramsden in London kept going thanks to
one particular sponsor. And I hope too that Annelies who has studied this period in detail can give us a
broader picture here.
Issues of the manufacturing industry
There has been a huge improvement in the standard of research in the last decade or so. When I was
beginning to work on my catalogue of the British Museum collection in the late 1980s things were very
different. I found time and again that the circumstances that gave rise to creation of objects were simply
ignored. Many authors had followed secondary sources instead of going back to original documents. I
take two pieces by Olbrich as examples though I hasten to add that the problem was not limited to
Germany, I found it everywhere. The fork comes form the service designed for the Darmstadt exhibition
of 1901. But nobody explained why it was made by Christofle in Paris when the aim of the Darmstadt
artists colony was to benefit local industry. At that time Christofle had no archivist and when I walked
into the Paris shop I was told they had no information. But I persisted and eventually discovered that
Christofle had a marketing subsidiary in Karlsruhe where patterns were distributed exclusively for the
German market, and that the service was commissioned by the factiory’s agent in Germany who wanted
new flatware pattern in current German taste. A letter in the Christofle archive of 1910 confirmed what I
had suspected: that the firm added several items not designed by Olbrich (to this day that letter not
mentioned anywhere else but surely this is important evidence that that is what factories do, especially
once artist, as in Olbrich’s case, was no longer alive). Now there is an excellent archivist, the archive is
superbly arranged at St Denis together with the company museum. (I hope that Dominique Forest will
include Christofle dinanderie in her talk and explain the differences if any between Christofle works
produced in a factory context and those made by artist-craftsmen such as Dunand and Linossier).
Pair of Candlesticks
Metalworks Eduard Hueck, Lüdenscheid
Design by Joseph Maria Olbrich, ca. 1902
Cast pewter
Olbrich’s zoomorphic candlestick for E. Hueck was another puzzle. The literature available then all said it
was designed in 1901-2. But I could find no illustration of it before 1904. I still don’t know the answer.
Despite improvement in standards there are still many factory records that have not been looked at. They
might answer some of the following questions.
The outworker—never written about. Does the outworker survive ? Do they work exclusively for one
firm or do they supply many firms ? In the 1930s Cartier for example had some 20 workshops in Paris
and London apart from their own in-house ateliers. Some of these outworkers worked exclusively for
Cartier, whether mount-making in platinum, enamelling or executing the goldwork for cigarette boxes
and vanity cases. The London workshop for boxes was Wright & Davis from the 30s right up to the
1980s. These boxes are part of an extraordinary group of boxes commissioned in the 1960s by Peter
Wilding and left to the British Museum in 1969. When I spoke to a former director of the workshop he
knew exactly which craftsman had done the engine-turning and indeed invented the system of racks to
make the pattern. And he had particular praise for the man who did the polishing of the insides, right into
5
the corners—no one can do it today he said. Such craftsmen are the unsung heroes of a big firm like
Cartier, their names never recorded or acknowledged. Except for one brief period after the Second World
War when there was a shortage of materials and so a prohibitive purchase tax was applied to objects in
gold and silver. But art works were exempt from this tax and so these boxes were submitted to the
appropriate authorities—they got their art status which meant that the craftsmen had to be acknowledged.
The designers—many designers worked in different materials so you cannot look at metal in isolation. To
take just some of the issues—how did they become involved ? From the 1960s commercial
professionalism was widespread, but as late as 1951 it was completely haphazard: with the Cona coffee
machine for example, the designer, Abram Games was a graphic artist known for his posters of the
Second World War. He had never designed an object in his life. But he happened to be a friend of the
owner of the Cona company who wanted to update his coffee machine so he asked Games to do it. It was
the only such object Games ever created. Using scrap aluminium from wartime production, Games has
created an abstract sculpture: the cantilevered metal frame forms an unbroken line with the plastic handle
of the jug. The jug itself floats in space supported only at the neck. Its playfulness is in marked contrast to
Gerhard Marcks’ solid functionalist design of 1930. In one of the most extraordinary books on design
history, called Design in British Industry. A Mid-Century Survey, written by Michael Farr in 1955, these
two coffee machine are illustrated side by side with the question, which is better for the job, the
functionalist or the humanist ? This is a question we should perhaps be asking more often.
Other ways in which designers become involved depended on enlightened manufacturers inviting them,
government sponsorship (I speak of Germany or France here, unheard of in the UK to this day), or
approaches from designers themselves. How much control does the designer have ? And then once the
product is there, how is it marketed ? Is the designers name a selling point or not ? And how different is a
factory made piece from one made by an individual craftsman ? Joppien has rightly noted that in the case
of the extraordinary coffee and tea service designed by Fritz Schmoll von Eisenwerth for Bruckmann in
1913, with its richly decorated surface and its ebony handles studded with silver nails, it is hard to believe
that it is factory made at all.
Tea Service
Silverware factory Bruckmann, Heilbronn
Design Fritz Schmoll gen. Eisenwerth 1913
Sterling silver, ebony
Bruckmann has always used both internal and outside designers—I would like to know why, and whether
the products of one have been more successful than the other, both from a commercial and critical punt of
view. In the late 1920s Die Form illustrated the designs for Paula Strauss for Bruckmann and noted the
importance of a large firm introducing a modern attitude in an area where customers still followed old
ideas. So with people like Strauss involved, what was the role of the internal artists ?
And what about designers’ signatures ? I believe that Dresser is thought to have insisted that his signature
appear. At that time it was exceptional.
6
Covered Tureen
Hukin & Heath, Birmingham/London
Design Christopher Dresser 1880
Metal with silver electroplate, ebony
There are many later examples such as Jan Eisenloeffels’ brass wares where the artist’s monogram,
becomes a decorative motif, but again it is completely haphazard and did it make any difference to the
rate of sale at the time ? Or has it just become no more than useful aid to collectors and a means for the
dealer to ask a higher price ?
Yet not all signatures command high prices—they have to be well-known ones. Take these two hot-water
urns. One, made in France, presumably in the mid 1930s. It bears the name of the silversmiths’ firm G.
Carré and is signed “Executed with the hammer by G. Lecomte”. I know nothing about him as yet. But
the craftsmanship and elegance equals anything by more famous French modernist silversmiths such as
Puiforcat or Tétard. The faceted body is a triumph of hand raised work and the pouring method is highly
original. Instead of the usual tap, a lever at the top releases a sliding flap inside the spout. The other was
designed by the Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen in 1934 for the Cranbook Academy of Art in Michigan
and made by the International Silver-Plate Company, Connecticut. The French one is solid silver and
made entirely by hand, but because neither the silversmith nor the firm are famous names, it cost us a fifth
of the price of Saarinen’s silver-plated urn.
Despite its tremendous presence the Saarinen urn was not commercially successful. The construction was
intended to be suitable for industrial production—the sphere is spun, while the pierced gallery that hides
the burner is stamped—yet it appears to have been made in very small quantities. Ours is one of 4
recorded examples. One suggestion that has been made is that customers for silver or silver-plate wanted
more traditional forms. The implication then is that people who wanted modern forms wanted new
materials such as aluminium and chrome as well. Is this really the case?
Most visitors who come to the museum have no idea what is meant by hand made or industrially made. It
is one of the most difficult things to get across to a non-specialist public. Both of these urns function well,
but which is more human ?
Pair of Candlesticks
Reimann-Schule, Berlin, Heubler class, ca. 1930
Brass
The candlesticks are examples of factory pieces made entirely by
hand
The craftsmen—how often do we know if we are talking about one person, one person with a couple of
helpers, or a sizeable workshop ? And if we are talking about more than one person, what does the name
of the artist actually mean ? Wendy Ramshaw is Britain’s most famous artist jeweller. She is always
regarded as an artist maker (has recently had one-man show in Darmstadt). But she has 2 or 3 helpers. Is
7
this standard ? perhaps Herr Moll can throw some light on this ? If this is standard then where is the
borderline between a piece made entirely by the artist, and the artist having someone else make all of it ?
To make her pieces more accessible to a wider market, Wendy Ramshaw has another branch of her
work—her production pieces made entirely in Birmingham and produced in limited editions in enamelled
metal, no precious metal and no gemstones. She vets the castings and enamelling in person but she does
not make the pieces.
This leads on to other examples where we think we know what we are dealing with. But do we ? What is
Puiforcat ? What was his role ? How many craftsmen were there ? Were there any outworkers ? Who
made the wooden handles for instance ? Did his own distinguished collection of 18th-century silver play
any role ? Was it available in the workshop ?
Or Sandoz—all his work made for exhibitions or to commission—did he have assistants ? Who made the
silver which he then inlaid with lacquer ?
What does Bauhaus manufacturing mean ? Take the Brandt tea-infuser— How can you have a classic of
modern design when there are only a handful of them ? And why are there 8 of them (or however many
there are, 2 silver, approx 6 in brass) this is neither a unique prototype or a production line. Given the
social conscience of the Bauhaus, one might ask why they made silver at all ? The production is totally
different from the Wagenfeld lamp, so even under the one Bauhaus heading you have enormous contrasts.
Lastly—what of the attitudes of the manufacturers themselves ? What did they really think ? How did
manufacturers regard pieces by outside designers compared with the work of the internal designers ?
What kind of acknowledgment do internal designers get, if any at all ? Very little is written by the
manufacturers themselves. This is a great pity.
---
8
Coffee and Tea Service
Robert Fischer, Schwäbisch Gmünd, ca. 1935
Sterling silver, ivory
The silversmith—conceiving and making works of silver
WILFRIED MOLL
Silversmith, Hamburg
The profession of the silversmith has many facets which have evolved over a long period of time; it
involves the combination of art and craft to make a living, and both these elements have to be integrated
into everyday life.
Some aspects, though, have changed in recent times: the changes are primarily concerned with the social
status of the craftsman. The modern silversmith has been liberated from the rigorous organisation of the
guilds and the pressures of larges factories with industrial working conditions. As a rule he/she is today
an independent, self-employed craftsman/woman independent just like his artist colleagues—painters,
sculptors or photographers. His/her working modus is comparable to theirs.
His ideas are put in concrete form via sketches, drawings and models; he then proceeds to execute his
works. They are realized in a direct exchange between his ideas and his expertise. In the course of
realization he is always looking for ways to improve his work and to react to coincidence should the
occasion arise.
His way of producing an object qualifies him for the making of unique objects as well as for the
development of a prototype for serial production.
The silversmith moves in a variety of milieus: from his workshop to dealing with potential customers—
maybe in a country district church—or in the home of a potent collector of traditional and contemporary
silver; in the evening he may be attending the lecture of an art historian.
The profession of the silversmith requires intense training and much experience. It usually takes more
than ten years until a degree of intellectual and technical ability is reached. Intensive training and a time
spent at college are very helpful. But there is also the possibility to get an education along secondary
paths—like all artists the silversmith learns his trade everywhere he wishes and throughout his life.
Commercial ability is a great help indeed and he needs a talent to avoid the traps set by bureaucracy and
by the existential needs to survive.
There will always be serial products to satisfy the general demand for silver; besides this industrial
production there is a niche where small workshops can establish themselves which make unique pieces as
small services showing their own distinct style and expression.
At present there is a surprising number of young people (mostly women) who try to establish themselves
in a creative profession. It is unlikely that the job of a contemporary silversmith will yield great financial
return; on the other hand it offers an attractive and relatively independent position in our society.
