A Little About Chou Lo-Yuan / Zhou Lyuan

[George]

Although not copied word for word, the following are highlights of artist Chou Lo-Yuan's history from Bob Steven's, "The Collector's Book Of Snuff Bottles."

Chou Lo-Yuan, the founder of the Peking school, is its best known and most frequently copied artist. Although not the most productive. The period of his painting was brief. Starting 1882 and ending 1893. There was a demand for his bottles due to his work being the first done in the new style. Many artists often signed his name even though their won styles are too often evident. A few imitators were Yen Yu-t'ien, Sun Hsing-wu, Ma Shao-hsuan, Chang Pao-t'ien, T'ang Tzu-ch'uan, Yeh Chung-san and many others. Some signed his name as well as their own and or seals. Chou Lo-yuan's style is distinctive and his calligraphy, usually lengthy. Having a flair and is easily recognized. His calligraphy is much better than that of most others. While many bottles appear with his signature, we have to take extra care to authenticate them because it was so much more superior to that of others who copied him.
 
When an artist is truly proud of his work, he is not very likely to show himself to be a bitter and envious artist. Delighting in his creations, and in them being approved, even in imitations. Even so, he would also be eager that others who emulate him do so with such care in detail that the prestige of his art work is enhanced rather than betrayed. All too often as soon as one tried to imitate another, he was forced to apply his own talents in a strained and unnatural manner. It was this stiffness that usually betrays the forgery. It is the mark of a lazy artists who may have turned out one good thing and then tried to cheat the market with many bad repetitions of his own art work, or of someone else’s.

[Pat - 查尚杰]

I heard it once said that statistically speaking, it would be close to impossible for ANY bottle from ZLY that has not already entered a collection to be stilll undiscovered.  Any newly discovered bottle not already from an existing collection would almost have to be a fake or done by another artist.  This man only worked for 2 years from 1892-1893, and his output could not have been more than 1-2 bottles a week, so we can all do the math.  That is 100-200 bottles MAXIMUM of any decent quality (certainly the way he painted, he was the pillar of all the new movement)... period.... , if you then take into account survival rate of maybe 35-40 cpt (high estimate) etc.. we are talking 70-80 bottles left in this world folks.  Some food for thought...

PS, if you note on Hugh Moss' website .. in the pics of ZLY bottles, it is many of the same bottles coming up over and over again turned over from different auctions or collections.. dont think that these are all different bottles.

[George]

Good day Pat !

I was just checking out Bill's site, and discovered another spelling.. Zhou Leyuan. There was no mention within Bob Stevens book about this spelling.. I just added it to the subject/title line of this topic here.

Then went to Hugh Moss site.. Here is a snippet..

"What is also important, from the point of view of the collector and student of the subject, is that he left a large body of works. He obviously painted full-time from the late 1870s until he ceased to paint in the spring of 1893. In some years he was more prolific than in others and particularly between 1882 and 1885 he didn’t date so many works so we are left to guess at what was done in those years, but his output was prolific during the height of his career from the early 1880s to 1893. As a commercial painter, however, his output would have matched the demand for his works, and it is obvious from the dated works that he hit the height of his fame between about 1885 and 1893 – with demand steadily increasing throughout that period."

Even so... It would still seem as you mentioned, that even if he painted full bore over the few years,  can not be very many of his bottles out there..

Here is a link to Hugh Moss site showing several of Zhou Leyuan bottles..

I am a bit confused though.. Bob Stevens book spelling is Chou Lo-Yuan with no mention of a Zhou Leyuan spelling. Then Hugh Moss site references the Zhou Leyuan spelling with no reference to the Chou Lo-Yuan spelling .. 

[George]

Also, just to add more info to this thread..

Here is a link authored by a Long Xiaoyun giving examples of how to tell fake ( he also spells ZL ) Zhou Leyuan calligraphy from the real deal..



And.., although we were already sure about these Zhou Leyuan bottles as being fake, his link really confirms them so..

[Pat - 查尚杰]

Same guy... Zhou Le Yuan.   I have not heard a definite conclusion on his painting period.  There are not so many bottles dated before 1882 and none after 1893 as far as I know, so ...Anyway.   He would have been THE guy and the only guy (first) for quite a while to cop/replicate/fake

[Peter Bentley 彭达理]

Hi All

Chou  Lo-Yuan  =  Zhou  Le Yuan :  just  different   phoenetic  systems : first  is  Wade Giles (I think)  ,   second is  Pinyin (for  certain)

From  my  very brief   discussions  with Ian Hardy,  who is a   ZLY  expert

1.   ZLY never painted the  same bottle   twice, so  every  one  is  unique ( but of course  that does  not mean   others, incliding his   students,   did not    copy  his  style and  create  other  bottles   that  were  similar  in style)

2. No-one seems  to  know what happened  to  ZLY  after   1893

Cheers   Peter

[George]

1.   ZLY never painted the  same bottle   twice, so  every  one  is  unique ( but of course  that does  not mean   others, incliding his   students,   did not    copy  his  style and  create  other  bottles   that  were  similar  in style)

Prior to bidding on this Zhou Le Yuan bottle today, checked around a bit trying to find similar examples.

