Thanks for the responses guys. While I'm definitely not a Ruth expert, I am familiar with his signature and have/do own numerous pieces. My first impression was that it was good. After a closer look, I began to have some doubts. After researching it, I can across Ron K's book, in which he seems to specifically discuss this exact piece (and how he opines that its a forgery). So obviously there's some differing opinions on this one.
While there are aspects that I really like about it, there are some that cause me some pause.
First of all, I still can't come up with a plausible explanation as to why Ruth would address and send this to himself (and signing his name in the process). Maybe he was a collector himself, and wanted to add this piece to his collection. If that's the case, then I feel it would add great value to this piece. Obviously that's possible, but just not sure that makes sense.
Secondly, the "B" to the "a" connection is definitely atypical (though not completely unique to this piece).
Next, the "i" to the "d" connection in Riverside also seems odd (as if he was about to misspell it).
The sticker placed on the piece also seems suspicious. Why put such a generic and unappealing sitcker (and sloppily done) on such a nice piece? Was it to cover up a more glaring mistake?
I'm not making a case against this being authentic, just expressing some concerns and trying to educate myself a bit.
Thanks guys....and would love to hear any other opinions.
|