posted 11-16-2004 04:26 PM            

The Modernist jewelry movement in America revived many of the tenets of the Arts & Crafts movement of a few decades earlier. Modernist jewelers placed emphasis on hand-craftsmanship and frequently used inexpensive and found materials. The primary metal used by the modernists was silver. Bronze and copper were popular as well, but gold was used to a far lesser extent. Additionally, the modernists' jewelry drew influence from contemporary artistic movements, such as Surrealism, Cubism, Futurism, Dada, Abstract Expressionism, etc. Most better examples of modernist jewelry can also be appreciated as pieces of sculpture.

Known Makers
On the marketplace, the most desirable modernist jewelry is signed by makers who are well known, usually because of superior design and craftsmanship, as well as through exhibitions.

These ca. early 1950s earrings are a good example of Ed Wiener's (NYC) earlier work. Constructed of silver and set with garnets, their form is biomorphic and a little bizarre; the design was almost certainly influenced by Surrealism.

Olaf Skoogfors's (Phila.) work is fairly scarce. The circa 1965-70 brooch shown above was made using the lost-wax casting method. Its feel is sculptural, and its motif is ambiguous: it could be an owl's face, a mask, or perhaps even a landscape.

The whimsical Betty Cooke tie tack from around 1960 exemplifies abstraction. The piece is appealing in its simplicity. Abstraction and stylization were popular among the modernists in the 1950s and 1960s, and popular motifs included birds (used often by Cooke and Frances Holmes Boothby), musical instruments, and the human form (such as the Frances Holmes Boothby brooch pictured below).

(This brooch is signed "fhb STERLING")

posted 11-16-2004 04:27 PM            

Ed Levin (Bennington, VT and NYC) still works today. His earlier pieces are marked LEVIN in block type, while his later (circa mid-1980s-present) work is signed Ed Levin in script. Levin has produced jewelry in a wide range of styles, usually in silver, but also in bronze, gold, and mixed media. His work is always well-crafted. Many of his pieces, such as the chokers pictured above, are simple and form and were produced in larger quantities. These are not quite as sought-after as his more intricate and earlier pieces, such as the abstract ebony & sterling pendant pictured below.

Unknown Makers
As with the Arts & Crafts movement, there are hundreds of modernist makers whose identities are now unknown (many deservedly so). But an unrecognized signature should not necessarily be a deterrent when considering a modernist item for purchase. Design and quality of manufacture should be the criteria for judging an unknown piece. Sadly, less successfully designed objects by well-known makers can still sell for more than better designs by unknowns.

Pictured above is a circa 1965 necklace by "LC?". I am not familiar with this maker, but the necklace is well-made and intriguing in appearance. The design is of a rounded rectangular box (note the pendant's dimensionality in photo number 2), part of which is cut away to reveal a textured interior and a turquoise cabochon. The exterior has a softly hammered finish. The feeling of the pendant is similar to many Surrealist works, particularly some by Magritte and de Chirico: the viewer questions what lies in the shadows and beyond view (i.e., underneath the part of the box that was not cut away).

posted 11-16-2004 04:27 PM            

The brooch by "ODELL" is a later Modernist work in a very abstract mode. Its design is three overlapping, undulating planes. The outer planes are brushed silver, and the central plane is made of silver with the mokume-gane (wood-grain) technique. The pin is signed "ODELL STERLING" and also hand-engraved "3/83 COPPER SHAKUDO." Its elegance and successful use of a difficult and seldom-seen technique in American jewelry make it a fine example of studio jewelry.

Modernism for the Masses
While makers such as those listed above, as well as others like Sam Kramer, Paul Lobel, Bill Tendler, etc., were making one- or few-of-a-kind objects by hand, a handful of American costume jewelry manufacturers began producing Modernist style jewelry in mass quantities. The most prolific of these seems to have been Beaucraft Sterling of Providence, RI. Other makers who produced modernist jewelry in large quantities include Danecraft (silver) and Renoir/Matisse (mostly copper)

Beaucraft's efforts in modernism are usually abstract/geometric in form (such as the earrings pictured above), or are stylized figural designs (such as their ubiquitous stylized cat jewelry). Naturally, mass-produced modernist jewelry is worth only a small fraction of its handmade counterpart. Generally the design of these items is inferior and derivative.

