Topic: 1954 Devil's face notes - intentional or not?  (Read 5705 times)
  • Guest
« on: October 31, 2004, 06:34:18 pm »

I understand that in the small world of negotiable security design and production, it is not completely unknown for artist's to incorporate "easter eggs" into their work as an inside joke since their work will never be acknowledged as being their own on the finished product. Kind of a way of ensuring their work will be remembered (If and when noticed) for quite a while. Anyone think the "devil's face" in HM's hair might have been someone's very own "Kilroy was here" ?
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 78
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2004, 06:41:11 pm »

A topic of much research and debate, I'm sticking with the "just a fluke" theory.
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2004, 07:25:39 pm »

The Queen's portrait was engraved by George Gundersen, and it has been widely acknowledged as his work.  There seems to be no reason he would attempt to be better remembered by adding a playful flourish, and even less reason to doubt the devil's face resulted from anything other than a faithful reproduction of the source photo.

Collecting Canadian since 1955
  • Guest
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2004, 11:11:23 pm »

Maybe the Devil made him do it??

I couldn't resist, sorry  ;D

Login with username, password and session length