|
|
|
Newsletter
January 2006
Letter
From The Editor
As we enter the new year, we are
seeing significant changes in
the Limited Edition collectibles
market.
The big news in the world of collectibles:
Islandia International is no longer
producing Limited Edition collectibles.
Suppliers still have a limited
number of Islandia plates and
figurines available, but they
are going fast. Once their supplies
are depleted, Islandia products
will only be available on the
secondary market. Most collectors
know what that means, but for
the uninitiated I will explain.
When collectibles can no longer
be purchased wholesale, then those
items can only be obtained from
private owners.
The value of collectibles has
always been governed by supply
and demand, but it is difficult
to know which collectibles will
be in great demand in the future.
People collect items for different
reasons. Sometimes the item has
historic appeal, but most of the
time the appeal is the item's
artistic or sentimental significance.
Limited Edition plates and figurines
are licensed, porcelain reproductions
of original works of art by famous
artists.
For example the series "Uncle
Tad's Cats" by Thaddeus
Krumeich. These plates have escalated
in value since their release because
owners are very hesitant to part
with them. They have great artistic
appeal, but the subjects also
appeal to our sentimental feelings
for our feline friends, which
is why we have not offered our
personal collection of Uncle Tad's
Cats for sale. It is difficult
to put a price on something that
you cherish. A good rule is, "Don't
buy it unless you love it."
If an object has meaning for you,
the value is secondary. But if
you love it, other people will
probably love it too.
Another example of a plate that
has escalated in value is Gregory
Perillo's "Chief
Sitting Bull". Perillo's
artistic talent has always enchanted
collectors and his plates are
highly prized, but Chief Sitting
Bull was obviously not one of
his most beautiful subjects. That
particular artistic achievement
is sought after for its historic
significance and because it was
the first plate released from
the Perillo art collection. That
release was also very limited
in number.
It is because of his important
contributions in the world of
art that we have chosen Gregory
Perillo to be our "Artist
of The Month" for January
2005. Don't miss his 'Artist's
Profile' in the article below.
The big news at ThePlateLady.com:
We are very excited to have found
a supplier that makes authentic
replicas of the art objects that
were once reserved only for kings,
pharaohs, and aristocrats to possess.
There was a time, in the not too
distant past, that such art objects
could only be owned by the decadently
rich who could afford to hire
scavengers to collect them; but
that time has now passed.
In the 21st Century there is a
pervading agreement that art should
be available for everyone to enjoy,
but also a seemingly contradictory
one that original artifacts should
not be removed from their historic
sites. That is why we are proud
to be able to offer replicas of
those magnificent art treasures
to our visitors, so they too can
enrich their lives with the ambiance
and beauty of the old world.
Although authentic ancient artifacts
are now becoming more readily
available, at a price many of
us can afford, there is a legal
and/or moral dilemma involved
in collecting the real thing:
Those items are often considered
'stolen' from the countries of
their origin. Either collectors
enter a country and remove the
artifacts (legally or illegally)
or that country's own citizens
become willing to deface and plunder
historically significant places
to earn the money they need to
survive.
Although it is true that citizens
of third-world countries are sometimes
personally responsible for the
loss of their own heritage of
antique art objects, buying such
objects can make us accomplices
to their potentially illegal actions.
See the article "Ancient
Treasures For Sale" by Steven
Vincent, that you will find below,
for an in-depth discussion of
that dilemma.
Our company has been approached
by individuals looking to market
items that were obviously authentic
artifacts. However, when we questioned
whether or not they had written
permission from the respective
governments to remove them, we
got no reply and communication
was abruptly terminated.
We will not and have never been
a party to distributing illegally
obtained items, but we do feel
that everyone should have the
opportunity to display antique
art objects in their homes, if
they so choose. That is why we
are embracing the art replica
industry. Art is to be enjoyed
by everyone and authentic replicas
make that possible, at an affordable
price, without removing or destroying
the originals from their historic
settings.
We have already added several
pages to our 'Figurines' category
that offer authentic replicas.
One such page is our "Egyptian"
art page where you will find much
more than just figurines. We also
have authentic replicas on our
"Warriors"
art page. In the near future we
plan to add a "Medieval"
art page, an "Eastern"
art page, and a Greek "Mythology"
art page where authentic replicas
can also be found.
Be assured that we will continue
on our mission to find additional
suppliers of authentic replicas
of antique artifacts in the future,
to add even more variety to our
offerings.