Some makers, like Ed Levin and Frank Rebajes, produced both unique items and multiples. Still, their work was almost always handmade whereas Beaucraft et al. simply rolled their items off of an assembly line, thereby disregarding one of the most important aspects of the modernist jewelry movement. I do not like the mass-produced modernist jewelry of companies like Beaucraft.

Book Suggestion
Marbeth Schon's new work, Modernist Jewelry 1930-1960: the Wearable Art Movement is an outstanding reference that is an essential addition to any jewelry and silver collector's library. It lists scores of makers, with as much biographical detail as was available, and it pictures hundreds of examples of their work, as well as makers' marks. The illustrations show all manners of modernist jewelry, and also demonstrate the artisans' stylistic evolutions.

posted 11-18-2004 10:46 AM            

I agree that most of the mass produced modernist jewelry is less interesting than the handmade variety. Still, I find that some of the Beau designs are rather appealing, and I usually pick up pieces with a good look if the price is right.

One problem I find these days is distinguishing between vintage pieces and the work of contemporary craft jewelers. There are some very fine people working today, and not all of them sign their work. Even if they do, they may be impossible to trace. My wife and I enjoy the work of Lightwing, a husband and wife team that does silver overlay on dichroic glass. None of their pieces are signed, so if they leave their boxes there is no way to readily identify them, except by style.

Brent

posted 11-18-2004 02:31 PM            

It is a shame that any smith or jeweler does not feel it necessary to mark their work. It is not cost prohibitive to have a mark made and it shows pride in your work and increases the marketability of your work. Law prohibits the quality marking of precious metals without a maker's mark that can be correctly attributed.

Paul, Thanks for starting this important phase and period of silver collecting and study. Marbeth has done a fabulous job in publishing her book and on her website.

posted 11-22-2004 01:42 PM            

If anybody has Modernist items to share, please do. Brent, I am curious to see a piece of Lightwing's work if you are able to post an image. (see:Lightwing Sterling Overlay Jewelry)

posted 02-07-2008 02:59 PM            

quote:

---

Hello,

The FHB stamp that someone at your site is asking about is a piece hand crafted by Frances Holmes Boothby. She began production in the 50's & retired in the early 80's. She had no apprentices. Her work was all produced by hand. Most were one of a kind. A few were production pieces.
she also did a few castings. She was located in upstate NY and Weston, VT. She died 7-8 yrs. ago.

I hope this information is helpful.

Kate Staman

---

posted 02-08-2008 03:45 PM            

One by Paul Lobel, about 1.5 inches across:

And one unmarked (at least as far as I can see), about an inch across, with a wonderful sperm like design:

posted 02-08-2008 06:16 PM            

I particularly like the way they're mirror images, which must have been tricky with such an intricate abstract design.

posted 02-08-2008 09:18 PM            

These are great image of classic Modernist pieces and by some of the best. Lobel was a great designer. Ronald Hayes Pearson's work was a great influence on my work and continues to be an inspiration. Thanks for sharing them with us.

The short Boothby tie bar would have fit perfectly with the narrow ties we wore in the early 60's. Narrow belts were all the rage then as well.

Fred

posted 02-08-2008 10:13 PM            

The Pearson earrings were converted from screw backs to posts before they found their way to me, and I don't know which way is supposed to be up. Whenever I wear them I spend a some time staring at my ears in the mirror & twisting them around trying to decide.

Okay, one last pair of earrings, and that exhausts my Modernist jewelry. These are made of twisted wire, marked "sterling" on the screw back finding but without a maker's mark. The construction is very simple--just wire and the findings--but there's something graceful & appealing about them, at least in 3D.

posted 09-09-2008 11:51 AM            

A Lobel horse brooch. Images do not reveal the multi dimensional layer of the separate cutout pieces of silver used to create this little treasure.

posted 09-09-2008 11:15 PM            

I will try taking an image this weekend and post it.

The head neck & mane are a single pierce piece of silver sheet and it is soldered directly onto the front legs and torso. A piece of square wire has been soldered to the first two pieces of sheet silver to act as a spacer and then the tail and back legs were soldered onto the assembly. The trailing horizontal tail is bent up and negotiated so that it can be soldered to the front legs. Finally a round pellet of silver was soldered on as the eye. A bit of judicious filling and the attachment of the pin stem and catch and Voila, the piece is ready for the showcase once it is oxidized and polished.

These pieces are not only wonderous items to wear.... They are also fabulous teachers.

Best,
Fred