---
9
Plate ”round acanthus”
Court jeweller H. J. Wilm, Berlin, ca. 1935
Sterling silver
Ferdinand Richard Wilm (director of H. J. Wilm 1912–1967) established the
”Deutsche Goldschmiedehaus” 1922 in Berlin and 1942 in Hanau
Silver Triennal—An International Exhibition Promoting the Contemporary Art of the Silversmith
CHRISTIANNE WEBER-STÖBER
Chief Executive, Gesellschaft fuer Goldschmiedekunst, Hanau
Already in 1932, in the year of her foundation, and in the following years, the German Association for
Goldsmiths Art in Berlin began to promote the art of silversmithy through competitions and exhibitions.
Today we are an international association. The themes of these exhibitions were for example: The silver
vessel; 1933: The silver container; 1935/36: Vessel for the Olympian champion;
1942: Silver for the councils of German cities; 1951: A silver municipal plate; 1958/59: The silver coffee
pot; 1959: The magic charm of the mirror; 1960: Silver vessel with enamel; 1963: The silver sports
award.
In the 60ies, the Association opened for the European countries. 1965 the series of exhibition “European
Silver, hand made”, which was later on known as Silver Triennial, was started in cooperation with the
Handwerksform Hannover.
Ulla Stöver, who was at that time manager of the Association, wrote in the first catalogue: “The renewal
of the art of silversmithy began with the consequent adjustment of the surface and intensiv work on the
pure shape. Through Werkbund and Bauhaus Germany gained a leading position. The dogma of the
20ies, “form without ornament”, and the doctrine of the orthodox functionalism, to make the use to the
only pre-condition for shaping, was pointed at the sins of the years of rapid expansion, of historism and
misunderstood Art Nouveau. It was defined: Form is shape without ornament. But by omitting ornaments,
the good form asked for is not automatically obtained, and mere functionalism leaves little margin for
creative phantasie. In the process of creating handicraft, function and material are only the law that limits
the task set before the artist. Within these limits, the artist is free to create whatever he wants and must.”
From Germany, more than thirty artists showed secular and ecclesiastical silverware. Submissions also
came from Great Britain, Scandinavia, Austria, Italy, and Switzerland. With the return to a new style
distinguished by clear lines and elimination of any decoration whatsoever, the Scandinavians, such as
Karl Gustav Hansen, Sigurd Persson and the workshop of Georg Jensen, as well as the British, were at the
head of the international competition.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the Scandinivians were represented in greater number than the Germans
at the second exhibition in 1968, on the theme “European Silver hand-wrought”.
As three years earlier, forceful modeling, characterized by convincing simplicity prevailed among the
northern artists. Silver works were combined with leather, horn, or transparent enamel. The Swede, Heinz
Decker, for example, showed a sauce boat with a removeable handle of elkhorn.
The concession to serial production may come as surprise, so the exhibition presented handwrought silver
and some objects of serial production. Therefore critical remarks on the exhibited articles were also to be
heard. “The perfection is nearly complete; traces of the processing are carefully erased. Silver hollow and
flatware which were once usually one-of-a-kind and practically not reproduceable, are now almost
exclusively models for the industry”.
In 1974, the original concept of the Silver Triennial was enlarged with a further aspect: “it sets out to
demonstrate the proximity of the artistically designed one-of-a-kind article to fine art. The framework of
the earlier Silver Triennials were expandes intentionally; silver sculpture and objects such as trophies or
sport awards were included for the first time.
10
Three years later, in 1977, the Swedish silversmiths played a prominent role, which can be traced to a
great degree to the founding of a work-group of ten silversmiths in Stockholm. Among their most
important objectives were the cooperative promotion of individual discoveries and goals, international
contacts, and an international prize for a publication in gold and silversmiths’ art.
When the Silver Triennial was organized for the sixth time in 1980, an extremely unfavorable situation
dominated the silver market; the price of silver had risen from $ 5 to $ 50 per ounce. This time also, the
Scandinavians captured a special spot in the Silver Triennial. In Denmark, leading silversmiths had also
joined together in a group, called the “Danske Solvsmede”. They wanted to demonstrate to the public that
in spite of the difficult conditions for subsistance, there were more and more Danish silversmiths making
hand-wrought silver hollow and flatware according to their own form conceptions in their workshops.
“All works should be executed by the silversmith himself, from the idea to the finished piece”, is stated in
the charter.
The “Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths” made available the British silversmiths’ masterpieces from
their collection. This 800-year-old guild provides an important start-assistance for young gold and
silversmiths through the granting of commissions. The purchased works are either included in the
collection or donated to churches and universities, for example.
At the Silver Triennial in 1986, nearly twice as much artists participated as in the years past. The use of
silver-plated bronze for the first time at the Silver Triennial was rated as an absolute innovation. The large
participation unfortunately did not bring with it an equally high quality in the work.
The Silver Triennial of 1989 was a “remake” of the form dogmas of the Bauhaus: frequently the bodies of
the pots were based on the sphere, triangle, or cone; the geometric forms were dissected and rejoined
again arbitrarily.
Until this triennial, the 9th performance, the organizers – the Deutsche Goldschmiedehaus Hanau and the
Association for Goldsmiths Art – chose the pieces for the exhibition. On the occasion of the anniversary
of the 10th Silver Triennial 1992, an international competition was announced, a jury chose the prize
winners and the participants of the exhibition. 166 artists from 12 countries responded by submitting
hollow and flatware or objects in silver to this competition.
This triennial went back to the true purpose of furthering the art of silversmithy. Silver plated objects
were not accepted. This ruling stands until today, the submission of silver-plated objects is only permitted
for students and apprentices. In 1998 we received more than 300 works. The palette of the submitted
silver works has been expanded by a number of pieces. In addition to the classic silverware such as
beverage pots, tea and coffee services, place settings, vases, boxes, carafes, trays, warmers, and drinking
vessels, many new ideas were realized in silver. Everything from cases for eye glasses, a rice wine bottle,
an ensemble for breakfast cereal, a lobster set, a champagne cooler, a picnic set, a cocktail shaker, to a
CD box Air Cooled, a secret hiding-place for chewing gum Incognito, or furniture fittings could be found.
This year we organized the 13th Silver Triennial exhibition: Far more than 500 works were submitted by
217 artists from 24 different countries.
This year, the Triennial is creating a new highlight: Ulla and Martin Kaufmann of Hildesheim offered a
5000 “Deutsch marks” prize to promote the next generation of silver artisans.
Especially among the younger generation, a completely new starting point in the art of the silversmithy is
demonstrated by one or the other of the works.The tasks are approached on an intellectual level; the result
presents itself as a statement, as a comprehensive artistic endeavor which extends far beyond handcreated silver objects.
A notably high number of participants came from Belgium, where an interesting environment for young
silversmiths is developing. Christophe De Ranter of Belgium has been awarded the promotional prize for
younger artisans for his “Dinner”: The work is enlivened by its conceptual idea and demonstrates the
meeting point between fine art and applied art. The conceptual work by Christophe De Ranter cannot and
should not fundamentally replace or dispute the classic art of the silversmith.
In addition to the Silver Triennial in Hanau, many other events were established in the 90ies, which draw
the attention to the international development of the scene of silversmithy.
In1990, the silversmith Jan van Nouhuys from the Netherlands called into life the exhibition “Zilver in
Beweging”. Two years ago, in Schoonhoven (site of the Vakschool Schoonhoven, the most important
school in the country and a museum for the art of silversmithy) a gallery for contemporary art of
silversmithy was opened. Next year, an international exhibition for silversmithy will be announced there.
11
1992 the Foundation for Gold- and silversmithy at Schwäbisch Gmünd, Germany, (Stiftung Gold- und
Silberschmiedekunst, Dr. Angelika Ehmer, Franziskanergasse 6, D-73525 Schwäbisch Gmünd)
announced a competition titled “Dinner for Two”.
The Vlaams Institut voor het Zelfstanding ondernemen VIZO in Brüssel organized 1993 in Antwerpen an
international exhibition titled “A Sparkling Party”, which caused furore with its extravagant staging.
(VIZO Crafts Department, Johan Valcke, Kandelarijstraat 19, B- 1000 Brüssel).
In Belgium, The Zilverzentrum Antwerpen, joined to the Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof, gained
increasing importance in the last years. (Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof, -Zilvercentrum, Hoftvunderlei
160, B-2100 Deurne) In cooperation with the Provinciaal Diamond Museum a design competition for
young silversmiths and jewellery designers aged between 20 and 29 was announced in 2000, titled “Twen
in 2000 – Diamond and Silver Creations for the Twenty-First Century”.
The silversmithy workshop titled “Silver for the table—vessels and utensils” organized 1999 by Gerda
and Wilfried Moll in the Center for Culture at Salzau near Kiel, Germany must be also mentioned.
An important promotor for the art of silversmithy since many years is the yearly art fair organized by the
Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe in Hamburg.
Besides the activities already mentioned above, the Worshipful Company also organized in 1999 an
important retrospective of the English art of silversmithy titled “Metalmorphosis - Tradition and
Innovation in British Silver and Metalwork from 1880 to 1998”, an exhibition that was also shown in
Germany, here in the Bröhan-Museum.
(Worshipful Company, Goldsmiths’ Hall, Foster Lane London EC2V 6BN)
Finally I want to finish my statement with some remarks on the Australian and American scene of
silversmithy:
The establishment of a gold- and silversmithing workshop at the Royal Melbourne Institute of
Technology, in 1948, laid the foundation for an independent Australian development. In 1981, the
Canberra School of Art opened a gold and silversmithing workshop. An international symposium in 1988
to coincide with the World Craft Council Conference in Australia was organised by the Canberra School
of Art. A meeting of silversmiths under titled “Concepts and Realisation in Hollow-ware” was included in
the symposium.
In the United States, the contemporary art of silversmithy has also an outstanding position. There exists a
“Society of American Silversmiths” which edits an own publication titled “American Silversmith”.
(Society of American Silversmiths, PO Box 3599, Cranston, Rhode Island 0210, USA)
---
12
The Way to the Art Nouveau-silver—Stylistic preferences between Second Empire
and Fin de Siècle by the example of Paris orders of table silver
CLAUDIA KANOWSKI
Curator, Schleswig-Holsteinisches Landesmuseum Schloss Gottorf, Schleswig
French metal art of the Art Nouveau stands out for a certain kind of formal criterions: elegant curves of
the lines, organic forms and vegetable ornaments, decorations with female figures inspired by the
symbolism. Here in the Bröhan-Museum, we can see examples for this (Emmanuel Orazi, Paul Follot,
Maurice Dufrène, Georges de Feure). Artists from the English- and German speaking areas such as
Christopher Dresser, Josef Hofmann and Bruno Paul produced completely different designs.
Chocolate Pot
Maison Cardeilhac, Paris
Design probably Lucien Bonvallet, ca. 1895
Silver (950/1000), ivory, painted green
I am especially interested in the roots of these special characteristics of the French Art Nouveau, the way,
which leads from the Historicism- movement of the Second Empire and the early Troisième République
to the forms of style of the Fin de Siècle. In my mind, researches and exhibitions should still more
emphasize the links between both epochs—Historicism and Art Nouveau. I also believe that it is
insufficient to understand the decorative art of the 19th century only by a descriptive analysis of styles:
Neo-Classicism, Neo Gothic, Neo-Renaissance and Neo-Baroque, Neo-Rococo and finally Art Nouveau.
The study of this epoch only becomes interesting and convincing when the stylistic observations are
related to the cultural-historical context. Only then we can find historical reasons for the development of
styles, which never appear by chance.
In the following I want to present some aspects of my doctoral thesis, which I finished in 1997 “Table
silver for the bourgeoisie—production and customers of the Paris gold-smith companies Christofle and
Odiot between Second Empire and Fin de Siècle”, which appeared last year (in 2000) in the Gebr. Mann
Verlag Berlin. Both companies—Christofle and Odiot—still exist today in Paris and have extensive
archive material, which I have evaluated for the research.
