What Was the Real Connection Between Pakula and DeLizza & Elster? What Frank Actually Said

Vintage jewelry collectors occasionally encounter a piece with a Pakula tag, a reference to Pakula in an old catalog, or a piece of jewelry attributed to Pakula and wonder exactly what that name tells us.

Did Pakula manufacture the jewelry?

Did DeLizza & Elster make jewelry for Pakula?

And if a piece appears in a Pakula catalog or carries a Pakula tag, can we assume Pakula was the actual maker?

Fortunately, this is another part of DeLizza & Elster history where we do not have to rely entirely upon collector speculation.

Frank DeLizza discussed Pakula himself.

Frank DeLizza on Pakula

On page 68 of Memoirs of a Fashion Jewelry Manufacturer, Frank talks about D&E’s business relationship with Pakula and specifically names the woman responsible for buying their jewelry.

Her name was Genevieve Loeb.

Frank explains that Genevieve bought the DeLizza & Elster line for Pakula and placed pieces from that line into the Pakula catalog.

That is an extremely important piece of documentation.

It tells us directly that jewelry offered by Pakula could, in fact, have been manufactured by DeLizza & Elster.

— Frank DeLizza, Memoirs of a Fashion Jewelry Manufacturer, p. 68

Pakula Was a Customer of DeLizza & Elster

This is where terminology can become confusing for collectors.

A vintage tag bearing a company name can easily be interpreted as a manufacturer’s signature.

But the costume jewelry business did not always work that way.

DeLizza & Elster manufactured jewelry for numerous customers. Some bought pieces from D&E’s existing line, while other customers worked with D&E to develop merchandise specifically for their needs.

Pakula was one of those business relationships.

According to Frank’s own account, Genevieve Loeb bought the D&E line for Pakula.

She then placed pieces from that line in Pakula’s catalog.

So when we encounter a piece associated with Pakula, the Pakula name may document who marketed or sold the jewelry rather than who physically manufactured it.

That distinction matters enormously when identifying vintage costume jewelry.

What Does a Pakula Tag Actually Prove?

A Pakula tag is valuable evidence.

It tells us that the piece was associated with Pakula.

What it does not, by itself, necessarily tell us is which factory manufactured that particular piece.

Frank’s memoir establishes that Pakula was purchasing jewelry from DeLizza & Elster. Therefore, at least some jewelry sold or cataloged by Pakula originated with D&E.

This is why identification cannot always stop at the name printed on a paper tag.

The construction of the jewelry still matters.

The components matter.

Known documented examples matter.

Original catalogs matter.

Factory history matters.

And when we are fortunate enough to have the manufacturer himself describe the business relationship, that primary-source documentation matters a great deal.

The Relationship Changed

Frank’s account also tells us that the D&E-Pakula relationship did not remain exactly the same over time.

After Genevieve Loeb retired, Frank says the relationship declined.

Later, Pakula hired Barry Rusick, whom Frank describes as an expert buyer, and Pakula began purchasing from DeLizza & Elster again.

— Frank DeLizza, Memoirs of a Fashion Jewelry Manufacturer, p. 68

That detail is useful because it reminds us that manufacturing and wholesale relationships were not always continuous.

Companies changed buyers.

Buying decisions changed.

Relationships weakened and resumed.

A jewelry company could be an important customer during one period, purchase little or nothing during another, and return later under different personnel.

Vintage jewelry history rarely fits into perfectly neat boxes.

Why Pakula Catalogs Matter

Frank’s statement that Genevieve Loeb placed D&E jewelry into the Pakula catalog gives surviving Pakula catalogs special research value.

If a piece can be matched to a Pakula catalog and independently identified as DeLizza & Elster, that catalog can help establish how the piece was marketed and may even help us better understand its period of production.

But there is an important distinction:

Appearing in a Pakula catalog documents a Pakula connection. It does not automatically establish Pakula as the manufacturer.

Frank’s memoir tells us why.

Pakula was buying another company’s jewelry and putting it into its catalog.

That company was DeLizza & Elster.

This Was Common in the D&E Business

Understanding the Pakula relationship also helps us understand DeLizza & Elster more broadly.

D&E was not simply a company making jewelry under one name and selling it directly to consumers.

Much of its business involved manufacturing for other companies and selling through wholesale and retail customers.

That is one reason DeLizza & Elster identification can be so fascinating — and occasionally so confusing.

A piece can have unmistakable D&E construction yet turn up associated with another company’s name.

Those two facts are not necessarily contradictory.

The company whose name accompanied the jewelry may have been the customer.

DeLizza & Elster may have been the manufacturer.

Pakula provides a documented example of exactly that kind of relationship.

So Was Pakula Jewelry Really DeLizza & Elster?

Here we need to be just as careful in the other direction.

Frank’s memoir does not tell us that every piece of jewelry ever sold by Pakula was manufactured by DeLizza & Elster.

That would be taking his statement too far.

What he does tell us is very specific:

Pakula bought DeLizza & Elster jewelry.

Genevieve Loeb bought D&E’s line and placed pieces in Pakula’s catalog.

After her retirement, the relationship declined.

Later, under Barry Rusick, Pakula began buying from D&E again.

Those are the facts Frank gives us.

So a Pakula tag should never automatically disqualify a piece from being DeLizza & Elster.

But neither should the Pakula name automatically make a piece D&E.

Identification still requires looking at the jewelry itself and the documentation surrounding it.

Why Going Back to Frank Matters

This is exactly why I wanted to begin the What Frank Actually Said series.

Over decades of collecting, short explanations often become repeated until they begin to sound like rules.

But the actual history of the costume jewelry industry was much more interconnected.

Manufacturers made jewelry for wholesalers.

Wholesalers sold jewelry under their own names.

Retailers bought open-line merchandise.

Designs moved through different sales channels.

And removable tags can tell only one part of that story.

With Pakula, we are fortunate to have Frank DeLizza’s own account.

When we ask what the connection between Pakula and DeLizza & Elster really was, we do not have to guess.

Pakula was a customer. Pakula bought D&E jewelry. And D&E jewelry appeared in Pakula catalogs.

The next time a Pakula tag turns up on a piece that looks very familiar to a Juliana collector, that history is worth remembering.

Source

Frank DeLizza, Memoirs of a Fashion Jewelry Manufacturer, p. 68.