We are all about art and collecting
art objects, but that includes
respecting the cultures that produce
the art. We believe that offering
replicas not only brings those
wonderful and worldly art objects
within the reach of honest working
people, but it also honors the
honest working people who produced
the art.
Three articles are included in
this Newsletter that have to do
with art collecting. The first
article is "Ancient
Treasures For Sale" by
Steven Vincent. It discusses the
legality and consequences of removing
antique artifacts from historical
sites. The second article is "How
To Buy Art Online" by
David Waddleton. The third article
is "Art Collectibles
As A Hobby" by Brigitte
Smith. I am sure that you will
enjoy all three.
We hope you will have a wonderful
and prosperous New Year, and that
you will join us in our resolve
to protect and cherish the fascinating
art that inspires us to enhance
our lives.
|
Artist's
Profile: Gregory Perillo
Gregory Perillo was born in 1929,
in Greenwich Village, New York.
He is a painter and sculptor whose
style combines realism with impressionism.
Gregory Perillo has been awarded
numerous honors. His work can be
found in The Denver Museum of Natural
History, The Pettigrew Museum (Sioux
Falls, South Dakota), The Museum
of the North American Indian (Marathon,
Florida), The Butler Institute of
American Art (Youngstown, Ohio),
and Saint Michael's College (Santa
Fe, New Mexico).
When Gregory Perillo was a young
child, his father frequently took
him to museums and told him stories
about the American West, encouraging
his son to share his love of art
and American history. At the age
of 10, Perillo began to draw pictures
of many of the stories his father
told him.
Later Perillo enrolled briefly in
art school and then joined the Navy
in 1944. He served for two years
on the U.S.S. Storm King and during
that time he was assigned as a cartoonist.
Following that he studied at Pratt
Institute, The School of Visual
Arts, and with the Art Students
League
In 1950 he met William Leigh, whose
work Perillo had seen at the Grand
Central Galleries in New York. Perillo
spent the next five years, until
Leigh's death in 1955, studying
with him.
In the 1970's Perillo began sculpting
and ultimately completed about 30
pieces. Then in 1990, American Express
commissioned him to paint over fifty
oils and to sculpt two huge bronzes
for its world headquarters in Phoenix,
Arizona. His work is also displayed
in the corporate headquarters of
AT&T in Baskin Ridge, New Jersey;
the Governor's mansion in Albany,
New York; and at the University
of New Mexico.
Perillo now lives on Staten Island,
but he makes frequent trips West
to refresh his vision. He was one
of the first western artists to
combine portraits of animals and
humans on canvas; in fact he does
all facets of the American West
including wildlife.
He captures the fascinating saga
of the American Indian and his brave
heritage in a highly skillful style
that vividly portrays a colorful
chapter in American history.
|
Ancient
Treasures for Sale
Do antique dealers preserve
the past or steal it?
By Steven Vincent
April, 2005
As you read this, criminals somewhere
in the world are destroying portions
of mankind’s past. With backhoe
and shovel, chainsaw and crowbar,
they are wrenching priceless objects
from sites in the mountains of Peru,
the coasts of Sicily, and the deserts
of Iraq. Brutal and uncaring, these
robbers leave behind a wake of decapitated
statues, mutilated temples, and
pillaged trenches where archaeologists
were seeking clues to little-understood
civilizations. The results of this
looting include disfigured architectural
monuments, vanished aesthetic objects,
and an incalculable loss of information
about the past. And it shows no
signs of diminishing.
As you continue to read, other people
across the globe are purchasing
some of mankind’s oldest and
most exquisite creations. Contemplating
ancient statues, vases, and stelae,
many of these purchasers experience
antiquities’ near-mystical
power to connect them to the past
or to transcend time through beauty.
Proud of their efforts, these private
collectors, commercial dealers,
and museum curators view themselves
as temporary caretakers of timeless
treasures. Their love for these
artifacts often resembles the passion
one associates with religious fervor.
It, too, shows no signs of diminishing.
At first glance, the connection
between those who loot antiquities
and those who collect, trade, and
preserve them seems the stuff of
academic seminars and journals.
Yet such is the allure of ancient
treasures that, since the 1970s,
this relationship has spawned global
treaties, inflamed Third World nationalism,
created a secretive Washington bureaucracy,
and triggered federal prosecutions.