In the 19th century extensive table decoration consisting of figured Surtouts de table, candelabras,
Jardinières, dishes and plates, cutlery and coffee- and tea-services was of great importance for the private
and the public representation. Unlike in former centuries, now the customers were not principally princes
and aristocrats, but above all bankers and industrialists: table silver became a phenomenon of the
bourgeoisie.
The profound industrial and social changes also had an effect on the rather conservative sector of the art
of the gold-smith. Modern techniques like the galvanic (electro-chemical) silver-plating gave the
companies completely new possibilities. Charles Christofle, who founded his company in 1831, quickly
recognised the chance to produce by means of the new industrial procedures table silver for a wider civil
public as well. Christofle was the first company on the European continent that made use of the galvanic
techniques for the serial production of table silver. The company’s printed catalogues in which since the
1850’s all the models and prices of the current production were listed, were part of the modern marketing
concept of Christofle.
13
During the Second Empire, Christofle advanced to the position of a purveyor to the imperial court.
Industrially silver-plated table decoration corresponded to the imperial ideology of progress formed by
the Saintsimonismus. The tables in the Tuileries, the ministries and in the Paris city hall were decorated
with tableware out of non precious metal, which was covered by an electrochemical procedure with a
very thin film of silver and gold—the official France presented itself as well economical as modern.
On the other hand, the rich Paris bankers preferred for the decoration of their tables silver from a
traditional house like Odiot, which was one of the few French goldsmith-companies, which survived the
French Revolution. During the 19th century, Odiot maintained the traditional techniques of handicraft.
Hardly a name from the financial world is missing in the order books: André, Camondo, Fould-Furtado,
Goldschmidt, Koechlin, Rothschild. It would appear that especially the upstarts from the new-bourgeois
society searched for “remaining” in the sense of material values. Therefore they preferred to order their
table silver at Odiot, often in an execution in solid silver.
After the downfall of the Second Empire in 1870, the Company Christofle considered itself to be forced
to change its image. The imperial house disappeared as a lucrative client. In the field of the decorative art,
the initial enthusiasm for industrial techniques changed more and more to a consciousness on traditional
craft values. Now the company Christofle stressed in its advertisements that they also produced solid
silver products following drafts of artists—tendencies that led to the Art Nouveau (to mentioning just
some key words: demand of honesty when using the material, vocation of well known artists by the
companies, handicraft point of view by the martelé technique). Much more often than in the starting
years, we can find now illustred names from the Paris society in the archives from Christofle
(Manzanedo-Santoòa, Pereire, Marquise de Païva, Earl Henckel von Donnersmarck...).
Even if the companies Christofle and Odiot were different in many aspects, particularly considering
technical production and marketing strategies, we can nevertheless see from their products the same
characteristics of design. The styles “from Versailles”—Louis XV and Louis XVI—were exemplary, but
they were not copied in a slavish way.
Two elementary tendencies can be noticed. At the time of the Second Empire the table silver in the NeoLouis-XVI style or also (more seldom) in the Neo-Louis-XIV-style was particularly popular. By the end
of the century, about 1880, people preferred silver in the Neo-Louis-XV-style with curved ornaments of
the rococo.
During the Second Empire the preference for the Louis-XVI-style had a prominent representative:
Empress Eugénie. In a personal admiration for Marie-Antoinette, she let the castles in Saint-Cloud,
Fontainebleau, Compiègne and of course in Paris be furnished with Louis-XVI-furniture. And typically
for that period of Historicism, originals of the 18th century were mixed with new interpretations of the
historical styles. The imperial preference of Louis-XVI, which already at that time led to the ironical
description “style Louis-XVI-Impératrice”, has importantly influenced the bourgeoisie’s taste. The
private orders of silver show that as well as the furnishing of the rich villas in Paris: Louis XVI was en
vogue.
The change of taste between the Second Empire and the Fin de Siècle can be seen clearly in two orders by
the government for Christofle: Two Jardinières in plated silver from a table decoration ordered by
Emperor Napoléon III at Christofle in 1866, and on the other hand a Jardinière Style Régence, plated
silver, executed in 1889 by Christofle for the Elysée Palace in Paris. While the iconography of the
jardinières remains unchanged (allegories of the four continents), the ornamentation is changing. The
model from 1866 is orientated with its classicistic decoration on the style of Louis-XVI- and also on the
style Empire. On the other hand the model from 1889 shows a moving, vegetable decoration in the style
about 1740 (style Régence). Nevertheless, regarding this type of object, we will search in vain for a
concrete example of the 18th century. The so-called corbeilles with a figurative decoration were new
creations of the Historicism. They were often used as jardinières to present flowers and, at that time, had
to be on every richly decorated table. Christofle’s and Odiot’s models were free and very imaginative
interpretations of historical examples.
14
In the 1880-years, favouring the style of Louis-XV was accompanied by a tendency of a vegetable
ornamentation. It is known that Japan’s art gave decisive ideas for the intensive treatment of the botany.
But in this connection it should also be considered that the French artists and art-critics tried very much to
connect inspirations from the far-east with the national art traditions. They did not ask for a revolution,
but for a rejuvenation of the French style (“un rajeunissement des styles français”, quotation to be read in
the report from the Paris World Exhibition in 1889 by Lucien Falize, himself goldsmith). It was the style
from Louis-XV, which counted as originally “French” under the historical styles, especially because it
had created an individual, vegetable ornamentation, which did not refer to classical examples. Therefore it
offered the possibility to unite national and reformist arguments.
Two examples from the Christofle’s production can show clearly that supposed “modern” models were
created directly out of the Historicism- treasure of forms. In 1901 the President’s wife Madame Emile
Loubet received a solid silver Surtout de table of several parts as a present of the Department Oise, made
by Christofle. In its way of creating it was considered to be modern. The motto “La Forêt” determines the
decoration: Female fauns and oak leaves on the central jardinière and the bowls, on the plates fruits which
are typical for the seasons (strawberries, cherries, grapes and nuts)—no allegories any more, no concrete
quotations of a historical style. Nevertheless, the comparison with the jardinières “Model Louis XV” out
of the Christofle-sales catalogue from 1882 shows the narrow formal relationship: Here as there vegetable
decorations, curved sides of the bowl, moving figures.
In his report from the Paris World Exhibition in 1889, Lucien Falize praised the contemporary
interpretations of the Louis-XV-style, like the models presented by Christofle. The following quotation
from his report reflects that indeed Neo-Louis-XV was the favourite style at that time: “Nos orfèvres
français sont tous au Rococo. (…) Ce que j’affirme, c’est qu’on a copié par toute l’Europe notre
orfèvrerie du dix-huitième siècle et qu’on a jamais su la faire qu’à Paris.” (“Our French gold-smiths all
adhere to the Rococo. (…) I want to emphasize that the whole of Europe has copied our art of orfèvrerie
of the 18th century, however only in Paris you will find the capability of producing it.”) It is interesting
that Falize lays stress on a Japanese inspired vase of glass by Emile Gallé with a bronze mounting in the
Louis-XV-style from Froment-Meurice. Today one copy is in the Berlin Museum for arts and crafts.
Falize described this vase as “peut-être l’œuvre la plus parfaite que nous ayons vue parmi les
reminiscences du dix-huitième siècle” (the “perhaps most perfect work that we have seen under the
reminiscences to the 18th century”). The author saw in this model the successful attempt to revitalize the
French style tradition. If you think about the furniture design of Emile Gallé, Louis Majorelle or Eugène
Gaillard, to be seen here in the Bröhan-Museum, it becomes clear that the Neo-Rococo-ornamentation
was not replaced, but continued by the Art Nouveau.
The stylistic observations, which I have presented here with a few examples, can be transmitted to other
examples of the private inside furnishings in Paris. In my work I not only examined the table silver, but, if
it was possible, also the architecture and the furnishings of the Hôtels particuliers, in which the clients
lived.
Especially compared to Germany I noticed how much the French Haute Bourgeoisie identified itself with
the cultural heritage of the 18th century, the Ancien Régime. The governmental clients followed the
”Model of Versailles” as well as the companies, continuing an epoch during which the “French taste” was
leading in Europe. In France there did not exist, contrary to the German Empire after 1871, the search for
an own “civil style” (Bürgerstil). The courtly aristocratic example remained determining—even after the
definite downfall of the monarchy and also when the Art Nouveau gained total acceptance.
15
Lidded Jug ”Oxalis”
Christofle & Cie., Paris
Design probably Henri Godin between 1901 and 1909
Pewter alloy (Gallia metal), cast, silverplate
I do not at all want to deny the innovation of the Art Nouveau. When searching for modern principles of
furnishing, great impulses came from France. I only want to show the continuities that integrate the Art
Nouveau firmly into the 19th century. Probably in nearly no other country the requirement for
reconciliation of tradition and modern age was so strong as it was in France. Maybe, just the radical
political revolutions and the rapid industrialization led to this strong re-insurance in the common cultural
patrimony.
---
16
Thorvald Bindesbøll —an Innovator of Danish Silver
POUL DEDENROTH-SCHOU
Director, Museet på Koldinghus, Kolding
”Artichoke Bowl”
A. Michelsen, Copenhagen
Design Thorvald Bindesbøll 1898
Sterling silver
The man
Thorvald Bindesbøll was a key figure in Danish design, a man who created his own unique style on the
basis of contemporary artistic trends and an extensive knowledge of the art of previous epochs and other
cultures. Bindesbøll is Denmark’s most original designer to date, the Danish artist who has done most to
open up new avenues of possibilities in the fields of ceramics and silver. Bindesbøll set new standards for
work in crafts and design, and he was a leading figure in the developments that took place in the field of
design at around the beginning of the twentieth century. His work still serves as a source of inspiration to
this very day.
Thorvald Bindesbøll was born on 21 July 1846 as son of Michael Gottlieb Bindesbøll, the architect of
Thorvaldsen’s Museum in Copenhagen. Thorvald was only ten years old at the time of his father’s death,
but he inherited his father’s love and interest for art and architecture. He was born into a circle of
contemporary aesthetes and beaux-esprits, including some of his father’s students, who eventually
became his teachers at the Academy.
He attended the Royal Academy of Fine Arts from 1861 to 1876. And while studying here, Bindesbøll
received his first independent architectural commission in 1874. In 1882 he managed to win the small
gold medal, and in the same year he successfully applied for a travel scholarship to Northern Germany,
the Netherlands and Northern Italy. Disappointment awaited him on his return home, however, because
there were no architect assignments to be had. As a result, Bindesbøll had to seek other outlets for his
creative talents. In fact, his entire life was to reflect the fact that working solely as an architect was by no
means able to occupy his time nor to satisfy his need to express himself. As a result, Bindesbøll threw
himself into all the many facets of working with crafts and design.
From the early 1880’s Bindesbøll became seriously engaged in working with ceramics. Initially,
Bindesbøll remained closely tied to Italian patterns decorated in the Classical style. Gradually, however,
he was able to shed this influence and replace it by Far Eastern sources, and he then moved on to develop
his own personal form of non-figurative art. In so doing, he placed himself apart from all others working
with contemporary decorative art, both in Denmark and abroad.
As time went on, Bindesbøll was to try out all aspects of the decorative arts, and all materials used. While
studying at the Academy, he tried his hand at designing embroidery patterns for his sisters. From 1887 he
designed bookbindings. From the 1890s he designed furniture and artistic metalwork. From 1898, he
designed silverware for A. Michelsen, later for A. Dragsted and P. Hertz, all of Copenhagen, and last, but
not least, for Holger Kyster in Kolding. Silverware gradually replaced pottery within the range of work
Bindesbøll produced. However, it is a distinctive feature of all his work that he paid scant regard to the
actual nature of the material he was working with at the time. As a result, the same characteristic
decorative elements are to be seen on a cushion cover and the binding of a book, on a table leg and on a
bronze candlestick, or on an item of silverware. For Bindesbøll it was the form that mastered the material,
not vice versa. “There is no shape and no motif linked to any definite material”, Bindesbøll once said.
