Pros And Cons Of Harry Parr

Jennifer Price’s essay, “The Plastic Pink Flamingo: A Natural History”, details the history of the plastic pink figure that could be seen in the yards of Americans in the mid 1900’s and can still be seen today. Through her use of irony and various rhetorical devices, she criticizes American decadence and materialism while also highlighting an inability to observe genuine beauty.

However, the result of the Vyses concentration expended on the production of the stoneware vessels and attendant ash-glazes culminated in the re-working of the figure group Morning Ride. Even so, it is difficult to understand the reasoning why Vyse found it expedient to remodel this figure rather than devising an additional composition, and Marsh, in his Walker’s article, does not mention it. Indeed, this present model is occasionally mistaken for the 1925 original (Fig. 62). Furthermore, the 1929 model should not be viewed as a previous model bearing a similar title. In sculptural terms, this edition is a pointed up version of the original. Doubtless, Vyse expended much the same industry in the as he had done when modelling the smaller 1925 version. The present version, thought by collectors to be the suitable of the two, and possibly justification for the time

Like Untitled #225 (Blond Woman), Sherman’s Untitled portrait #198 (Feather Mask) also stirs a sense of uneasiness. The portrait is a color photograph created in 1989. A woman with an open salmon colored shirt exposes both artificial breasts as she sits with a large, blue feather mask covering her face, as if to cover her identity for fear of being mocked for being a woman. Dark, black eyes peer from beneath the mask, and appear to follow the viewer while one examines the portrait. There’s seems to be no reason for her shirt to be open and her breasts on display, unlike Sherman’s Untitled #225 (Blond Woman) portrait, who seemed to have a definite reason. The fake, jewelry-like nipples on the breast are a deep ruby red color that match with a red pedant hung around her neck. A white tulle skirt covers the lower half of her body as she sits in front of a green printed fabric with red tassels that is hung loosely behind her.

never, I believe, made large sums of money by his writings, and the early profits of these charming sketches could not have been considerable; for many of them, indeed, as they appeared in journals and magazines, he had never been paid at all. . . .(chap. 2)

In 1964, at the Royal Academy, one of the paintings he sent in was Morning and Evening: Chelsea Reach (RA726), this was his last work shown there. Furthermore, Harry Parr, in the tradition of pottery figure making, had staked his claim by his superlative craftsmanship, and his work in the genre, was recognized by the knowledgeable figure-collector. However, he made even fewer thrown vessels than his meagre output of figurative work. It would appear that Parr and his work are under-researched or ignored by the modern commentator of studio pottery, and a greater effort than this author can provide is required to restore him to his position in the vanguard of the early twentieth century studio pottery movement, now is the time for further research into the life and work of this much neglected artist. In his final years, his youngest daughter Janet Parr cared for him at the family home, he had become increasingly frail, and after a brief illness, admitted to St Luke’s Hospital Chelsea, where he died aged eighty-four on 12th September

Harry Parr aged 29, was newly returned to England, fluent in both the Italian and French languages, when he took up a position of modelling tutor at Glastonbury College of Art. However, his ideal was to become a fine artist, and to work on his own account. Returning to London he found lodgings in Chelsea. Throughout 1910, while trying to procure sculpture commissions, he lived as best he could around the Chelsea area. Undaunted at his seemingly slow progress, he carried on working from his lodgings-cum-studio, 54 Lamont Road Chelsea SW. That same year he exhibited at the Royal Academy a silver plaque portraying Miss Alice Clark RA 1883 and a portrait bust, titled, Una Madre Vecchia RA1902 (an aged mother). While working at The

Parr, in his first year, studied Architecture under Professor Arthur Beresford Pite (1861-1934). In his second year 1904, he gave up architecture to study sculpture under Professor Edouard Lantèri, gaining a British Institute Scholarship to further his studies at the sculpture school. He gained the British Institute Scholarship for Sculpture, in 1905, and in 1907, a Travelling Scholarship. A student may gain a Travelling Scholarship in the sculpture school, if judged the year’s best. His winning subject, Hercules, was a plaster sculpture, said to be two feet high. For a number of years, Parr displayed his Hercules at his Cheyne Row studio. He surpassed his contemporaries at the school, Charles Sargeant Jagger (1885-1934), William McMillan (1887-1977), and Gilbert Ledward (1888-1960). He travelled to Florence, Lucca, and Venice to further his knowledge of Italian art, and arrived at the British School at Rome in 1908. To underwrite his other expenses, his Grandfather Joseph Parr made him an allowance to further his art studies in Italy and France, here he painted and mastered the art of stained