To some, this international cooperation
reflects the ability of the world’s
nations to unite to protect an endangered
world resource. To others, it demonstrates
the hazards resulting when “feel-good”
multinationalism collides not only
with the sovereignty of the United
States but with the basic human
desire to surround oneself with
objects of beauty.
“We have a situation in this
country today where American citizens
pursue their legal rights under
the shadow of prosecution by foreign
laws, and private and public collections
of antiquities are at risk to the
demands of cultural ministers in
other countries,” says New
York lawyer William Pearlstein.
“The antiquities situation
is a mess,” echoes Kate Fitz
Gibbon, a Santa Fe dealer in Central
Asian artifacts. “We’re
heading for a major crisis in the
near future.”
Artifactual Dispute
It’s been a decade since I
first wrote about “cultural
patrimony,” the question of
who has the right to own and exhibit
mankind’s aesthetic and archaeological
treasures. At the time, stories
were proliferating about looters
plundering the temples of Cambodia’s
Angkor Wat and the tombs of Mali’s
Niger River delta. Archaeologists
were still buzzing about the Metropolitan
Museum’s 1993 repatriation
to Istanbul of the so-called “Lydian
Horde” of gold objects, which
smugglers had illegally excavated
from Turkey and sold to the museum.
I found the topic abstruse, filled
with mind-numbing legal documents
and visually stunning artifacts.
All I knew for sure was that collector
demand for these objects created
incentives for looters to pillage
archaeological sites in Third World
countries. End the international
antiquity trade, I thought, and
the looting in those “source”
nations would stop.
In the late 1990s, though, my investigations
brought me to an urbane but down-to-earth
antiquities dealer named Frederick
Schultz. In his 57th Street gallery,
filled with vitrines displaying
relics of Chinese, Etruscan, and
other ancient civilizations, the
boyish Schultz explained the viewpoint
championed by the “trade.”
Looting is indeed a problem, he
conceded, but critics of dealers
were wrong. The international antiquities
market—together with the private
and public collections it supplies—preserves
ancient treasures and disseminates
their beauty and influence across
the globe. “A strong market
assures a free flow of antiquities
and acts in the best interests of
everyone—archaeologists, collectors,
and the people in source and market
nations,” Schultz argued.
He was persuasive. But then, as
the head of the New York–based
National Association of Dealers
in Ancient, Oriental, and Primitive
Art, he had to be; he was a high-profile
defender of the trade and an adviser
to the Clinton administration on
issues involving antiquities.
Cultural patrimony was the focus
of a complex, three-sided debate.
On one side, there are the “internationalists”:
academics, dealers, and collectors
who advocate a vigorous but regulated
market as the best way to protect
antiquities and promote global understanding
and universal values. “The
moment the Soviet Union fell, the
world plunged into ethnocentricity,”
says George Ortiz, a celebrated
collector of classical and Middle
Eastern antiquities. “Instead
of each group claiming its own heritage,
we need to create a common culture
by allowing art and antiquities
to circulate around the world.”
Opposed to this view is a second
group comprised of source nation
officials and Western academics
who believe cultural patrimony is
linked to a people’s identity
and sense of self-determination.
As Claude Daniel Ardouin, then director
of Senegal’s West African
Museum Program, once told me, “Our
cultural heritage tells us who we
are. I find it unacceptable that
big dealers are sitting around in
their shops in Paris and New York
thinking about the pretty objects
they are going to take from my country.”
These “nationalists”
generally call for a trade that
is limited, heavily regulated, and
open to public scrutiny.
The third party is the most extreme.
It consists of archaeologists who
castigate the trade for removing
cultural artifacts from their indigenous
context, rendering them useless
for scientific study. Unlike the
nationalists, many archaeologists
oppose the export of cultural property
to insure its preservation and accessibility.
“One cares about the people
and the area in which we work, but
our primary interest is to understand
the history of the country,”
says Colin Renfrew, a member of
the British House of Lords and director
of the Cambridge University–based
McDonald Institute for Archaeological
Research. Many in this group would
like to see the antiquities trade
shut down altogether. According
to Boston University archaeologist
Ricardo Elia, “Collectors
and dealers are dinosaurs. They
think it’s still the 18th
century, when you could rip things
out of the ground and put them on
your mantle.”