17
1900 was a year of triumph for Bindesbøll. This year he received full, official recognition in Denmark,
when he was given responsibility for the preparation of the Danish section for craft and design at the
World Exhibition in Paris, where he also displayed ceramics and silver of his own design. It was in his
capacity as commissioner for the exhibition, however, that he was awarded a gold medal. His
contemporaries were not yet ready to observe and recognise the genius that lay in his artistic work.
In 1909, on the occasion of a small memorial exhibition for Bindesbøll, Mario Krohn wrote: “Bindesbøll
himself was absolutely convinced that in the areas in which he was best, he was not new in the most
profound sense of the word”. For posterity, Bindesbøll stands out as an artist who was able to release
Danish art from the clutches of the styles of the previous centuries, and who was the first “modern” artist
in Denmark.
The style
In Denmark, the break with previous historical traditions and the Classical styles has been designated the
Skønvirke period, and is generally considered to stretch from 1880 to 1920. It corresponds to the English
Arts & Crafts Movement, the German Jugendstil and the French Art Nouveau. Just as was the case
outside Denmark, Skønvirke was a reaction to the growing supply of cheap and poorly worked mass
produced-goods that industrialisation had made possible.
Assessments of Bindesbøll’s significance have varied over the years, but his talent and impact has always
been recognised. From his contemporaries he experienced rather negative reactions. In 1900 a critic
wrote: “Thorvald Bindesbøll occupies a unique position among Danish architects. Regardless of whether
this is justified or not, he is perhaps the most renowned of them all, and certainly the one most talked
about. He has created a field for himself within crafts and design, a field that is his domain alone, and his
excremental ornamental work has set root in people’s general awareness. To what extent he is really
called to serve as the person to be the salt in Danish decorative art must remain unresolved, but the
honour of having provided fresh fertiliser for its growth cannot be taken from him. He has a powerful,
original talent”. In a similar tone, another critic warned visitors to the World Fair in Paris against
believing that the fact that the Danish section of the exhibition had been set up by Bindesbøll, with the
“doodles” that were so characteristic for him and his work, in any way made him representative of
contemporary Danish art. “Bindesbøll’s artistic honour lies in his absolute personal integrity and in his
rich decorative bilities, which on this particular occasion have made a favourable impression on so many
people. But precisely because of his special artistic status, he cannot and should not be considered as a
representative of the school of thought currently prevalent in Denmark”. As architects, both critics were
among those used to working in a more traditional direction, so it is hardly surprising that they partly
dissociated themselves from Bindesbøll in his break with historicism, though they were unable to deprive
him of his significance.
The general attitude at the time, however, seemed to be a preference for the well known and perhaps also
for the new naturalism and its sense of the romantic, as expressed in the works of N. G. Henriksen and
Harald Slott-Møller, both of A. Michelsen’s workshop. Bindesbøll was apparently too radical in his
powerful new shapes and his rough-hewn ornamentation.
In 1941, the director of the Danish Museum of Decorative Art, Vilhelm Slomann, characterised
Bindesbøll’s efforts in a more unreservedly positive manner: “In the revival of design and crafts that
followed the writing of Ruskin and the work of Morris, and which broke out from England into the major
countries on the Continent and which formed the backdrop to what happened in the world of porcelain,
books and silverware in Denmark, the work of Thorvald Bindesbøll figures as Denmark’s greatest artistic
effort. He was the man who most strongly and most artistically fully understood what it was all about, and
who brought the greatest talent to bear on dealing with the new assignments.
He achieved less recognition abroad, on an international scale, than others among his contemporaries, but
his impact within Denmark was greater than anyone else’s, and many will perhaps consider it too great.
The fact that the Skønvirke style acquired a largely ornamental character in Denmark is due to the gifts
displayed by Thorvald Bindesbøll”.
18
Posterity has fully backed Vilhelm Slomann’s assessment. Professor Nikolaus Pevsner calls Bindesbøll
“the most original ceramic artist of his generation”. It has been said of Bindesbøll that if his efforts had
been applied in the field of painting, his abstract imagery would have made him famous in the world at
large at a much earlier point. His artistic abilities came to be applied in the world of the decorative arts,
however, while it was only some years after his death that functionalism in Scandinavia developed “the
smooth style”. Bindesbøll’s ornamented surfaces on ceramics, silver and bronze as well as in architecture
were left to stand as an isolated rock rising above the surface of the river that rushed past and onwards
with the undecorated as the main artistic idiom. “More than anyone else, he represented the watershed
between the stucco exoticism of the previous period and the pragmatic classicism of our time, standing in
the doorway between the carnival architecture of the nineteenth century and the smooth, white style of the
twentieth century”.
Bindesbøll drew his inspirations from a number of sources. His father and his artist friends had brought
an awareness of the decorative arts of Antiquity back home from Rome. The wall-paintings from Pompeii
provided motifs in their decorative works, while the black-and-white mosaic floors did not win a place in
their art. It was Thorvald Bindesbøll instead who took up this source of inspiration in his black-and-white
style, and his earliest ceramic works feature classical ornamentation. He had an intimate knowledge of
later European art and the tracery of leaves from the Renaissance and the powerful relief effects and
characteristic types of ornament from the late Baroque are all recognisable in many of Bindesbøll’s pieces
of silverware and on his furniture.
Other writers have focused on unfurling fern buds as the source of inspiration for one of Bindesbøll’s
favourite motifs. The curled and rolled-up leaves that have a distinct resemblance to an ornament featured
on an old Japanese sword decoration now in the Danish Museum of Decorative Art. Bindesbøll
transformed this motif into the cloud ornaments so characteristic of his work. It was in fact at the very end
of the nineteenth century that Oriental art became a significant source of renewal in European decorative
art. The almost over-exaggerated naturalism of the Art Nouveau artists was clearly inspired by Japanese
art and, although Bindesbøll only seldom employed naturalism as a form of expression, this Japanese
inspiration is clear in works such as the vase with the large, foaming wave in Museet på Koldinghus. This
was probably inspired by woodcuts by Hokusai (1760-1849) showing the Fuji-san volcano and the Great
Wave. There are other examples, too, including a number of pieces of silverware, where individual cloud
ornaments have been carefully and meticulously placed on smooth silver surfaces, such as a tea caddy in
Koldinghus. A drawing from 1899 in A. Michelsen’s archives shows a similar use of individual
ornamental features on an earthenware vase mounted with silver. Bindesbøll also made use of inspiration
from Persian art, particularly as regards ways to fill out a base, a trend that moved in a different direction
from the Japanese.
Regardless of the sources of his inspiration, Bindesbøll was not an artist who merely copied the original
source. He distilled the essence from what he had seen, and used it to create his own particular style that
was in on sense a distillation of the basic principles of nature. “After having acquired a schooling in the
decorative arts, the like of which probably no other Dane has ever had, he shrugged off everything he had
learned and then produced a form of ornamental art that is both new and without equal in the Europe of
his contemporaries or in the past. It is an art that is abstract, but yet is not built up of straight geometrical
lines and circular forms. It is an art that has drawn on the forms of plant life that lie behind it to find a
life-like, even life-filled, sense of movement that is carefully held in equilibrium within a clear, strong
sense of the whole”.
Bindesbøll and the silversmiths
Just as was the case throughout most of Europe, Danish silverware design in the latter half of the
nineteenth century was locked rigidly into the artistic idioms of times now past. The historical approach
resulted in the re-use of Renaissance, Baroque, Rococo and Empire styles in quick succession. In search
of new inspiration, people began to seek as far back as the prehistoric. For silverware, the ornamentation
of the Bronze Age and the Viking Age was to provide the new impulse. In Norway, ornamentation
derived from the Viking Age in particular played a role in the Norwegian national regeneration that
followed centuries of foreign rule by Denmark. In Denmark itself, however, Prehistory proved a dead end
as a source of inspiration for the silversmiths.
19
The Nordic Exhibition in 1888 revealed that silverware had remained essentially static since 1872. The
cultural historian R. F. Mejborg (1845-98) had already, in 1885, written (after mentioning Japanese art
and after a reference to the collection of conches in the Zoological Museum as being suitable for
decoration on silverware): “Moreover, I would like to take the liberty of suggesting to these gentlemen
and craftsmen that there may well be good and distinctive motifs at hand around our own coastline, and
that the delicate shades of colour in many types of seaweed might well be admirably suited to attractive
new works of multi-coloured silverware”. However, more than a decade was to pass before any serious
sense of renewal began to take effect.
It is a remarkable fact that although William Morris had started his movement many years previously, and
that furniture and ceramics had undergone their period of change in the 1880s, the renewal in working
with silver only arrived towards the turn of the century, in Denmark as well as in the rest of Europe. It is
also remarkable that the renewal within the silversmith’s craft in Denmark - the basis for Danish
silverware’s internationally recognised position in the twentieth century - did not come from within the
profession itself. It actually came from people with a completely different background altogether - Harald
Slott-Møller (1864-1937), Mogens Ballin (1871-1914) and Johan Rohde (1856-1935) were painters,
while N. G. Henriksen (1855-1922) and Georg Jensen (1866-1935) were sculptors, although the latter was
also a trained silversmith, and Bindesbøll was an architect. This process of revival began in the A.
Michelsen workshops, the largest and the leading silversmithy in Denmark. However, the real “modern
breakthrough” came from the new workshops of Mogens Ballin, Georg Jensen and Holger Kyster.
The growing body of criticism of poor quality, cheap silverware led to several of the manufacturers of
silverware beginning to work with some of the leading contemporary artists in order to find designs that
were suitable for industrial production, but which at the same time also maintained a certain level of
artistic quality. The proprietor of the A. Michelsen workshops at that time, Carl Michelsen (1853-1921),
was in the vanguard of the move towards renewal in the silversmith’s profession and he opened the doors
of his workshops for new artists such as Harald Slott-Møller and Thorvald Bindesbøll. In the Paris
Exhibition in 1900 a very large stand from the A. Michelsen workshops presented works of both
historical and modern nature. However, it was the works of a historical nature and the more naturalistic
works depicting motifs borrowed from nature that received most attention. The real modern renewal that
lay in the work of Bindesbøll attracted less attention.
At the time when Bindesbøll began design work for A. Michelsen, he was at the culmination of a career
in ceramics, and his silverware proved strongly influenced by his work with clay. Bindesbøll’s dilemma
was that he was able to implement his own intentions when working in clay, but when it came to
silverware he was always dependent on the craftsmanship skills of the silversmith as a mediator between
his sketches and the finished product. As one critic wrote about Slott-Møller and Bindesbøll: “One has to
ignore the craftsmanship aspects and look solely at the artistic result, as these artists soon reveal their lack
of technical knowledge about the material for which they produce designs”. In an obituary for Bindesbøll,
professor Vilhelm Wanscher wrote: ”His ideal was that the craftsmen should themselves be in possession
of so much culture that they could work independently. He himself put this ideal into practice in
architecture and in his drawings and in his ceramics, whereas he can hardly be said to have achieved this
freedom as a silversmith, because he was dependent on craftsmen who were not in tune with his methods
and because he perhaps was tied”. Wanscher also felt that Bindesbøll made a mistake in transferring his
botanical ornamentation to silverware, when it was really intended to work within the medium of
drawing. Another critic, Pietro Krohn, director of the Museum of Decorative Art in Copenhagen, wrote:
“His work in silver, executed at Michelsen’s, has powerful and categorical main shapes, and ornaments
that correspond to these shapes and which were created as if to be implemented in metal. In his work,
silver becomes solid and alive. The ornaments do not mean anything in particular, they tell no story, they
merely serve to provide good decoration”. Slightly later, Frederik Kastor Hansen, himself a silversmith,
wrote; “His designs for silverware are so incredibly alive and so impulsive that not even the most
embarrassingly detailed examination can make the items completely boring and lifeless, as can be seen
from those of his works that were produced in the larger workshops and factories”.