In this time there was an ideal look for females. Women that were tall and slender with a very small waist and narrow hips were considered “perfect”. These models and fine figures were described as having a “soft feminine figure”. Not all

1900’s - Creation illustrator Charles Dana Gibson. (Not a real person at first) - Lots of girls inspire to be like the drawings. - Turned into up to date fashion and style. - Ideal women was: o to be slender and tall o voluptuous bust but not lewd o Rounded shoulders o Smooth neck o wide hips

Mr. Charles Vyse’s pottery and porcelain figure work is too well-known and eagerly sought after to need any introduction. These have already found their way into the collections of many discriminating and discerning buyers both at home and abroad and especially collectors in the United States of America have been keen to acquire these very interesting and beautiful specimens of modern sculptured pottery work. The subjects have been taken usually from life studies of simple, familiar and interesting types, most of the Chelsea streets and its immediate neighbourhood– the “Balloon Girl, ” the “Tulip Woman” the “Chrysanthemum Girl” and the “Madonna of the World’s End” for instance, these, and occasionally others further afield, such as the “Piccadilly Rose Woman,” have attracted the

1935, proved to be a turning point for Harry Parr, and his relationship with the Royal Academy. He no longer sent his ceramic figures for consideration by the committee. Rather, he began to send in, art work on paper, such as his 1935 exhibit, Head (RA 1205) a study in pencil and wash. His other exhibit that year, a bronze medallion depicting an unknown subject, Miss Ealand (RA1603). Unfortunately, the whereabouts and the substance of these works are unknown.

It is the occasional fate of artists and potters that after decades of celebration, modern tastes should eclipse their once eminent reputations. Charles Vyse, sculptor and potter, was such an artist. In the new world following The Great War, Charles Vyse was at the vanguard of English studio pottery making. He is a poignant example of a celebrated artist overtaken by the shadow of derision in the post WWII era. His renown as a sculptor and potter during the 1920s and 1930s contrasts to the complete indifference to his art in the 1950s and 1960s. Whereas his status of master potter is indisputable, his aesthetic influence on other potters is insignificant. His figurative work and his stoneware vessels have few disciples among today’s potters. Conversely, for the collector, there has been a resurgence of interest in his figures and stoneware vessels. The acquisition of a Vyse figure is a prerequisite of the modern connoisseur.

They first appeared in The Ladies Home Journal in 1909 as children’s cartoons. *****Insert figure of

It is debatable why the Vyses appeared to abandon coloured decoration. As early as 1921, the art critic Bernard Rackham33 was suggesting the desirability of the monochrome glazed figurines. A point previously commented on in this book. Plainly glazed figurines were fashionable during this period, and Nell Vyse viewed the move to monochrome as a ‘modern’ concept. Furthermore, should the monochromatic venture prove successful, the Vyses would profit from the saving in time and materials, and of course the expense of hand decoration. They would also profit from the figure not requiring an enamel firing, again another saving on labour and fuel. It is difficult to say how many models Vyse made of The Falconer, the few that have come before the public

When Jennifer Wormser learned that I was interested in painting dollhouses, she offered to loan me her personal copy of The Miniaturist by Jessie Burton. The fictional tale tells the story of a young woman who receives a miniature Dutch cabinet house from her husband as a wedding present. The story is based on the actual 17th-century Doll’s House of Petronella Oortman (c.1686- c. 1710) on display in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, which I was fortunate to see in person during a visit to the Rijksmuseum a few years ago. It was a combination of seeing Petronella Oortman’s actual doll’s house displayed next to a painting that was made of the doll’s house by Jacob Appel in 1710, that inspired me to paint my first dollhouse interior, based on a childhood