Hi!- I was wondering what style these chairs are? are they eastlake? rennisance revival?- or what exactly is this style?- I had this clip saved from a magazine as I like the shape of this chair- it says eastlake on the caption. Now I am looking at this set of chairs for sale- and I really need to know- what the style -name of these are?

here is the sale pair that looks similar- Are these eastlake style or rennisance revival?-- thanks ahead!~~Valery~~

Hi Valery.

You've been a busy girl. Those are Renasissance Revival chairs, even though they fall at the simpler end of the scale. A lot of times, what confuses people is that they focus on minor decorative details instead of the overall proportion & feel of a piece. Specifically, in the case of these two styles, what throws people off is that they both used a lot of incised carving.

The difference, then, is one of spirit. Eastlake rejected the elaborate revival styles of the period & lobbied for a more honest treatment of furniture, where its beauty was inherent, the result of the natural character of the wood combined with honestly expressed construction methods, rather than something that was added via fancy finishes & applied carving after the piece had been assembled.

Anyway, once a cabinetmaker has eliminated fancy carvings & applied moldings & bronze mounts & French polishing, his 'ornament' is pretty much restricted to integral moldings & turned members & incised lines, which is exactly what Charles Eastlake recommended. Basically, it's medieval furniture, updated for 19th century production methods: big, blocky, substantial.

Sure, the moldings & incised lines show up on Renaissance Revival pieces too but, there, they're only part of a whole grab bag of motifs & methods: geometic appliques with chamfered edges, segmenetal curves, brackets, scrolls, cartouches. You don't see any of that stuff on the kind of pieces Eastlake recommended.

But, as was said in another context, people have a tendency to strain out the gnat & gulp down the camel, focusing on tiny details rather than seeing the big picture. So if you're not sure what you're seeing, pull back & look at the overall lines: if there's a lot of decorative stuff that you could physically eliminate if you wanted to simplify it (which was the fate of a lot of over-the-top Victorian pieces back in the 193Os: all the superfluous extraneous ornament was simply sawn or pried off) it's probably RR. If its overall lines are about as simple as you can get, it's probably Eastlake.

Either way, those look like nice chairs.

Regards,
MAGNAVERDE.

P.S.
Never go by the stylistic descriptions in picture captions in shelter magazines. Those are usually written to fit a specific word count by the lowest man on the editorial totem pole, who often, it seems, has no clue about the historic styles. I always get a kick out of the way they always manage to confuse the styles named after the famoues 18th Century French triplet kings Louis, Huey & Dewey.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: MAGNAVERDE,

Thanks MAG!- I really was wondering about the caption on the article stating that the magazine pics are Eastlake.-- I found these chairs after I starting looking up Rennisance Revival- as I was absolutely mesmerised by Phobe's antique bed.- I posted on that thread and No one has answered yet about the chairs.-I love the shape of the red ones -they are for sale-

LOL- I can't believe I might buy 2 chairs in hopes of finding the same style bed! I saw phobes bed and then saw these chairs listed- and thought that they looked like her bed style.-

Yes- I have been very busy!- I also recently got a couple antique books just to look up Victorian Castor Sets- and a Samovar-. I did manage to find similar castor sets too- the one I just bought. Samovar- I havn't found the same as mine but it really is interesting to be learning so much about antiques-esp rare ones.

LOL- your comment about the triplet kings- Now I have this to look up too- I did laugh, but now need to know if they really were triplets named that.

Thanks much,~~Valery~~

Hi again, Valery.

I was just kidding when I said the kings were triplets. The confusion in the popular mind comes not from their being identical royals, or even from having rhyming names--which, actually, moght have made it easier, since they were, in fact, allnamed Louis--but from having numbers attached: XIV, XV & XVI. The real problem, though, is that to publishing industry interns who grew up using calculators, all Roman numerals look alike. Hence the confusion. M.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: MAGNAVERDE,

Hello again!- lol- MAGNAVERDE this doesn't sound like you. Usually you spell things correctly and also sign your name only once.- I hope that it truly is you and not yet another imposter name! LOL- -

Are you sure that all you drank before lunch time was Pepsi?--

Thanks for the heads up on the triplets names.~~Valery~~

Say-MAG- could you take a peek at the thread below about the samovar etc.?- lol- and look at some of these values of castor sets- I posted one I bought on there and then a pic from an antique guide of a different one just for the learning.~~Valery~~