Mabel Rollins Harris was a pinup/calendar artist whose most popular period was in the 1930s. She specialized in cheesecake-style women, female nudes and little girls. I confess I’m not particularly fond of her work overall. I find it generally uninspired, and I prefer strong lines and darker colors to the soft glowing look of Harris’s work. In fact, I’m not a huge fan of pastels in general. But she did produce a few notable pieces. The curly-top look of some of her little girls was clearly inspired by Shirley Temple, who was enjoying her greatest success during the same period. And the half-dressed toddlers in Look Who’s Here are fairly charming, I think.
Mabel Rollins Harris – Contemplating the Cookie Jar
Mabel Rollins Harris – Bedtime
Mabel Rollins Harris – Bedtime (detail)
Edit: I originally had two versions of the following image posted here, neither of which I was fully satisfied with. I have now replaced them with this superior version sent to me by one of our readers. Thanks, Lester! – Pip
Mabel Rollins Harris – Look Who’s Here
Mutoworld: Mabel Rollins Harris
Compare Harris’s work against this piece by William Fulton Soare, which, while rendered in the same style and medium, I find to be a much more interesting and accomplished piece. Soare studied under master artist Dean Cornwell, and it shows.
William Fulton Soare – Mother and Child
Pulp Artists: William Fulton Soare
I suspect that in “Sweetheart” the aspect ratio has not been preserved, the image has been shortened in the vertical direction, see http://trainstationart.com/imagpp/bedtimemrh.jpg for a (slightly rotated) image with a different aspect ratio, it looks better.
Yes, indeed. I thought that it might not be the full image, as it seems to be oddly cropped, but I didn’t really look for a better version. Still, I will add the one you linked to anyway. In fact, because it is cropped so much, I’m going to list the first version as detail. I’m also changing the name to Bedtime, as that’s what is listed under the linked version, and it seems more likely to be the correct title. Thanks, Christian.
Maybe it’s because of my imperfect eyesight, but I’m trying to figure out what is the difference between the two versions given of “Look Who’s Here”. Could you please explain?
I am asking more out of curiosity than anything else.
The second version of the image is not quite the full image (badly cropped) but I like the more muted colors. The first version is the full version of the image, but it’s brighter and has softer edges. Thus, I like that the first version is the entire image, but I prefer the richness and clarity of the second version. So I just decided to go ahead and post both of them.
I have a high resolution version which is quite crisp, but the colours are still not what I would call right. http://www.darvillsrareprints.com/Vintage%20calendar%20art%20Babies%203.htm have their irritating watermarks, but I think they do get the colour of their scans better than we see elsewhere. But how these images appear depends on the screen you are using, an increase in contrast can make a vast difference to one’s viewing pleasure. My 50″ TV screen is a better display than the computer monitors.
Thanks! More alternatives for an image are a good thing. I could actually remove that watermark manually, though it will take some work. Perhaps when I get some more free time I will take up that project.