In the aftermath of the Bonhams sale one collector of ancient Grecian geegaws over on Tim Haines' Yahoo Ancient Artifacts discusion group ostensibly for "responsible collectors" says that:
they [whoever they are] wait for the catalog to be published and at the last minute before the sale they make a huge fuss, all this is timend to perfection to make the auction house look stupid and unethical. what bonhams said was right, why dont they publish the whole file of photos or put them on the art loss register so they can refuse the pieces in the first place.
Arrrrrrr! [I have contacted the author off-list pointing out that in what he wrote to Tim Haines' Yahoo list, he's wrong on at least three counts - but more of than anon]. Anyhow, his post elicited the following
reply by the ACCG's retained mouthpiece:
Whoever they are, they find it easy to prey on the auction houses. Should that become difficult for them they will move downward -- first to retailers, then to collectors. It does prove, however, that all of the nonsense about promoting ethical collecting and exercising due diligence is just that -- nonsense. Obviously, due diligence, is something that they, themselves, do not practice. The collector and dealer are nothing more than cannon-fodder to them. Using cult techniques, they give a false impression of being your allies [...]
Well, the whistle-blowing we are talking about here was from the
Art Newspaper who apparently ACCG's Hooker accuses of only "pretending" to be the art buyer's ally. Eh? I am not sure the rich London auction houses really would fit into anyone else's definition of "easy to prey on". Neither am I at all clear where it has been "proven" thatexcept in Hooker's fevered imagination that ethical collecting is just a "nonsense" thought up by this undefined "Other". I really do feel that posts like this show clearly the extent to which the ACCG and "collectors' rights" movement it represents are losing direction and heading deeper and deeper into the lunatic fringe. The ACCG clearly needs a new leadership.
2 comments:
The collector reported here assumes that members of staff at Bonhams were unaware of the issue until the report appeared in The Art Newspaper just before the sale.
Indeed, but as you say an assumption. As you know these people exclude from their number people who might be able to provide real information rather than their guesswork, glib claptrap and wishful thinking. that is no basis for any kind of "discussion", but of course that is not really what Tim Haines' Yahoo Ancient Artifacts group is about. Having people with facts and different ideas in the group would get in the way of the "groupthink".
Post a Comment