20
Today, despite everything said about Bindesbøll’s work, it must be said that his silverware, with its many
different sources of inspiration, created a style that had a profound effect on the silverware of the
Skønvirke period. In terms of both form and decoration, Bindesbøll provided a radical break with
everything that had been seen earlier. His work had great influence on the decorative art in Denmark, and
most decorative artists working in this period were directly influenced by his style - a style that with its
powerful plasticity and intense textural effect left its mark on Danish silverware up until the 1920s, and
which rapidly became sought-after by the silversmiths of the period.
Bindesbøll began his collaboration with the A. Michelsen workshop in Copenhagen at the end of 1897 or
early 1898, with the first drawings and designs dated February 1898. For Michelsen he designed
hollowware, cutlery and jewellery. Shortly afterwards, he was also, but on a smaller scale, engaged in
designing hollowware, cutlery and jewellery for the workshops of P. Hertz and A. Dragsted, both also in
Copenhagen. From 1904 he worked solely with Holger Kyster in Kolding (hollowware, cutlery and
jewellery) with the exception that from 1907 he also had cutlery and jewellery made by Rasmus Jensen in
Horsens at Kyster’s suggestion.
On 27 August 1908, Thorvald Bindesbøll died, almost literally with his designer’s pencil in his hand.
From his sickbed a few days previously, he had send his last drawings for Holger Kyster.
---
21
From art deco to art nouveau dinanderie. When technical evolution go with stylistic evolution
(see french original version below)
DOMINIQUE FOREST
Conservator, Musée des Arts Décoratifs, Paris
During art nouveau and art deco period there was a great revival in french dinanderie. In 1902 Lucien
Bonvallet, who is well known as the main reformer of art nouveau dinanderie, displayed for the first time
many objects in copper repoussé work in the Salon of Society of Fine Arts. In 1913 Museum of
Decorative Arts in Paris devoted a one man exhibition to him. If Lucien Bonvallet was a very influential
pioneer at this period he was very quickly followed by others majors artists such as Henri Husson or Jean
Dunand. He was also the one who introduced a type of objects: vases always constructed with a hammer
and with naturalistic décoration. He was the first to use pure copper alone worked with a hammer. After
having constructed the vase with a hammer he beats the metal from inside, so the decoration appeared in
relief outside. This technique was used by many art nouveau dinandiers: Lucien Bonvallet but also Capon
brothers, Mathieu Gallerey or Jean Dunand.
If Bonvallet is hailed as the father of modern dinanderie, Henri Husson, the other important dinandier of
the period was inspired by symbolist aesthetic; Saint John the Baptist plate in1909, bat vase in 1909, bat
plate in 1905. Also in hammered copper his pieces were made in different ways: in repoussé, in pouring
or inlaying copper in silver. If Husson shares his contemporaries the love of nature he was the only one to
realise Des Esseintes passion for sickly plants. He worked copper and silver like a skin and his techniques
were less simple than those of Bonvallet or Scheidecker. If Bonvallet was a virtuoso in copper repoussé
work, Scheidecker was a virtuoso in the cutting of copper.
The craftsman who bridged the two periods and the two styles was Jean Dunand. His lacquered
dinanderies of twenties, thirties have usually been valued more highly than his work of the art deco
period. Yet Dunand began work in 1905 and he created repoussé works which are very close of those of
Bonvallet. Like his contemporaries he created flowers, animals and so on only by hammering the metal.
His ability to work many kind of metals and his invention around 1907-1908 of incrustations coulées and
new patina have made him the great master in art nouveau and art deco dinanderie.
Few before the war, the number of dinandiers increased during next period. Jean Dunand changed this
craft, traditionnaly associated with base metal into a great decorative art thanks to the size of his pieces
and their somptuous decoration. The simple naked copper of the beginning of the centuty used by
Bonvallet was dead, replaced by red, black and gold.. At the beginning of the century with the renewal of
french dinanderie objects appeared with decoration in relief. Art deco dinanderie make a great change.
Forms are flatened and a new type of décoration, usually geometrical, came hand with hand with
incrustation and patina, sometimes also with lacquer or enamel. Around 1907-1908 Jean Dunand invented
the technic of incrustations coulées which could be said to have “ennobled” anoblir in a way base metal
with new colours totally unknown in traditionnal dinanderie. An artist like Claudius Linossier used the
red patina as a signature. With their geometrical décoration, strong colors and lack of relief art deco
dinanderie is quite different from pieces of 1900-1910. For dinanderie it’s really technical changes which
is doing stylistical changes. Jean Serrière is really unique in that he goes on using simple copper without
inlay and patina. In 1925 an art critic noted about dinanderie that “The only change is, except beautiful
material, the one of frank and bright tones which brushes away pale harmonies of long ago”.
Let us now return to the inlay technic which brought a complete change in dinanderie from 1910-1920.
There are in fact two inlay techniques: l’incrustation au filet and l’incrustation coulée. L’incrustation au
filet consists in inlaying the metal with a burin to put in the groove a metal thread which goes into the
groove. The metal thread gives the pattern which can be either left in relief or levelled. Jean Dunand used
this technique at the beginning of his carreer. Around 1907, 1908 he perfected the technique of
incrustations coulées. Most dinandiers will use this technique of incrustation coulée. Most of dinandiers
would use this new technique.This technique involves fixing one metal on another metal melting it at the
lower temperature. When the metals are fully mixed, the dinandier adds the patina with a blowlamp and
acid. These two processes (inlay and patina) gave dinanderie totally new colors.
22
The explosion of colors made possible by inlay and patina will increase further with the use of another
pechnique: lacquer. Dunand earned this technique in 1912 and it became the foundation of his work after
1918. His most impressive work will derived from that; vases with wings like attachments, vases
incrusted with eggshell.
The discovery of these two techniques ( lacquer and mainly inlay coulées ) by french dinandiers brought a
golden age of dinanderie in 1920-1930. The use of dinanderie diversified. For example it was used for
furniture with Dunand; Above all many artists became interested in this “art of the past” as one art critic
described dinanderie at the beginning of the century. Among art deco dinandiers we can name Jean
Dunand, Claudius Linossier but also Laurent Llaurensou, Paul Louis Mergier. The famous goldsmith
Christofle created a dinanderie collection designed by Luc Lanel.
Vase ”Ecailles” (Scales)
Christofle & Cie., Paris
Design Luc Lanel before 1926
Copper, partially silverplate
This interest of a great goldsmith in dinanderie reveals the extent to which it had won over a large public;
Dinanderies by Christofle were not however unique pieces constructed with the hammer like the artisanal
pieces They were made by using mechanical procedures and consequently in considerable number. One
can thus say that within a matter of a few years the technical evolution of dinanderie was accompanied by
a truly spectacular stylistic development and at the same time by an unprecedented enthusiasm for the
technique.
De la dinanderie art deco à la dinanderie nouveau.
Quand l'évolution technique accompagne l'évolution stylistique
La dinanderie française va connaître dans la période art nouveau art déco un très grand renouveau. En
1902 Lucien Bonvallet, que tous saluent comme le rénovateur de la dinanderie art nouveau, expose pour
la première fois de nombreux cuivres repoussés au Salon de la Société des Beaux Arts et en 1913 le
musée des arts décoratifs de Paris lui consacre une exposition personnelle. Si Lucien Bonvallet fut dans
cette période un pionnier très vite suivi par deux autres artistes majeurs: Henri Husson et Jean Dunand, il
fut aussi celui qui imposa un certain type de pièces: des vases toujours montés au marteau au décor
naturaliste repoussé. Le premier il fait la part belle au cuivre nu simplement travaillé au marteau. Après
avoir monté la pièce au marteau, sa technique consiste à repousser le métal par l’intérieur de manière à ce
que le motif apparaisse en saillie à l’extérieur. Cette technique va être utilisée par de nombreux dinandiers
art nouveau: Lucien Bonvallet mais aussi les frères Capon, Mathieu Gallerey ou Jean Dunand.
Si Bonvallet est salué comme le père de la dinanderie moderne Henri Husson, l’autre très grand dinandier
de cette période, va ancre son œuvre dans l’esthétique symboliste: plat Tête de Saint Jean Baptiste de
1909, vase chauve souris de 1909, assiette chauve souris vers 1905. Egalement en cuivre martelé les
décors de ses pièces sont obtenus de plusieurs manières: au repoussé, en coulant ou en incrustant de
l’argent. Si Husson partage avec ses contemporains le goût de de la nature lui seul a su donner vie à la
passion de Des Esseintes, le héros de Huysmans, pour les plantes délétères. Il traite le cuivre et l'argent
comme un épiderme et ses techniques sont moins simples que celles d’un Bonvallet ou d’un Scheidecker.
Si Bonvallet est un virtuose du cuivre repoussé, Scheidecker est un virtuose du cuivre découpé.
23
Celui qui va faire la transition entre deux époques et entre deux styles est Jean Dunand. Ses dinanderies
laquées des années 20 –30 ont souvent éclipsées son travail d’avant la guerre, pourtant Dunand est actif
dès 1905 et il réalise alors des œuvres au repoussé très proches de celles de Bonvallet. Comme ses
contemporains il fait naître fleurs et animaux du seul martelage du métal. Sa capacité à travailler toutes
sortes de métaux et son invention vers 1907-1908 des incrustations coulées et de nouvelles patines en font
le grand maître de la dinanderie art nouveau et art déco.
Peu élevé avant la guerre le nombre des dinandiers s'acrroit dans la période suivante. Jean Dunand
transforme cet art, qui est théoriquement un artisanat des métaux pauvres, en un art d'apparat par la taille
des pièces mais surtout par la richesse des décors. Fini le cuivre nu du début du siècle comme pouvait
l'utiliser Bonvallet. Vive le rouge, le noir et l'or! Comme nous l’avons vu le renouveau de la dinanderie au
début du siècle avait vu l'apparition d'œuvres repoussées et ciselées, cette technique permettant d’obtenir
des motifs en relief qui dispensaient de tout autre ajout. La dinanderie art déco opére un changement
radical. Les formes s’aplanissent et les décors, généralement géométriques, sont obtenus par incrustations
et patines, parfois aussi par laque ou émail. Vers 1907-1908 Jean Dunand inaugure la technique des
incrustations coulées qui permet d’ »annoblir » en quelque sorte les métaux pauvres grâce à des couleurs
totalement inconnnues dans la dinanderie traditionnelle. Un artiste comme Claudius Linossier fera du
rouge sa véritable Signature. Par leur décor géométrique, leurs couleurs franches et l’absence de tout
relief la dinanderie art déco tranche singulièrement avec toutes les pièces des années 1900-1910. On peut
dire que dans le cas de la dinanderie c’est vraiment un changement de technique qui a accompagné un
changement stylistique. Si un artiste comme Jean Serrière continue à préférer le cuivre nu et brut sans
incrustations et patines, c’est un cas unique. En 1925 un critique note à propos de la dinanderie que « Le
seul divertissement admis est, outre le jeu des belles matières celui des tons francs et vifs qui ont chassés
les pâles harmonies d’autrefois ».
