Home > Archive >Desperately Seeking Ottoman
Author:jc
email: jc@rugkazbah.com
Wed, Aug 23rd, 2006 02:52:32 PM
Topic: Desperately Seeking Ottoman

RK has now had the opportunity to read he whole of pacquin’s long-winded paean to his “newly discovered group of embroideries".

It should be read as nothing more than a woefully transparent attempt to ‘prove’ something, actually anything, other than the fact these embroideries are the new, made to order, recent market fakes, as we have previously stated.

We illustrate above another of these bogus needleworks and, while it is no better or worse than any of the others pacquin has collected, it does smack in major ways, at least to us, as having come from a forgers mind and hand rather than, as pacquin mistakenly hopes, from an early period and traditional Ottoman source.

Clearly pacquin is so desperately seeking Ottoman he overlooks, or is it just discounts, all the evidence he himself presents concerning the important discrepancies, both technical and visual, his embroideries and genuine traditional period Ottoman embroideries possess.

If pacquin is playing the ‘doubting thomas’, something a careful reading of his article does question, we would have to more appropriately class him as a doubting and dumb thomas, rather than just a doubting one.

In support of our contentions, about pacquin and his embroideries, we offer below some additional quotes from his article along with our comments and rebuttal following.

Once again, pacquin’s appear in “quotations” with our’s in bold typeface.

“If our textiles are forgeries, we might well as, “of what?” It would be a unique approach to create a new category of object, with no established market value, which would be subject to close scrutiny? Why use an unevenly woven silk ground, a different technique, a different fabric width, and a mixture of metropolitan and provincial styles of drawing? Would not more conventional materials, along with consistent court-style drawing be easier to promote a real and pass more easily into the marketplace?”

These rhetorical questions pacquin throws out are, like dirty dishwater, really valueless and though they might sound good on paper, or in the case of the dishwater taste good to a thirsty someone stranded in the Sahara for many days, they have no real import or meaning. Especially as pacquin forgets them as soon as he starts waxing on about them and the “possibilities” they are genuine.

Nor do those questions mollify in any regard the incredibly high probability -- RK feels impossibility -- these embroideries are period traditional Ottoman artworks.

All pacquin’s questions are mooted by the fact fakery is widespread in Turkey and Iran, as well as Pakistan and Russia, with any of these countries having the materials, knowledge and skilled workers necessary to produce these embroideries.

In the end RK finds pacquin’s playing both sides of the fence -- are they real or not – to be obnoxious and disingenuous since he bought them and is obviously looking to increase their presence in rugdom for his own reasons.

So forget the questions, pacquin, and concentrate on the facts you enumerate pointing to their being fakes but somehow choose to keep ignoring.

“Entertaining as conspiracy theories may be, the simplest explanation is that in our embroideries we have found a new, previously unrecorded, group. But until we establish a provenance, the place and time of manufacture of these textiles will remain a mystery.”

Well, mr pacquin, please tell us, and we are sure many other interested parties, why -- in real reasoning please and not your convoluted wishin’ and hopin’ mode -- this is the “simplest” explanation?

RK might believe it is the simplest explanation simpletons might swallow, is that what you mean?

“For the moment the sheer artistry, the power of their designs, and the beauty of their materials all combine to make a strong case for them being a newly discovered, old, and very beautiful products made within the Ottoman artistic melieu(sic).”

Again we have to reiterate these embroideries are not produced with sheer artistry, their designs have no real power – we see only a vague reflection of “power”, and the beauty of their materials? Sorry, pacquin, we are sure even from just looking at your photos that not one, let alone all, of your embroideries could hold their own when shown alongside genuine period Ottoman needleworks.

These bogus copies might look good to your inexperienced eyes but to anyone with real expertise they ring hollow and appear to be rather ungainly reproductions.

They are not beautiful, their designs and patterns are gross attempts to mimic, combined with no sense of the originals majesty or creativity.

To coin a phrase, they are nothing short of horrible.