The Long Arm of Mexican Law
The nationalists’ and archaeologists’
illiberal amalgam of Third World
nationalism, anti-capitalist sentiment,
and distrust of aesthetic connoisseurship
dates back to the U.N. Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s
(UNESCO) 1970 Convention on the
Means of Prohibiting and Preventing
the Illicit Import, Export, and
Transfer of Ownership of Cultural
Property. The first major international
agreement to protect cultural property
from thieves and smugglers, the
convention created a legal framework
allowing signatory governments to
negotiate for the return of looted
items. Over the years, UNESCO followed
with further “recommendations”
that clarified international rules
for protecting and exchanging cultural
property. These pronouncements reflected
an increasingly anti-market bias.
In 2001, for example, UNESCO declared
that “underwater cultural
heritage shall not be commercially
exploited.”
The U.S. signed the convention in
1972, and in 1983 Congress passed
the Cultural Properties Implementation
Act (CPIA), which established a
process by which source nations
could request U.S. import bans on
archaeological material originating
within their borders. Legislators
hoped restricting entry into the
American market would help reduce
looting. Mindful of UNESCO’s
anti-market bias, however, they
included in the CPIA measures to
protect dealers, collectors, and
museums. “We felt we were
in the business of encouraging the
legitimate circulation of cultural
objects,” says Meredith Palmer,
who as a State Department official
in the 1970s helped develop the
legal and intellectual framework
for the CPIA. “We took pains
to ensure that any law based on
the convention reflected the interests
of the American people.”
Be that as it may, the result was
a classic example of what happens
when the state decides to limit
or prevent people from doing what
they feel is their natural right,
in this case purchasing antiquities.
Under the CPIA, a nation seeking
U.S. import restrictions on cultural
objects must submit a petition giving
its reasons for the request, documenting,
among other topics, the severity
of the looting problem and the country’s
own efforts to curtail it. Further,
it must identify categories of endangered
objects and specific sites jeopardized
by robbers. An advisory committee
reviews the request, then passes
its recommendations to an anonymous
State Department official empowered
to approve the petition, generally
for a period of five years.
The law does not require this official
to declare reasons for the restrictions.
Nor must the State Department provide
the public with any documentation
to support the decision. Even the
advisory committee is not privy
to all information. “The process
is frustrating and shrouded in secrecy,”
says Santa Fe dealer Fitz Gibbon,
who served on the committee from
2001 to 2003.
Worse, the CPIA proved ineffective
in protecting the interests of American
citizens. In November 1995, U.S.
Customs agents entered the New York
home of collector Michael Steinhardt
and confiscated a third-to-fourth-century
Sicilian gold bowl, or “phiale,”
that Steinhardt acquired from a
New York dealer for $1.2 million.
In February 1995, Italian authorities
had requested the U.S. government’s
help in retrieving the phiale, which
they claimed was part of Italy’s
cultural patrimony. (Italian law
claims state ownership of all antiquities
located in Italy, except for those
privately owned before 1902.) Using
the guidelines of the National Stolen
Property Act (NSPA), U.S. officials
agreed the phiale was stolen property.
But as Steinhardt’s defenders
noted, Italy had not requested import
restrictions under the CPIA. So
what right did customs agents have
in accusing Steinhardt of possessing
stolen property and invading his
home to confiscate it?
Enter McClain v. the United States,
the most controversial aspect of
the cultural patrimony issue in
this country and a source of continuing
acrimony and contention. When federal
agents entered Steinhardt’s
home to confiscate the “stolen”
phiale, they based their action
on the 1977 case of an appraiser,
Patty McClain, whom American authorities
had arrested for carrying pre-Columbian
antiquities across the Mexican border
into the U.S. In that judgment,
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
5th Circuit in New Orleans, using
Mexican law to define stolen archaeological
property, upheld McClain’s
conviction. To put it another way,
an American citizen was arrested,
convicted, and jailed in the U.S.
based on the cultural property laws
of a foreign nation. “In my
opinion,” says Stanford University
law professor John H. Merryman,
a staunch supporter of regulated
international antiquities trade,
“McClain was poorly decided.”
In Steinhardt’s case, that
25-year-old ruling permitted Italy
to assert its state ownership laws
in American courts, thus turning
the phiale into stolen property
under U.S. law. Steinhardt unsuccessfully
appealed in 1997, and the phiale
was returned to Italy. The shock
waves from the case are still being
felt. Says Ashton Hawkins, former
counsel to the trustees of the Metropolitan
Museum: “The government made
a lot of people apprehensive by
seeming able to seize anything on
the basis of a complaint from a
foreign government. When the U.S.
begins to enforce foreign laws against
private citizens without due process,
this is trouble.”
