Vyse: Harry Parr Chanticoler
Parr Chanticleer
It appears that Harry Parr, knowing Vyse’s penchant for modelling fauns and animals, he could not resist having a jibe at ‘pompous Vyse,’ especially at the Royal Academy, and as he remarked to his son Malcom, ‘I’m not done with debunking Vyse’. From his studio adjacent to Vyse, he sent in two exhibits to the RA. A promotional photo-card, dated 1927, illustrates one of Parr’s exhibits, a pottery group titled Chanticleer (RA1572). The subject is a handsome boy mounted on a speckled cockerel (Fig. 79). The 1928 coloured photograph shows a cockerel decorated in blues and lavender. From this evidence, one can assume that Parr made at least two different coloured versions of Chanticleer. The composition is a variation of Parr’s figure
group Boy and Turkey of 1921 (Fig. 38). As noted, there is an underlying and amusing narrative to this whimsical study of a Faun mounted astride a Cockerel. The modelling and decoration of the rabbits on the grassy mound is by Kate Parr.
In all probability there were no artists making pottery better known to visitors to the Royal Academy than Charles Vyse and Harry Parr. This year they are each represented this year by two pieces. Vyse with a figure group entitled RA1575, La Folie Bergère and another figure group described as RA1592 Tug-of-War. Parr is showing RA1572 Chanticleer in glazed earthenware, and RA1691 Bridget, a glazed earthenware bust. All of these exhibits, maintain the high standard of previous years. 34
One would believe that from the above, glowing report, published in the June edition of Pottery and Glass Trade Review, 1921, both Parr and Vyse would be somewhat mollified. However, for Vyse, it was abhorrent that he should be so intimately associated with Parr, the former friend and compatriot who had become his nemesis.
Parr Bridget
John P Heseltine, a respected art collector, and family friend commissioned Parr to model a ceramic portrait bust of Bridget, the Parr’s daughter (Fig. 80). However, Parr agreed to model the likeness, the second of a series of studies, he made of his three children. The outcome so pleased the two men that they agreed that Parr should exhibit the bust Bridget (RA1691) at the Royal Academy that year. Following this obvious success, Heseltine professed his being at a loss to understand why Parr did not pursue further work of this genre. However, no records exist to suggest that Parr made figures other than the original model, certainly, his son Malcolm Parr could not recall them.
Parr The Rose Seller
When Parr introduced his figure, Rose Seller’s is not known, however, an extant edition of the figure bears the signature Hy Parr, and is dated 1927 (Fig. 81). Furthermore, Parr did not exhibit at the Royal Academy that year, from which one may assume the RA committee rejected his work. From the style of the modelling, one may also conjecture that Kate Parr contributed to modelling the figure. Until further research has placed it accurately in the Parr canon, it remains an enigma. Smarting from what he believed was Parr’s punning of his work, he further angered to learn that Parr had another flower seller in production, in the adjacent studio. The Burslem pottery did not produce further street vendor figures by Harradine, or indeed a china figure that could remotely offend the artistic sensibilities of Vyse; this must have come as the relief to Nell Vyse.
●●●●
It appears that Harry Parr, knowing Vyse’s penchant for modelling fauns and animals, he could not resist having a jibe at ‘pompous Vyse,’ especially at the Royal Academy, and as he remarked to his son Malcom, ‘I’m not done with debunking Vyse’. From his studio adjacent to Vyse, he sent in two exhibits to the RA. A promotional photo-card, dated 1927, illustrates one of Parr’s exhibits, a pottery group titled Chanticleer (RA1572). The subject is a handsome boy mounted on a speckled cockerel (Fig. 79). The 1928 coloured photograph shows a cockerel decorated in blues and lavender. From this evidence, one can assume that Parr made at least two different coloured versions of Chanticleer. The composition is a variation of Parr’s figure
group Boy and Turkey of 1921 (Fig. 38). As noted, there is an underlying and amusing narrative to this whimsical study of a Faun mounted astride a Cockerel. The modelling and decoration of the rabbits on the grassy mound is by Kate Parr.
In all probability there were no artists making pottery better known to visitors to the Royal Academy than Charles Vyse and Harry Parr. This year they are each represented this year by two pieces. Vyse with a figure group entitled RA1575, La Folie Bergère and another figure group described as RA1592 Tug-of-War. Parr is showing RA1572 Chanticleer in glazed earthenware, and RA1691 Bridget, a glazed earthenware bust. All of these exhibits, maintain the high standard of previous years. 34
One would believe that from the above, glowing report, published in the June edition of Pottery and Glass Trade Review, 1921, both Parr and Vyse would be somewhat mollified. However, for Vyse, it was abhorrent that he should be so intimately associated with Parr, the former friend and compatriot who had become his nemesis.
Parr Bridget
John P Heseltine, a respected art collector, and family friend commissioned Parr to model a ceramic portrait bust of Bridget, the Parr’s daughter (Fig. 80). However, Parr agreed to model the likeness, the second of a series of studies, he made of his three children. The outcome so pleased the two men that they agreed that Parr should exhibit the bust Bridget (RA1691) at the Royal Academy that year. Following this obvious success, Heseltine professed his being at a loss to understand why Parr did not pursue further work of this genre. However, no records exist to suggest that Parr made figures other than the original model, certainly, his son Malcolm Parr could not recall them.
Parr The Rose Seller
When Parr introduced his figure, Rose Seller’s is not known, however, an extant edition of the figure bears the signature Hy Parr, and is dated 1927 (Fig. 81). Furthermore, Parr did not exhibit at the Royal Academy that year, from which one may assume the RA committee rejected his work. From the style of the modelling, one may also conjecture that Kate Parr contributed to modelling the figure. Until further research has placed it accurately in the Parr canon, it remains an enigma. Smarting from what he believed was Parr’s punning of his work, he further angered to learn that Parr had another flower seller in production, in the adjacent studio. The Burslem pottery did not produce further street vendor figures by Harradine, or indeed a china figure that could remotely offend the artistic sensibilities of Vyse; this must have come as the relief to Nell Vyse.
●●●●