Peut être faut-il revenir sur la technique des incrustations à l’origine d’une complète métamorphose de la
dinanderie à partir des années 1910-1920.
Il existe en fait deux techniques d’incrustation: l’incrustation au filet et l’incrustation coulée.
L’incrustation au filet consiste à entailler le métal à l’aide d’un burin puis à mettre dans le sillon ainsi
creusé un fil métallique qui, frappé, entre dans l’entaille. Le fil donne alors un motif que l’on peut soit
laisser en relief soit aplanir au même niveau. Jean Dunand utilise cette technique au début de sa carrière.
Surtout vers 1907-1908 il met au point la technique des incrustations coulées. Et la plupart des dinandiers
uriliseront ensuite cette technique qui va véritablement révolutionner la dinanderie. Il s’agit de fixer sur le
métal un autre métal en le fondant à une température moindre. Quand les métaux sont fondus le dinandier
va ensuite patiner au chalumeau et à l’acide la pièce. Ce sont ces deux procédés (incrustation et patine)
qui donnent à la dinanderie des couleurs aussi variées et tout à fait inconnues jusque là.
L’irruption de la couleur rendue possible dans la dinanderie par les incrustations et les patines va aller
grandissant avec l’utilisation d’une autre technique: la laque. Dunand s’initie à cette technique dès 1912
mais celle-ci ne devient la base de son travail qu’après 1918. Ses réalisations les plus spectaculaires
naîtront de là; vases à ailettes, vases incrustés de coquilles d’œuf.
24
La découverte de ces deux techniques, la laque et surtout les incrustations coulées, par les dinandiers
français va donc permettre un véritable âge d’or de la dinanderie dans ces années 1920-1930. D’une part
les applications de la dinanderie se diversifient. Elle est par exemple utilisée pour du mobilier en
particulier avec Jean Dunand. Surtout de très nombreux artiste s’intéressent à cet « art d’autrefois »
comme la critique qualifiait la dinanderie au début du siècle. Parmi les grands dinandiers art déco nous
pouvons citer Dunand et Linossier mais aussi Laurent Llaurensou, Paul Louis Mergier. Surtout une
maison d’orfevrerie comme Christofle va créer une ligne dinanderie dessinée par Luc Lanel. Cet intérêt
d’une grande maison d’orfèvrerie pour la dinanderie montre bien à quel point cet art a su conquérir un
vaste public. Les dinanderies de Christofle ne sont pas des pièces uniques montées au marteau comme
dans le cas des productions artisanales que nous avons vues jusque là mais des pièces ayant recours à des
procédés mécaniques pour pouvoir être produit en plus grand nombre. On peut donc dire qu’en quelques
années seulement l’évolution technique de la dinanderie s’est accompagné d’une évolution stylistique tout
à fait spectaculaire et du même coup d’un engouement sans précédent pour cette technique.
---
25
Jean E. Puiforcat: New Discoveries
GAIL S. DAVIDSON
Assistant Curator of Drawings and Prints, Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum, New York
The French silversmith, Jean E. Puiforcat (1897-1945), ranks among the greatest twentieth-century
designers of silver tabletop objects. This paper discusses a recent gift to Cooper-Hewitt, National Design
Museum, Smithsonian Institution of more than one hundred Jean E. Puiforcat drawings, as weIl as
archival documents and photographs, and how this material adds to our knowledge of this great master of
modern silver. Puiforcat began his professional career following World War I, at a critical time for French
decorative arts industries. Stung by the successful 1910 showing in Paris of modern German design,
critics challenged French designers to create new forms expressive of contemporary life that would
restore to France the leadership position it had always held in decorative arts and design. Jean E. Puiforcat
was one of several French silversmiths who experimented with the “new” hollowware designs and
flatware. Working in a reductivist process between 1921 and 1923, he pared-down any applied historicist
or art nouveau vegetal ornament on his silver models and adopted simple, classical fluting that
emphasized the swelling volumes and curving contours of his vessels. Before the 1925 Paris Exposition
International des Ans Décoratifs et Modernes, Puiforcat invented dramatic cubist-inspired centerpieces
and tea services with stepped bases and angular bodies augmented with wood or semiprecious stones.
When these objects were exhibited at the 1925 Paris Exposition, Puiforcat was hailed as the major French
silver designer of his time. But his greatest achievements were to come.
While drawn to geometric forms in mid-1920s, it was only in the late 1920s that Puiforcat became more
knowledgeable about using mathematics to achieve perfect, precisely calculated, spare, geometric
volumes. Mathematics and science had been common interests among French avant-garde painters,
architects, and designers since the late teens. Puiforcat must have become interested in mathematics
through conversations with his designer friends and colleagues including Pierre Chareau, René Herbst. He
also would have read or heard about Le Corbusier’s interest in the golden section and its application to
architecture. He could weIl have known Matila Ghyka’s discussion of design and the golden section in his
1927 book Esthétique des Proportions dans La Nature et dans Les Arts (Paris, Gallimard). The golden
section (described as the division of a line so that the smaller section is to the larger section as the larger
section is to the length of the whole line) is also known as “divine proportion” since this ratio, according
to the Greeks, was found in every living object, induding the movements of the planets.
The impact on Puiforcat of the current vogue for matbematics appears in his silver pieces of 1927–1929
when he created his sparest and purest objects, such as a 1929 Silver Vase (collection Torsten Bröhan) in
the form of a cylinder intersected by a three-dimensional parallelogram. By late 1929 and certainly by
1930, just at the moment when he became a founding member of the avant-garde design group Union des
Artistes Modernes, Puiforcat began to incorporate the golden section and other mathematical ratios in the
design process.
His more sophisticated application of mathematical proportions is documented in the drawings now
owned by Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum. A Design for a Silver Box, 1934 (1995-164-43), for
example, shows the mathematical tracing lines, that Puiforcat called “traces harmoniques”, underlying the
composition of the box. Furthermore, in the drawing’s lower right corner, the draftsman included the
Greek letter phi symbolizing the golden section. The creator of this drawing would have been one of the
employees at Puiforcat Orfèvre, who the designer presumably trained in making the necessary
mathematical calculations to prepare such a drawing. The silversmith was living and working most of the
time in St. Jean-de-Luz where in 1929 he had built a house for his family. He probably sent bis rough
design sketches to Paris where assistants prepared drawings to “correct” the proportions of the designs so
they conformed to the required mathematical ratios.
Mathematics and the golden section appealed to Puiforcat’s own aesthetic and strong religious beliefs. In
addition, he discovered that he could market himself and the uniqueness of his silver creations by
stressing the mathematical purity of his designs as compared with those of contemporary French silver
firms.
26
The Art of Adaptation—Aspects of 20th Century Danish Silver
JÖRG SCHWANDT
Expert in Danish Silver and Art Dealer, Berlin
Danish silver would never have attained its prominent role in the 20th century if it had not been for the
great success of the Georg Jensen Silversmithy. Like an enormous flagship the Jensen Silversmithy has
been ploughing the waves, allowing a number of other silversmithies to follow in its wake.
But it is often forgotten that there existed a much smaller piloting vessel that consequently went ahead to
show the new way. And it is just as often overseen that at certain times the flagship fell back and had to
leave the leading role to one or another of the smaller ships.
Be it piloting ship, flagship or those taking the lead in between, Danish silver has a common trait. That is
the ability to recognize an important artistical or technical change, often occuring in another country, even
in another material, and, instead of copying a style slavishly, adapting it to the given artistic and technical
possibilities and thus transferring the very idea of it.
Adaptation not in the sense of imitating a successful style but in the sense of transporting an idea to keep
it alive on a new feeding ground.
Vase
Mogens Ballin, Copenhagen, design pre-1907, execution 1915
Cast pewter
The piloting ship was the metal workshop of the symbolistic painter Mogens Ballin. When he in 1899
transferred the revolutionary “arts and crafts” principle to Danish metalwork, his way of adaptation was
both a stylistical and a sociological renewal. The stylistical change towards symbolism, much influenced
by japonism, is not so bold and can be found in Bindesbøll’s, later Jensen’s works and certainly in the
Viennese school.
Much more important, and already at that time showing one of the significant lines of development in
Danish 20th century silver, was the sociological change. Simple materials like pewter or silver and
cabochon-finished gem stones, and a mildly rationalized way of handicrafting opened the way to a broad
bourgeois clientele.
A way, which Georg Jensen, who from 1901 until 1904 was head of Ballin’s workshop, continued when
he opened his own workshop in 1904. Building upon Ballin’s special ability to show the material
character of silver, Jensen introduced his very special floral naturalism. A naturalism, baroque at times,
very controlled and stylized at other times, but always of an enormous technical solidity.
Most of the Jensen Silversmithy’s success can be attributed to this specific Jensen-style, which kept
echoeing through Europe until long after the art nouveau period’s end. However, nearly one hundred
years of successful survival of a vulnerable thing like a silversmithy would never have been possible
without considerable organisational adaptations which Jensen willingly undertook or was forced to do.
27
Footed Bowl
Georg Jensen sølvsmede, Copenhagen
Design Georg Jensen 1912
Silver
The technical and economical part of the smithy’s reorganisation begins with a reasonable rationalization
of production, where handicraft is tedious and inefficient. Further steps towards a manufactural
enlargement, taken by Jensen already after a few years, are serial production, a widening of the capital
basis by issueing stocks, and a market expansion throughout Europe’s leading capitals.
Perhaps the most important adaptation, securing the survival of the Jensen Silversmithy, has been a
graduate but constant change of style, which early breaks away from art nouveau’s ample decorations.
Johan Rohde, painter and furniture designer, introduced an architectural strictness, which eventually
confined the decorative elements to few technically or statically important places. Preparing the smithy
for the art déco and functionalist periods, when the classical decorative style of Jensen himself was full
alive.
Such diversity of style was consequently developed by working with silversmiths and designers of
differing expressions. Paired with great technical solidity as sign of corporate identity, artistical diversity
proved to be the best guarantee for a constant adaptation process.
Up to the middle of the century Denmark was a small country with a population mostly orientated on
agriculture. So, in 1925, there was no considerable mundane upperclass to spend a lot of money on
luxuries, like for example in France. That is why there was no chance for the demonstratively luxurious
type of art déco silver to develop in Denmark.
In spite, there was a clear tendency towards a sober functionalism, showing in Kay Fisker’s jug of 1927
for A. Michelsen Silversmithy, which is spun in one piece. And there was an enormous interest for the
Bauhaus ideal of rationalized production with its new aesthetics.
Wine Jug
A. Michelsen, Copenhagen
Design Kay Fisker, ca. 1927
Sterling silver
Again, from 1928 onwards, at the Frantz Hingelberg Silversmithy in Århus, a Danish silversmith, Svend
Weihrauch, grasped a revolutional idea, the Bauhaus idea, and adapted it to the daily production of the
typical little craftsman workshop.
28
Tea Pot
Hingelberg silversmithy, Aarhus
Design Svend Weihrauch, 1938
Sterling silver, ebonite
The consequent use of rationalizing techniques like spinning, of rationalizing work organisation (division
of labour) and of the synthetic material ebonite to rationalize the making of isolated handles, and at the
same time refraining from a possible serial production, brought about surprising aesthetic results. What
was experimental and sporadic at the Bauhaus metal workshop, developed consequently in the hands of
Weihrauch and became a new kind of craftsman-culture.
A craftsman-culture which Weihrauch carried on from the stereometrical forms of the 1930’ies to the
organical forms of the 40’ies and 50’ies. Probably not the last example of successful adaptation in Danish
silver, but certainly one we Germans must be thankful for. By keeping the Bauhaus ideals alive,
Weihrauch gave us the chance to pick up a thread of aesthetic culture, which we so brutally have cut off.