The Antique Dealer in the Flak Jacket
Emboldened by the Steinhardt case,
anti-market forces, particularly
archaeologists, intensified their
attacks. They began portraying dealers
and collectors as greedy plunderers
running what one archaeologist called
a “vast international network”
to loot countries in Central America,
Europe, Egypt, and the Middle East.
Ricardo Elia once declared to me
that he wanted to make collecting
as “socially distasteful as
smoking cigarettes, wearing fur,
or eating an endangered species.”
Lord Renfrew has accused major American
museums of “stimulating much
of the looting in the world.”
One Park Avenue collector told me
he felt like donning a “flak
jacket in public, like I was an
abortion doctor.” A new clamor
arose concerning the world’s
most notorious case of “cultural
plunder”: the Elgin Marbles,
sculptures from the Parthenon that
Britain’s Lord Elgin purchased
in the early 19th century and shipped
back to England. The British Museum
has them on display, ignoring Greece’s
repeated requests for their return.
Whenever I dropped by Schultz’s
gallery, I found the director writing
letters, articles, and legal briefs
defending the trade. “This
is ridiculous!” he griped
one afternoon. “I read that
archaeologists liken our profession
to international drug dealers. They’re
saying we rake in $5 billion a year
in dirty profits! Do you know what
we estimate the entire international
antiquities trade amounts to? Around
$200 million a year! Where do they
get the nerve?”
As the archaeologists stepped up
their assault, the trade sharpened
its arguments and continues to assert
them today. “We have to,”
says New York dealer Jerry Eisenberg.
“The charge that we’re
somehow responsible for the ‘rape
of the land’ makes a greater
impact on the public than our arguments
about the benefits of trade.”
Stanford’s Merryman frequently
criticizes source country laws that
define antiquities as state property.
Egypt and Turkey, for example, assert
ownership of certain privately held
objects within their borders, including
some owned for generations. Merryman
argues that such laws ensure that
the supply of material remains short,
thereby creating a lucrative black
market. Others, such as collector
Ortiz, note that source countries
maintain warehouses and storerooms
filled with thousands of uncatalogued
antiquities, many of which are just
“rotting away.”
Critics also observe that source
countries are often unable or unwilling
to pay their citizens for the antiquities
they discover. Dealers maintain
that many items are tomb objects
uncovered by accident, for instance
by farmers tilling their fields.
If the farmers cannot sell what
they discover in a legitimate market,
and if their government will not
buy such artifacts from them, they
have two choices (aside from simply
letting the state appropriate the
finds): destroy the objects or sell
them illegally.
There is also a problem of terminology,
trade supporters argue. Many source
country export laws blur the distinction
between “looted,” “illegally
exported,” “stolen,”
and “unprovenanced”
objects, thereby making it appear
as if dealers operate some vast
criminal enterprise, when there
are subtle but significant differences
between those terms. For example,
critics of the trade, including
many journalists, unjustifiably
assume that any antiquity without
a solid early provenance probably
has been looted.
“The burden of proof is on
us, and that’s unfair,”
Schultz frequently argued. “For
hundreds of years, people have been
buying and selling objects without
keeping or publishing proper records.
Many collections were built decades
ago; contrary to what the archaeology
Hezbollah maintains, there are bona
fide old collections.”
Teachings of Buddha
In the winter of 2001, an event
occurred that bolstered arguments
in favor of an international antiquities
market: Afghanistan’s Taliban
regime destroyed two colossal third-century
sandstone sculptures of Buddha at
Bamiyan. Although the statues, each
standing more than 100 feet tall,
were too large for purchase, their
fate posed uncomfortable questions
for source country nationalists
and archaeologists. What happens
when a country’s government
decides to eliminate rather than
retain its cultural heritage? In
such a case, wouldn’t leaving
objects in their archaeological
sites threaten their existence?
International trade, by contrast,
would bring artifacts to safe harbor
in private collections and museums.
“The market gives objects
value,” contends noted New
York collector Shelby White. “Like
we saw at Bamiyan, source countries
often destroy temples for political
or religious reasons. Other times,
they simply use ancient columns
and pillars for new construction.
Then you have cases where common
people who find antiquities often
melt them down for the gold, or
simply throw them away. They don’t
care about the craftsmanship or
beauty of the object.”