My bottle..



I did find one that looks very similar (below)



I think both mine and this one example above could be examples of Ding Erzhong signing ZLY's signature.

Although I have seen other examples of ZLY that are similar in style, am leaning more towards my newely aquired bottle actually being painted by Ding Erzhong. Much stronger resemblance to many examples shown from Hugh Moss like this one shown below.

If someone can decipher the rest of the characters/scripts on my bottle for me, then I may be able to tell more after knowing the date it was painted via what Hugh Moss shares on his site about the two artists.

May be kind of hard to see the characters on my bottle. So might need to get a close up once it arrives.






 

[George]

Here are a couple of blow ups that will help.. 

[Peter Bentley 彭达理]

Hi  George

My "quote" about   ZLY never painting the same  bottle   twice  was in fact a  quote from Ian Hardy

( I  know  nothing about the   Middle  period)

I suggest  you  send  Ian   your pics  for   his opinion

Cheers  Peter

[George]

I did not pluck that sentence from your post to suggest that you were in error about duplicate paintings.. Did not mean for it to sound like that..  Because of that piece of info you provided about how he did not paint duplicates is one actually one of the clues that contributed me to believe Ding painted it.   

I think you know a lot more about these older bottles than I do any way ! 

I will ask Ian to have a peek..

Am interested to find out if I am even close thinking that Ding may actually be the artist..

Thanks Peter ! 

[Pat - 查尚杰]

Nice bottle (I think it is rock crystal by the way).  But the signature and calligraphy just does not look right.  It is also painted in a area where the outside circular carving is, which is not something the older masters would have done.  They were very meticulous about these things.  I am curious what Ian Hardy has to say.

[Peter Bentley 彭达理]

Hi Pat,

Interesting  point   

 It is also painted in a area where the outside circular carving is, which is not something the older masters would have done.  They were very meticulous about these things.


Ian hardy   also  once  wrote to me to  say that   ZLY always  left  a nice   open space  for   the  script and   his  signature

The  way this  bottle  is  signed ,  half on top  of the    picture,  seems  very clumsy

Cheers  Peter

[George]

I am totally depressed...

The auction house just posted the winning bid along with the bidding increments.

Somehow I blew it 

For the life of me I still don't understand how I messed up. Especially since there were only two bids. One was on location, and the other was an internet bid.. Me I thought !

Waited for a month for this auction, and this particular bottle..

Well... still a good conversation piece just the same. But that does not cure the old depression 

Going to have to take about 6 prozac to bring me out of this one !! 

[Peter Bentley 彭达理]

Hi  George

If  it's any consolation  I  would  bet   that bottle  was  fake ( but  I  did  not   pass  any judgement  before  because  I  was afraid  I might influence you,  and  because  I really  know  nothing  about  bottles  of this  vintage so my opinion  could  well be   100%  wrong)

As a  matter  of interest  : how   much  did you   bid ?  And  how much   did the bottle  go for  ?
 
Cheers  Peter

[George]

Actually Peter.. I am now leaning towards it being a fake as well.. While looking for bottles to compare it to, I also noticed what Pat mentioned about the side of the bottle, signature, etc..

Also, the script looks off to me as well. Especially the reverse side.

So.... I should not be disappointed about not winning it..

The opening bid was 50.00. When nobody bid on it, they dropped it to 25.00. It sold for 30.00. The description did not include any info about who the artist may have been.

I think your right, and just as well that I did not win it.

Now I can keep an eye on a few more coming up over the next couple of days.. A few beauties !  Bound to win one of them !  

I am still looking forward to what Ian thinks about it though..

[Pat - 查尚杰]

Let me understand this properly,... This was on a reverse auction site?   If so, then please consider the following.  No seller in their right mind would put an item that THEY think and believe has value (or paid dearly) on this type of auction process.  I am sorry to be so blunt here, but that is a dead giveaway that the owner knew something was wrong with the bottle, AND could find no one to authenticate it or even give an approximate value range.  Two bids on an item like this... ?  That in and of itself is an indication.  I do admit, It looked like rock crystal, so I would have just bid even for the material itself.   If I am right and it is old rock crystal, then 50 bucks was like winning the lottery. Who cares if it was a fake, copy or whatever.  The bottle itself could be repainted later, and has significant value.  Even new rock crystal bottles are several hundred dollars just because of the material itself. 

[George]

I don't know what a reverse auction is Pat..

This particular auction was through a Bunte Auction Services..


 

[Pat - 查尚杰]

I used the wrong term but cant come up with the right one.  This ons is/was where the consecutive bids get lower and lower over time.... as opposed to higher (ebay type).   It is a real shame.  Would have loved to buy the bottle from you only for the bottle, if you were not happy with it after winning!

[richy88]

Hi George

In my opinion, the bottle is definitely not a genuine Zhou Leyan. So no regrets in not winning!

Richard

[George]

Thank you Richard.. 

I am with Pat too.. Painting aside, the bottle alone would have been nice to have.