Selected publications by Jörg Schwandt:
· WMF Glas - Keramik - Metall 1925-1950. Versuche künstlerischer Gestaltung, exhib. cat. Berlin
(Kunstgewerbemuseum) e. a. 1980/81
· Dänisches Silber des 20. Jahrhunderts. Teil I: Der Weg zum Jensen-Stil. Teil II: Funktionalismus,
dreißiger und vierziger Jahre. Teil III: Fünfziger und sechziger Jahre, in: Weltkunst 57 (1987)
Nr. 22-24, pp. 3412-3415, 3590-3593 and 3686-3689
· Svend Weihrauch 1928-1956. Silber. Ein dänischer Funktionalist (Skrifter fra Museet på Koldinghus 4),
exhib. cat. Kolding (Museet på Koldinghus) - Leipzig (Grassimuseum) - Köln (Museum für
Angewandte Kunst) 1998, Kolding 1998
· together with Poul Dedenroth-Schou and Bent Gabrielsen: Karl Gustav Hansen. Silber 1930-1994,
exhib. cat. Kolding 1994
---
29
The Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof is one of the very few institutions in Europe providing a department
exclusively devoted to silver. It thereby emphasizes and helps to revive the rank that silver always had in
the representation of a houshold.
Teapot ”Mireille”
Wolfers Frères, Brussels
Design Philippe Wolfers (?), ca. 1926
Silver (833/1000), palisander
List of Publications on Metalware
WIM NYS
scientific assistant, Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof-Zilvercentrum, Deurne
· M. Ceuterick & W. Nys, Augsburgs zilver in België = L'orfèvrerie d'Augsbourg en Belgique =
Augsburger Goldschmiedekunst in Belgien = Augsburg Silver in Belgium, Antwerpen, 1994.
· R. Steel & W. Nys, Art-decozilver: Antwerpen - Brussel - Gent = Art Deco Silver: Antwerp - Brussels Ghent, (Sterckshof Studies ; 3), Antwerpen, 1996. Bevat: W. Nys, Tentoonstellingen tijdens het
interbellum en hun invloed op de ontwikkeling van de Belgische art-deco-edelsmeedkunst =
Exhibitions during the interwar period and their influence on the development of Belgium's art deco
silver production, p. 47-61.
· W. Nys, Het edelsmeedwerk, in: A. Demey, D. De Smet, K. Goethals & W. Nys, De Sint-Antoniuskerk
te Sint-Niklaas : drie eeuwen sobere barok,(Kleine cultuurgidsen), Gent, 1996, p. 59-64.
· W. Nys, Zilver uit de 18de, de 19de en de 20ste eeuw, in: N. Van Campenhout & R. Van Daele (red.),
Van academie tot museum : een bundel studies n.a.v. het eeuwfeest van het Stedelijk Museum van
Lokeren, Brugge, 1996, p. 93-97.
· W. Nys, 18de-eeuws Bevers zilver ? : enkele bedenkingen omtrent de ‘zilversmid’ Joannes Wilhelmus
Heck en de horlogemaker Petrus Franciscus de Dobbelaer te Beveren, in: Het Land van Beveren, jg. 40
(1997) nr. 1, p. 23-28.
· W. Nys, Twee werken van Nicolas Joseph Rosart (ca. 1713-1750) in de Sint-Laurentiuskerk te Lokeren
?, in: De Souvereinen, jg. 28 (1997) nr. 1, p. 1-10.
· W. Nys, De Brusselse meester met vis : Dieudonné Robert, subaltern zilversmid voor Temse vanaf
1750, in: Jaarboek Gemeentemuseum van Temse. Jaarboek 1996, Temse, 1997, p. 41-61.
· W. Nys, De Wase edelsmeden in de 18de eeuw : een status quaestionis, in: Annalen van de Koninklijke
Oudheidkundige Kring van het Land van Waas, dl. 100 (1997), p. 105-177.
· L. De Ren, A.-M. Claessens-Peré & W. Nys, De Zilvercollectie = The Silver Collection, (Sterckshof
Studies ; 9), Antwerpen, 1997.
· W. Nys, Van belle époque tot art nouveau = De la Belle époque à l'Art Nouveau = Von der Belle
époque zum Jugendstil = From Belle époque to Art Nouveau. Belgisch zilver 1868-1914 = L'orfèvrerie
belge 1868-1914 = Belgisches Silber 1868-1914 =Belgian silver 1868-1914, (Sterckshof Studies 10),
Antwerpen, 1998.
· W. Meuris & W. Nys, Merkwaardige kerkschatten van de Sint-Jacobuskerk van Haasdonk, in: A. De
Witte & W. Van Dam, Catalogus bij de tentoonstelling Herinneringen aan de Boerenkrijg en
merkwaardige kerkschatten te Haasdonk. 12, 13, 19, 20 september 1998 Sint-Jacobuskerk, Haasdonk,
Haasdonk, 1998.
· W. Nys, Fleurons de l'orfèvrerie belge de la Belle Epoque, in: L'objet d'art, nr. 328, oktober 1998, p. 1011.
· W. Nys, “Eenen silveren cop ofte ciborie” bij testament aan de Sint-Martinuskerk van Beveren
geschonken (1768), in: Het Land van Beveren, jg. 41 (1998) nr. 4, p. 153-155.
· W. Nys (m.m.v. F. Buys & P. Verheyen), Petrus Nijs (1798-1849) zilversmid te Beveren, in: Het Land
van Beveren, jg. 42 (1999) nr. 1, p. 30-34.
30
· W. Nys, Edelsmeedwerk Abdij Keizersberg, in: Wandelcataloog bij de tentoonstelling “100 jaar Abdij
Keizersberg. 1899-1999, Leuven, 1999, p. 22-26, nrs 115-132.
· W. Nys, Koninklijk zilver voor volk en vorst. 1830-2000, in: Bulletin VPMA, 15 (2000) 3, p. 5.
· W. Nys, Technische tekeningen uit het atelier Simonet en Vansteeger (Brussel) naar schenkkannen van
Petrus Gabriël Germain en Joseph Germain Dutalis (Brussel), in: J.-P. Van Rijen (red.), De Stavelij in
zilver. 25 jaar zilverclub, s.l., 2000, p. 301-304.
· W. Nys, Aanwinsten Provinciaal Museum Sterckshof-Zilvercentrum, in: Newsletter, 15, p. 28-31.
· W. Nys, Koninklijk zilver voor volk en vorst = Orfèvrerie royale pour le peuple et le roi = Königliches
Silber für Volk und König = Royal Silver for People and King, (Sterckshof Studies ; 17), AntwerpenDeurne, 2001.
· W. Nys, Koninklijk zilver uit de prijzenkast van het 11e linieregiment. De ‘Coupe du Roi Albert’ en de
‘Coupe Prince Léopold’, (Kunst in de kijker 103), Hasselt, 2001.
· W. Nys, Ontwerpen voor zilver = Designs for silver, (Sterckshof Studies 18), Antwerpen-Deurne, 2001.
· W. Nys, Een koninklijk geschenk voor de Abdij Keizersberg te Leuven. Edelsmeedwerk van Dom
Martin (1889-1965) door koningin Elisabeth (1876-1965) aan de Abdij Keizersberg te Leuven
geschonken, in: Bulletin VPMA, 15 (2000) 4, p. 3-4.
· W. Nys, Edelsmeedwerk voor de Lokerse Sint-Laurentiuskerk, in: N. Van Campenhout, De SintLaurentiuskerk te Lokeren in woord en beeld, Lokeren, 2001, p. 116-134.
---
31
Functionalism? Formalism?
Questioning Marianne Brandt’s Tea-infuser
KLAUS WEBER
Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin
My intention is to give a closer look at and some short reflections about one of the icons of 20th century
design, an object synonymous with the so called Bauhaus style: Marianne Brandt’s famous tea infuser,
designed in 1924 and made in the Bauhaus metal workshop as model number MT 49.
An icon—there is a quite inflationary use of this word nowadays—, generally is an object not only highly
estimated and admired, but first of all an object of worship or veneration. In the case of our teapot this
admiration and—in a way—even veneration is manifest in the fascination of our visitors by this small
object, and in the numberless quotations or illustrations in books on modern design. It appears—for
example—most prominently on the cover of the British Museum catalogue on Modern Decorative Arts,
and of course on the cover of Marianne Brandt's biography published last year. And the poster the
Bauhaus-Archiv produced for the metalwork exhibition of 1992, using a blow up of the infuser, was
among our best sold posters ever. No question that it had to be placed on our own catalogue cover, too. In
Sotheby's Concise Encyclopedia of Silver it is used as a frontispice and combined with Giulio Romano's
mannerist painting of a mythological festivity (The Banquet of Psyche) gathered around a fantastic
treasure of gold and silver. Finally in 1998 the image of Marianne Brandt's infuser reached the top of its
popularity and its maximum of circulation as well being used on a postage stamp of the German mail.
And of course this high estimation is reflected by high prices: The last version on the market (in silver)
has been sold by Lempertz, Cologne, for no less than DM 340 000 in 1997, another silver version for
about a quarter of a million Dutch Guilders at Christie's Amsterdam in 1989: both belonging to the
highest prices ever paid for single objects from the Bauhaus workshops.
And finally there are fakes. Not yet false marianne Brandt teapots, as far as I can see. But at least we have
been confronted with a most doubtful drawing representing some very peculiar tea infusers and
pretending to be made by Marianne Brandt in 1924.
The Bauhaus-Archiv keeps one version of the small teapot made of brass, further versions in nonprecious metals are treasured in the collections of the Bauhaus Museum Weimar and the Germanisches
Nationalmuseum Nürnberg, both made of bronze for the body and nickel silver for foot and spout. The
British Museum keeps a fine silver version. Finally there has been another slightly different version,
documented only in photographs from 1925.
So we know at least seven versions in all today, possibly there have been a few more: a small number,
indeed, according to the intention of industrial mass production so often declared as a program at the
Bauhaus. But it is much in relation to other products coming from the metal workshop: many of these
things were made as unique prototypes only.
The purpose of the small teapot is to keep a strong infusion of tea, to be thinned down with hot water. Its
size is that of a teacup, the total height from the base to the upper tip of the handle being about 7,5 cm
(measure is taken from our piece, the different versions are varying in size only up to a few millimeters).
The hand raised body, standing on a cross-shaped base, has a hemispherical shape with a flat top, the
diameter is 10 cm (H 5 cm). The opening framed by a low cylindrical rim is placed excentrically near the
handle, and closed by a flat inserted lid with a cylindrical knob in our version. A pierced silver strainer is
inside.The short tubular spout is slightly narrowing towards the horizontal mouth. The ebony handle is
mounted tangentially in a rectangular position. In our copy it doesn’t show the exact semicircular form of
the other versions: here the curved outline is slightly irregular.
1st question: Is it functionalistic design?
Perhaps we should start with a definition of the term functionalism. Last year the Bauhaus Archive
presented the work of the famous Japanese graphic designer Ikko Tanaka. He found a very simple
definition for what he tried to do in designing elements of corporate identity for his customers: “Easy to
32
draw and easy to use”. Adapted to our subject this would mean: easy to make and easy to use. This
certainly cannot be said, for example, about a teapot by Theodor Wende, made in the same period as our
tea infuser, but nevertheless labelled “functionalistic” in a recent publication. It certainly is not easy to
make, nor easy to use.