These problems are not confined
to rogue nations. For example, China’s
Three Gorges Dam project, when completed,
will submerge countless undiscovered
antiquities beneath a 400-mile reservoir.
“A stronger market system
could have created incentives for
Chinese officials to excavate and
preserve the objects and sell them,”
notes Jim Fitzpatrick, a Washington,
D.C.-based lawyer who lobbies Congress
on behalf of the trade. “When
they permanently flood untold numbers
of irreplaceable artifacts, how
much does China really care about
their antiquities?”
But if market supporters felt the
destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas
and the Three Gorges Dam had finally
given the trade the moral high ground,
their victory was short-lived. In
July 2001 federal prosecutors accused
a prominent antiquities dealer of
handling objects that a confederate
had smuggled from Egypt. For the
trade, this was a catastrophe. Because
the government based the indictment
largely on McClain, a conviction
in the case risked confirmation
of that notorious ruling by the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd
Circuit, which has jurisdiction
over the New York art market. Not
only that, but the indicted dealer
was none other than Frederick Schultz.
Schultz’s trial, held in February
2002, was a veritable how-to guide
for smuggling ancient artifacts.
The star witness against the dealer
was the former British cavalry officer
and master antiquities restorer
Jonathan Tokeley-Parry.
According to Tokeley-Parry’s
testimony, from 1990 to 1994 he
purchased numerous items, including
statuary, from Egyptian “farmers
and builders,” used his restoration
skills to disguise them as tourist
tchotchkes, and spirited them out
of the country.
His actions violated Egyptian Law
117, which states that any antiquities
found within the country’s
borders are state-owned and thus
cannot be exported or sold. Tokeley-Parry
(who evidently turned against Schultz
in order to shorten a prison sentence
in England involving other smuggled
Egyptian antiquities) testified
that Schultz sold these and other
illegally acquired objects to Western
collectors, claiming they originated
from the fictitious “Allcock
Collection,” supposedly begun
in the 1920s.
Buy an Antique, Hire a Lawyer
In response, Schultz portrayed himself
as an innocent associate of Tokeley-Parry,
hounded by overzealous prosecutors.
Egypt itself had made no claim for
the objects the Englishman had taken
out of the country, the dealer argued.
Furthermore, Egypt had never requested
import restrictions as required
by the CPIA. The only justification
the U.S. government had in declaring
Tokeley-Parry’s objects as
“stolen property” was
Law 117. And the only reason it
could use foreign law to accuse
Schultz of a crime was the McClain
ruling. “If the court agrees
that Congress intended the CPIA
to set our country’s policies
toward antiquities, then Fred has
a good chance of acquittal,”
a lawyer supporting Schultz told
me at the time. “If the court
decides to apply McClain, he could
be in trouble.”
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff applied
McClain. Ruling that the CPIA and
McClain were not mutually exclusive,
he upheld the government’s
contention that under U.S. law Tokeley-Parry
stole objects from Egypt; prosecutors
then worked to prove that Schultz
knowingly handled these pilfered
artifacts. After a brief deliberation,
the jury found the dealer guilty
of a single charge of conspiring
to handle stolen property. In June
2002 Rakoff sentenced him to 33
months in prison and a $50,000 fine.
For the anti-trade camp, this was
Wellington at Waterloo. A highly
respected dealer had been convicted
for his involvement in a smuggling
operation, proving beyond a doubt
the link between the antiquities
trade and looting. Moreover, Schultz’s
conviction affirmed McClain in the
2nd Circuit, the heart of the antiquities
trade. “McClain is now established
in the 5th, 2nd, and 9th circuits,”
notes Patty Gerstenblith, a DePaul
University law professor and former
president of the Archaeological
Institute of America. “I don’t
think market people recognize what
an important legal development this
is. They’re in denial.”
Not all of them. “The fact
that the 2nd Circuit upheld McClain
is huge, no doubt about it,”
agrees Fitzpatrick, the Washington
lawyer. “But how far will
prosecutors take it? Does this mean
that anyone who purchases an antiquity
in the U.S. has to hire a lawyer
first, to make sure the purchase
doesn’t violate a foreign
country’s patrimony laws?
What’s the state of these
laws around the world? Which ones
apply, which ones don’t?”
Fitz Gibbon, the Santa Fe dealer,
says, “I fear the government
is gearing up for more prosecutions,
using McClain and the NSPA. Where
will it end? This will only be settled
by some huge court case involving
a museum collection, I’m afraid.”
