Author
Topic: Devil's Face Portrait  (Read 14248 times)
eyevet
  • Wiki Contributor
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 976
  • CPMS Life Member #101
« on: June 12, 2004, 02:02:49 am »

A recent discussion about the Devil's Face refers to a website with more information about this anomaly:  http://www.agencetopo.qc.ca/archives/devilface/eng.html.   This brings up a point that I was meaning to discuss on this board.  This site states the following:

Quote
In 1952 the Bank of Canada commissioned George Gundersen, of the British American Bank Note Company, to design the forthcoming issue of bank notes, scheduled for 1954. In executing the design, Mr. Gundersen based his engraving of Queen Elisabeth II on a portrait photo taken by Peter-Dirk Uys, one of Her Majesty's official photographers.  


I attempted to find more information on Photographer Peter-Dirk Uys and the only information I came across is regarding a contemporary South African comedian of that name.

The above mentioned website continues with the following information:

Quote
It was only in 1984 that the scandal re-erupted with the death of the photographer and the recovery of the negatives from the 1952 photo shoot, events which coincided with the publication of Peter-Dirk Uys‚ memoirs (Uys, Peter-Dirk, Her Majesty's Image - The Life Of The Official Photographer Of Elisabeth The Second, Yellow Sheets Books, London (UK), 1985).  


I attempted to find more information regarding this book and the oddly named publisher.  Nothing at all ... in fact a google search on "Her Majesty's Image" and  "The Life Of The Official Photographer" and "Yellow Sheets Books" or "Yellow Street Books" produces hits only on the above Agencetopo site.

This agencetopo article seems to provide some creedence to the theory that there was some malfeasance in the production of devil face portrait as it links the mysterious photographer Uys with Aleister Crowley who was (apparently) into devil-worship.

Nevertheless there are two pictures of the Queen at the bottom of the page which are represented as one of the original photos - purportedly taken by Uys, and a negative version of the same.  I became curious about a very small copywrite symbol "(c)Mathieu Beauséjour 2000) in the corner of these two pictures and when you click on the right picture you go to another page: http://www.agencetopo.qc.ca/archives/devilface/bioeng.html which describes the until now unnamed author of the site -  Mathieu Beauséjour and discusses his artistic endevours to add some "drama" to Canada's currency.

Finally if you click on the link to Agencetopo's main page you discover that the whole site is devoted to "PROJETS D'ARTISTES EN ARTS VIUELS"

So after a number of weeks of research, I have concluded that the Agencetopo article on the devil's face should be regarded as "entertainment".

There is an amazing website prepared by Peter Symes - a respected author of numerous articles on world paper money.  The site address is:    http://www.pjsymes.com.au/QE2/default.htm

Mr. Symes states that:

Quote
Portrait 6
 
This portrait of Queen Elizabeth is based on a photograph by Canadian photographer Yousuf Karsh. The photograph was one of many taken during a photographic session in 1951, a year before Queen Elizabeth's accession to the throne. Many of the portraits from the photographic session show The Queen wearing a tiara, but the particular photograph chosen by the Bank of Canada for its 1954 issue is one without the tiara. The necklace worn by The Queen in this portrait, of diamond flowers and leaves, was a wedding present from Nizam of Hyderabad and Berar. The image on the banknotes, which is based on Karsh's photograph, was engraved by George Gundersen of the British American Bank Note Company. This portrait is famous for its two varieties.


Regarding the portrait in the 1973 $1 and $2 notes Mr. Symes states:

Quote
Portrait 16
 
This portrait depicts Queen Elizabeth in an evening dress, wearing a diamond necklace and diamond earrings. The diamond necklace was presented to Elizabeth in April 1947, while she was still a princess, as a gift from the people of South Africa. The necklace was originally constructed with twenty-one large diamonds, connected by links that contained two small brilliant-cut diamonds mounted to either side of a baguette diamond. Shortly after Elizabeth ascended the throne, she had the necklace shortened to fifteen large stones, with the remaining stones being made into a matching bracelet. The necklace worn in this portrait is the shortened version. The earrings worn by Queen Elizabeth are Queen Mary’s Cluster Earrings, with each earring holding a large brilliant-cut diamond set in platinum and surrounded by two circles of small diamonds. The original photograph, on which the engravings are based, was an official portrait taken around 1962 by Anthony Buckley.


But I found some conflicting information here as well as the following CBC obituary on Malak Karsh -  
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2001/11/09/karshm_obit011109 says that the engraving on the reverse  of the note was based upon a Malak Karsh photo, but then goes on to say Malak's brother Yousef took the photograph of the Queen which appeared on the front of this same note.  In this case I beleive Peter Symes information is correct.


JohnnyG4
  • Guest
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2004, 12:12:36 pm »

I always wanted to know how two separate companies could come up with the same error.  Thanks for the information.

John
Hunter
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2010, 11:12:41 pm »

Quote
 
The photograph was one of many taken during a photographic session in 1951, a year before Queen Elizabeth's accession to the throne. Many of the portraits from the photographic session show The Queen wearing a tiara, but the particular photograph chosen by the Bank of Canada for its 1954 issue is one without the tiara.


     I found a picture that must have been from the same session, this one with the tiara and Elizabeth looking at the camera.  Now is it my imagination or is the Devil’s face in this photo too?

{http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/6500/1kht5hy22fmjthhj.jpg:http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/6500/1kht5hy22fmjthhj.th.jpg}
Either way it's still a nice picture.

Is it just a harmless prefix-kix or do I live for that next prefix-fix?
 

Login with username, password and session length