Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

I have been thinking about and discussing with various collectors the origins of Classic Art Ware pottery for quite some time now, and since the publication of the 2nd People's Potteries book and the attribution of the label to John Barnard Knight, and subsequently the attribution of some CAW pieces to JBK in an upcoming Australian Pottery auction, I have decided to "go public" in the hope of flushing some information, or at least informative debate out of the woodwork 🙂

As I have said else where, I don't agree with Dorothy Johnstons attribution of this label to John Barnard Knight, a Melbourne potter associated with the label Janet Grey. I, (and others, not having come to this conclusion in isolation, I have talked to various collectors), believe there is a connection with Delamere Art Pottery from Sydney; whether this was a label attached to their wares sold through a certain outlet or a range they sold themselves similarly to Diana's Hollywood or Pate's Regent labels no one is sure.


log vase.JPG caw more bits 004.jpg Photobucket
DSCF0405.JPG D-CAW jug.JPG CAW jug.jpg
Photobucket


Anyway - here are some photos for you to see labels on various CAW pieces that have always been attributed to Delamere (except the Koalas which are attributed only to CAW and the frog in the 1st pic which has a Delamere sticker). Aside from this there is continuity of glaze colour, and various motifs common over CAW and Delamere attributed pieces I can post pics of as well if anyone is interested, to support this theory.

Hoping there are some other CAW/Delamere collectors reading who might have info to share

cheers
Rae
Message 1 of 615
Latest reply
614 REPLIES 614

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Hello Rae,

Fantastic ! At last a real subject for debate and one that I agree upon so strongly. You are so correct as there is no evidence available to dispute that Delamere/ CAW were made by the same pottery.

Rather there is hear'say about JB Knight making Classic Pottery but no actual refference to CAW at all.
This evidence is all too flimsy and incorrect.

Classic is Sydney made pottery and quite common here and the variety is rich and wide. I love both of these potteries and I hope that you can find proof and find evidence from family or friends of anyone who worked there to tell the real story,
Cheers,
koori
Message 2 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Hi koori,

looks like a topic that isn't raising much interest 🙂 I guess you have to be obsessive collectors of CAW like us to get enthusiastic lol!

cheers
Rae
Message 3 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Keep going guys,still an interesting subject to read about:-x
Message 4 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Hi Rae,

I guess we will just have to talk amongst ourselves LOL,

Cheers,
pip
Message 5 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

I would like to participate in this discussion, but I know almost nothing about the topic. However I am interested to learn, please keep it going and educate me.

Yesterday, the OH bought a few pieces of pottery, one is a koala that is pretty much a match for the bottom one pictured above except ours only has 2 gum leaves not 3. There are no makers marks on the base. Another piece is a kiwi, looks like it could be out of the same pottery, once again not marked, then there is a little handled bowl. If you would like I can post some pictures.

Wilma
Message 6 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Wilma, you know we love pics on this board. 🙂
~ Mon ~
Message 7 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Hi, Have to warn you, these photos are not up to the OH's standard. Couldn't find my own camera so just put the things on the dining table and clicked, don't even know how to crop them or reduce the size. If you need better or more detailed ones, the OH will be home from Gin Gin this afternoon.


Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket


The backstamp on the little bowl thingy is not quite readable, just an outline of what looks a bit like an open fronted shed!!!. The fox is a piece we have had for a while, the other 3 pieces all came from the same owner.

Wilma
Message 8 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Hi Wilma,

The Koala is certainly Classic art Ware and as they were all hand finished the leaves & gum nuts vary in number and position on the pieces.

The kiwi looks lovely and I would love to see the base if possible?

The Fox is cute as can be but I have no idea of it's origins.

The vase I have seen before and I think it is by Scott Ceramics from memory...but that plays up at times 😄 but from the mark that you describe I am not so sure,

Regards,
Pip
Message 9 of 615
Latest reply

Re: Classic Art Ware - Debateable origins

Fascinating Thread
Love the eye candy pics
thanks
Jo
Message 10 of 615
Latest reply