Schultz’s conviction did not
bring a truce to the cultural patrimony
wars. The bitterness continues,
with archaeologists and the trade
each rallying around a new cause
célèbre. For the archaeologists,
it is the purchase last fall by
the Cleveland Museum of a bronze
statue of Apollo, between 1,700
and 2,400 years old. The object’s
documentation dates back to an East
German lawyer who claims to have
discovered it on his family estate
in the 1990s. “This is just
simply not a convincing provenance,”
contends Malcolm Bell, a professor
of art history at the University
of Virginia and a vice president
of the Archaeological Institute
of America.
Worse, the museum purchased the
work from Phoenix Ancient Art, a
business headquartered in Geneva,
Switzerland, owned by brothers Ali
and Hicham Aboutaam. Last year an
Egyptian court sentenced Ali in
absentia to 15 years in prison for
smuggling; last June, Hicham pleaded
guilty in New York to a federal
charge of falsified documents pertaining
to an ancient silver vessel that
the Phoenix Gallery sold for $950,000.
“How, in this day and age,
can a respectable museum do this?”
demands Lord Renfrew. “Doesn’t
the American taxpayer realize they
are subsidizing the purchase of
items like these through government
support of museums? I find it curious
there is not more outrage.”
As for the trade, its members are
currently preparing to do battle
over a CPIA request submitted last
May by the People’s Republic
of China asking for restrictions
on an array of objects, including
nonarchaeological works like calligraphy
and paintings dating from as recently
as 1912. Says the New York–based
Asian dealer James Lally, “I
fear that these import restrictions
are so broad they may inhibit the
legitimate trade in Chinese material
and chill the honorable practice
of collecting.”
In the past, dealers note, the Chinese
government did not want to shame
itself by seeking U.S. help to curb
its looting problem, relying instead
on Chinese collectors to buy back
the nation’s cultural patrimony.
So why make a request now?
One theory posits that a new and
more nationalistic director of the
State Bureau of Cultural Relics
has pushed for these restrictions.
Others believe it’s part of
a quid pro quo: China cracks down
on pirated CDs, and we close off
our shores to Chinese material,
helping to boost China’s domestic
market for antiquities. Or perhaps,
as the dean of Chinese dealers,
Robert Elsworth, suggests, “Instead
of letting construction projects
like the Three Gorges Dam destroy
objects, China may simply let looters
take them out of the country, then
use U.S. Customs officials to intercept
and return them back to China.”
In keeping with the secrecy surrounding
these petitions, a State Department
spokesman says officials are reviewing
China’s request and have yet
to schedule private or public meetings
on the issue.
Hidden Objects
No resolution to this conflict is
in sight. Changes have certainly
occurred, though. Take Iraq. So
far, few objects looted from the
war-torn country have appeared on
the market. “Five years ago,
you would have seen Iraqi objects
up and down Madison Avenue,”
comments DePaul’s Gerstenblith.
“Our efforts have proven successful
in that area.” (Others argue
that thieves simply have filled
up warehouses with pilfered Iraqi
antiquities, waiting for the statute
of limitations to expire.)
Has the rate of worldwide looting
actually diminished? “I don’t
think so,” says collector
White. “Objects are going
elsewhere—to Japan and Europe
and the Middle East. All we’ve
done is make public and private
collections more vulnerable to claims
from foreign countries. At the same
time, we’ve made it harder
for Americans to see the glories
of the past.”
Reason
Foundation
|
How
To Buy Art Online
By David Waddleton
Just a few years ago it seemed people
thought the idea of purchasing “clothing”
through the internet was absurd.
How would you know if it fits? What
if it doesn’t fit? What if
my credit card number gets stolen?
Those were just a few of the many
questions I had personally five
or so years ago. Hopefully this
article will help shed some light
on some of your inquiries.
The internet has significantly
changed the art market. Significantly,
meaning people now have choices
at their fingertips. The sometimes
intimidating and cold art galleries,
are now only one option. There
are also many art websites that
offer secure shopping, money back
guarantees, and customer support.
Shoppers no longer have to feel
they are playing Russian roulette
when they are purchasing from
secure sites .
Here are some hints and tips
I feel might be useful:
Search and Search Some More:
Without the hassles of walking/driving
from one gallery to another and
limited gallery hours, you have
more time at your disposal to
do your research. You have the
ability to view hundreds of works
of art within the average time
someone else, who actually goes
to an art gallery, will be able
to see a dozen. For me that means
a greater chance to find a new
painting I will fall in love with.