If we apply usability as a criterion of functionalism to our teapot, than there is, perhaps contrary to some
expectations, a quite acceptable result. It pours out the liquid without dripping (to be true, I dared to try
some years ago, and very carefully, indeed). Marianne Brandt herself once reported that no vessel left the
metal workshop without a pouring test. Perhaps the shape of the small handle to be held between thumb
and first finger is not an ideal solution from the using point of view. And maybe the centre of gravity is
not in the ideal place, but I think that all this can be neglected in view of the very small amount of liquid
in the pot. There has been given a functional reason, too, for the excentric position of the opening: In an
essay written by Wagenfeld in 1924 he told, that this should prevent dripping when holding the pot too
steep. But in fact this hardly seems necessary if the lid is stucked in the opening, thus hermetically closed.
If we take a simple production process, also compatible to machine production, as criterion of
functionalism, than our teapot can hardly be called functional. It does look very simple at the first sight,
but in fact there are too many components shaped too complicated. All these components have to be
assembled with a lot of handwork and very precisely: the foot, for example, is made of three separate
parts, which have to be cut out one by one to fit to the profile of the body, then arranged to form the cross
shape and finally soldered to the bottom. A simple ring certainly would do it better and easier as well. The
exactly formed halfsphere of the body had to be hand-raised, because there were no machines for
spinning in the metal workshop at this time. There always has been a fundamental error at the Bauhaus
workshops in believing that simple—and this meant geometric—forms could also be simply made and, in
consequence, produced industrially.
The infuser definitely is a work of handcraft, to be done by a trained silversmith, requiring a considerable
amount of time. In fact there has never been, as far as we know, any interest by an industrial manufacturer
to produce this model. This scepticism continues even in our days: Alberto Alessi, making the choice
from our metal objects for a reedition of Bauhaus metalwork, really loved the infuser, but he told us: even
with modern technologies the making would be far to complicated to sell it at a reasonnable price. In fact
Alessi had to solve a lot of technical problems to produce some other apparently simple designs from the
Bauhaus, as for example Marianne Brandt’s ashtray, also based on a hemisphere, or Przyrembels purely
cylindric tea container.
And anyway “nobody needs a tea infuser today”, he said. In fact there has been a striking fascination with
tea utensils, tea machines and samovars at the Bauhaus. We know at least five types of these machines
from the metal workshop designed by Jukker, Wagenfeld, Josef Knau, Gyula Pap and by Marianne
Brandt, too. Normally the Samovar includes a small teapot for the infusion. Brandt's model is an extract
teapot to be used independently, without samovar. Hardly anybody will prepare his tea this way today.
2nd question: Is it formalistic?
Reduction to a vocabulary of elementary forms is a basic feature of Bauhaus products. It has two
preconditions: Johannes Ittens studies of primary form in his famous basic course were continued in the
workshops. One of the standard exercises there was constructing a vessel out of cylinder, sphere or conus,
like these three vessels made by an unknown student about 1921.
Itten's courses were continued in Summer 1923 by the Hungarian constructivist painter László MoholyNagy. And Marianne Brandt was among his first students. Moholy-Nagy also became artistic director—or
master of form—of the metal workshop, together with the silversmith Christian Dell, technical director or
master of craft, as he and his colleagues in the other workshops were called.
Without any doubt there was a formal influence of master Moholy's own artistic works on his students.
His linocut compositions from the same year 1924 for example include elements as crosses and circle
segments arranged and balanced on a plane. Here we meet all the formal components of our tea infuser,
still limited to two dimensions.
This must have been the starting point for Marianne Brandt: to create a three dimensional object—it
33
happened to be a tea infuser—strictly using these components being propagated as a sort of formal dogma
inside the Bauhaus. ”Form and function always have to be designed clearly, one being the result of the
other”, her colleague Wilhelm Wagenfeld wrote in 1924, “And the formal reduction to primary elements
was the necessary counterpart.” (“Immer müssen Form und Funktion eine eindeutige Gestaltung erlangen,
in der eines das andere ergibt. Die Reduzierung der Form auf ihre einfachsten Elemente—Kugel,
Zylinder, Konus, Kegel—war eine notwendige Parallele”)
Marianne Brandt herself has reported another reason: she later wrote that “we were crazy about simple
forms, because we were so much closer to the kitsch of historism then” (“auf einfache Formen versessen
[...] weil uns der Kitsch der Gründerzeit [...] noch viel näher war.”).
Probably there has been a short evolutionary development leading to the final result of our infuser. The
Weimar Museum keeps another small teapot by Marianne Brandt in exactly the same dimensions: here
the starting point is a spherical shape of the same diameter, equally mounted on a cruciform base. The
wooden handle is similar, but provided with a deep oval hollow cut out for a better grip, thus strangely
reminding the shape a human ear. The asymetrical opening here has been cut off diagonally from the
upper part of the globe, the lid being fixed with a hinge.
The result looks extremly disharmonic, badly balanced, and apparently difficult to use: filled with tea this
pot would simply be to heavy to hold it comfortable between two fingers. Consequently the globe has
been cut in half horizontally, thus reducing volume and weight—and there we are. Perhaps her teacher
Moholy-Nagy had an eye on Marianne Brandt's work in this crucial stage of the formal experiment?
Finally we have the photographic document of a second spherical version, now provided with a simple
tubular handle, thereby adding a much more conventional aspect. This version, indeed, is reminding
Christopher Dresser's spherical teapots, but it can be taken for sure that Marianne Brandt didn't know
them at this time.
Perhaps Marianne Brandt had in mind to use the geometrical elements consequently as a sort of
construction kit, as her colleagues in the Bauhaus pottery did: just leave away the functional components
of the teapot, and you get an ashtray. In fact she designed two versions of a hemispherical ashtray, in a
slightly different proportion. But: the ashtray doesn't have the cross-shaped foot of the infuser, instead
there are only three bars arranged radially like a Mercedes Benz star. Perhaps it has been made this way
to correspond with the triangular opening on top. Anyway: the result is a loss of stability. This certainly
can be called formalism.
The formal evolution we have seen may be described by this very free variation of a famous sentence
(attributed to Louis Sullivan): At first there was form, then followed function. Marianne Brandt started
with an artistic idea, and finally succeded to create a fascinating and usable design, combining a certain
naïvity with utmost radicality. When we look at this small infuser and some other early works by
Marianne Brandt—like her famous silver tea set including a closely related teapot—we always have to
keep in mind one important and really amazing fact: they were created by a first year apprentice without
any specific experience. Working as an expressionist painter before at the Weimar art school, she didn't
have the slightest training in doing metalwork or even in designing threedimensional objects. That’s why
some of her works done by herself in this period are—it can't be denied—of low technical quality to the
critical eye of an expert. But is there another apprentice in the silversmith craft who succeeded in getting
a top place in art history with his very first trial works?
Our small teapot with it’s striking simplicity: Is it functionalistic or formalistic? Perhaps we can say: It is
a piece of formalistic design that works, as we have seen. But that's not enough to make it so famous.
Maybe there are further reasons. It just seems to focus the ideas of the early Bauhaus years: Bauhaus in a
Nutshell. A concise symbolic object definitely meaning: Bauhaus. Moreover there is no doubt that it
owns the charming attitude of a miniature, able to attract emotions, in fact an object for a collector's
showcase more than for the table. In a way there also is a parallel to the miniature versions of modern
classic furniture, the cute little Wassily chairs, offered in many museum shops.
A contemporary admirator once wrote about Brandt’s teapot: “How elegant this “prosaic” functionality
34
can be, how refined, how pleasing, even how playful!” (“Wie elegant, wie raffiniert, wie gefällig, ja
spielerisch doch die ‘nüchterne’ Sachlichkeit eigentlich sein kann!”). Indeed: elegant, pleasing and
playful, these are characteristics usually not applied to the design of functionalism. Finally: a recent
poster advertising the “International Marianne Brandt Contest” for designers even combined the image of
her infuser with the title “The Poetry of the Functional”.
Poetry? This reminds Puiforcats sentence we heard yesterday in Gail Davidson's lecture: that a teapot
should not only be a useful object, but also a work of art “to elevate your soul by its beauty”. So perhaps
we should try to see our little teapot simply as a work of art, beyond stylistic categories like formalism or
functionalism? It appears to be a perfect materialisation of an artistic idea, done in a moment of
inspiration. Unfortunately Marianne Brandt didn't live long enough to see the tremendous success of her
early masterpiece. But she once asked herself looking back to her work in a very sceptical way: “Did I
ever think about art?” (“Habe ich je an Kunst gedacht?”), probably meaning: “No, I did not”.
At least one object from the Bauhaus-metal workshop recently has been declared by a German courtyard
as a work of art: Jucker's and Wagenfeld's famous Bauhaus lamp—another icon. But here we better leave
the most unsecure terrain of trying to make a clear distinction between art and craft: I can't.
There is a good deal of legend in the reception of many Bauhaus products. They are not always able to
meet all the high expectations when looked at closely and analyzed critically. But this they have in
common with other legendary things. Benvenuto Cellini's manneristic salt cellar never was a salt cellar
alone, from a functional point of view. And who wants to discuss the technical or artistic qualities of a
miraculous icon painting?
---
35
A conversation with a teapot
WILFRIED MOLL
Silversmith, Hamburg
Participants of the symposium visiting the Bauhaus Archiv,
Berlin
During the visit to the “Bauhaus Archiv”, the silversmith Wilfried Moll was suddenly addressed to by
Marianne Brandt’s tea infuser:
“Mister! Mister!”
“Who is it?”
“It’s me.”
“Oh!”
“Is it true that Ms. Brandt died as a very poor lady?”
“I just heard of it. The report was authentical.”
“They spent a lot of $$ to purchase me. Did Ms. Brandt get some of it?”
“I don’t think so. But Amadeus and Vincent also died very poor.”
“It is a thousand times pityful.”
–––
“Mister—what are you doing?”
“Me? I am a teapot maker.”
“A teapot maker? Like Ms. Brandt?”
“So it is.”
–––
“Mr. teapot maker, have a look at my proportions. Are they well done?”
“Your proportions are very well done!”
“Thank you—some people measure my proportions by means of golden scales. Sullivan has written: First
came the functions, and other means; but most important is beauty. What about my function and beauty?”
“Also Frank Lloyd Wright has written important things, and Walter Gropius too. All this is stimulating
for thought. But by thinking alone you get no experience, not even to make teapots.”
“I do not agree. Gropius’ writings are highly intelligent and important for life.”
–––
“The small button on your lid seems to me much better than the one on your bigger coppersister. Your
crossbase is exceptional.”
“It is not easy to stand all the time on a crossbase.”
“You look a little bit like a roman oil lamp. If I’d put cotton in your spout and oil into your body...”
“Pouring oil into my body!! Don’t you dare—you are crazy!”
“Excuse me—excuse me. I am so sorry.”
–––
“Mr. teapot maker? I feel lonely without the beautiful paintings by Klee, Feininger and Kandinsky—
Teapot maker? I have a problem: People lift me up into the sky while I like to stand on a table. In my
presence they speak about the high ethics of Bauhaus design. On the other hand, they buy and sell all the
design nonsense they believe to be necessary.”
–––
“Dear little teapot, you are very critical about buyers and sellers. In one way you can be very happy. You
are standing in the bright light of success and appreciation. In contrast, the teapots from my teacher, a
36
very good silversmith, are condemned to the darkness of a museum depot.”
“What a pity!”
“You wish to stand on a table, have warm tea inside and feel to be required.”
“Oh yes!”
–––
“Mr. teapot maker? Do not forget me.”
“Whenever I sit on the beach, the red disk falling into the sea without any splish splash, I shall look into
the sky and remember you.”
“Auf Wiedersehen.”
37

Modern Art of Metalwork - Bröhan

Transcription

Similar documents

L`Art de Vivre - Meister Zürich

winter 03/04 - Masterpiece .dk masterpiece.dk