Take your Time: Yes, buying
off the internet is far from perfect.
So follow your heart and take
your time. Send the image to your
friends, research the artist,
and take advantage of the many
gallery website features available
at your disposal, such as “view-to-scale,
background colors, zoom, etc”.
Ask questions if you want by emailing
the website. You can also comparison
shop. Remember if you like one
piece of art and it's too expensive
for your taste or pocketbook,
there is surely another work of
art that is similar and can fit
your budget.
Protect Yourself: Read up
on the website. Find out how long
it's been in business. See if
the website provides secure shopping
and secured online purchases.
Read about what the customers
and any articles have to say about
the website and its artists. Check
if the artwork will come with
an authentication that you feel
comfortable with and find out
if they have a return policy that
you find reasonable. When you
have done your homework, buy it
and enjoy the work of art that
you purchased through the future
of art shopping, with confidence.
View our Fine Art Gallery
at www.houseofcachet.com.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com
|
Art
Collectibles as a Hobby
By Brigitte Smith
Start an art collectible hobby and
beautify your home ...
Collecting is a fun hobby,
and one of the most interesting
things to collect is art. Hobby
enthusiasts collect any number
of art objects, such as saw blades
and wooden eggs that have had
artwork painted on. People even
collect designer rugs as art.
Another hobby is collecting limited
edition art plates, thimbles,
Christmas ornaments, and figurines
produced by such companies as
Bradford Exchange. And of course,
many people collect fine art paintings.
The person with an art collectible
hobby will probably find his or
her own favorite artist whose
works they appreciate. They can
choose to focus on one particular
artist, either past or present,
or they can choose from the works
of many artists. On the other
hand, they may collect art and
art objects around a theme they
enjoy such as cigars, wild animals,
or piano music.
One may think of an art collector
as a rich person who has the money
to spend hundreds of thousands
of dollars on an original Van
Gogh. However, a person of more
modest means can collect art too.
Post cards are a good place to
start. Most art museum gift shops
offer high quality, glossy postcards
printed with some of their more
notable acquisitions. By buying
those cards one really appreciates,
anyone can have an art collection.
Ebay is a good source of art
collectibles, whatever the type
of art collectible you fancy.
In fact, if you are just starting
out, the choices and options can
be overwhelming! Just remember
that you can sell your own belongings
as well as buying those of others.
This should make the impact on
the budget a little less powerful.
Another ideas for collecting inexpensive
art is scouring flea markets,
thrift shops, and garage sales.
You never know what treasure someone
else may be getting rid of.
One nice thing about art collecting
is that artists come from every
part of the world. The art collector
should scout the local art shows,
museums, and artist's hangouts
to find out just what sort of
talent can be had less expensively
and close to home. Because of
the local flavor of some artwork,
art collectibles also make good
travel souvenirs. For instance,
the artist Linda Barnicott specializes
in paintings of scenes, buildings,
and landmarks found around Pittsburg,
Pennsylvania. Similarly, collectors
can find local artist almost everywhere.
An art collectible hobby will
keep you interested in life and
give you a home filled with art
masterpieces, as well. If you
enjoy having pretty and interesting
things around you, consider starting
an art collectible hobby today.
Find out more about hobbies
of all types at the Learn
How Guides - where you can
learn how to do just about anything!
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com
|
|
|
|
Collection
Displays
Dinnerware Displays
Doll Stands & Cases
Plate Frames
Plate & Platter Hangers
PlateRacks & Plate Rails
Plate, Platter, Bowl Stands
Home Decor
Animal Art
Art-Deco/ Art Nouveau
Capturing The Moment
Chess Sets
Cultural Art
Dragon Art
Egyptian Art
Fairy & Unicorns
Fantasy Art
Medieval Art
Asian Art
Museum Reproductions
Norman Rockwell Art
Sandra Kuck Figurines
Terry Redlin Art
Warrior & Knight Art
Ornaments
Sandra Kuck Ornaments
Decorative Egg Stands
Ornament Hangers & Trees
Jewelry
Costume Jewelry
Collectible Music Boxes
Jewelry
Hangers & Stands
Information
About Us
Collectibles Information
Contact Us
Help
Page
Helpful Links
Home Page
Privacy Policy
Site Map
|
|