“The most striking difference, however, is that most of the textiles in our group are worked in a single type of stitch not normally used in traditional pieces. Similar to a closed blanket stitch, it has long floats and a characteristic outlining ridge on one side of each motif. The presence of thus ridge on the ‘right’ side of the textile is the sole difference in the appearance of the work on the front and the back. By contrast, traditional Ottoman embroideries use a variety of stitches on any given example…..Their surface has a distinctive and varied texture that is very different from the equally distinctive appearance of our group.”

Added to all the other differences these embroideries demonstrate compared to the originals, the above is just over-kill to any thoughts pacquin or others hold that they might be genuine.

Come on, pacquin, hali, and you numbskulls at the acor who are going to “exhibit” this group of fakes in Boston in April, wake up and face the fact you all got fooled or it is screwed?

“First we must assume they were made in an area geographically removed from the capital….there had to have been local patronage……this patronage had to be in some important commercial outpost with ready trade access….”

Why should anyone accept this arrow shot in the dark from pacquin’s puny bow of reality? And, after all the other statements pacquin writes negating the possibility they are real, why does he then wax on cloyingly like this?

We believe, and have been proven right before, many readers in rugdom are not able to separate the wheat from the chaff and if pacquin keeps implying they are real, even though in the next sentence he gingerly backs off from that position, eventually the message they ‘might be real’ will be believed and remembered.

Maybe the likes of ben evans and the acor amateurs will be so impressed but surely no one with experience could possibly join in such a circle jerk of nonsense.

“In fact, our embroideries may eventually prove to be akin to other unlikely survivals, where a small number of items were preserved in a protected environment.”

This is but one more attempt pacquin makes to answer the “are they fake issue”. Yes, mr pacquin, anything is possible. Even the idea you and some school children from Amherst made them is possible. Sure we agree that explanation is highly doubtful, as is your belief they might be period Ottoman. Impossible we say again, sir.

Then pacquin continues to point out the appearance many years ago of an unknown supposed silk Timurid carpet and four early Anatolian animal rugs, -- one that is now in the Metropolitan Museum in New York -- found allegedly in Tibet. Sure enough, mr pacquin, those broke new ground but they, unlike your embroideries, were beyond question old, and were all entirely different in every respect. These differences, their unassailable age and genuineness, demolish your silly and pointless comparison. As an aside, let us add not all of those pile carpets were as old as their carbon-dating tests implied, well at least not in RK estimation.

As for carbon-dating your embroideries? All we can suggest is don’t even bother because if they do date early, such an occurrence will only add further questions and doubt to the reliability of C14 dating for Oriental Rugs and related weavings made after 1300. It will not do one thing to prove your embroideries are anything but the fakes we believe they are.

““Sending a son, brother or cousin of the Sultan to govern a provincial center was a common means of limiting the influence of potential political rivals and such a high-born exile would have the financial resources and access to the high-style artistic products necessary to inspire a local embroidery production to use a metropolitan repertoire.”

In his extensive fishing expedition to find any reason to explain the horrendous discrepancies his embroideries have compared to genuine ones, pacquin’s quote above shows his wholesale desperation to search for any possible rejoinder, no matter how absurd or ridiculous.

This silly penchant to float nonsensical, and even incredibly stupid ones like that above, highlights either pacquin’s misplaced role as ‘explorer or discoverer’ or his sever lack of understanding what the minimum level of supporting documentation for such an exercise would require.

In any case, pacquin’s way, way off base and out in left field alone.

We could go on, as there are other gaffs and malapropisms we could cite. However, let’s end with the grossest understatement, or is it just another wishin’ and hopin’ remark from pacquin’s desperately seeking Ottoman stance:

“In spite of the design parallels documented above, we cannot be sure of the dating of our group.”

Yes, yes, mr pacquin not only can’t you substantiate any dating but you can not substantiate anything about these embroideries other than the fact you bought them, authored the hali article and will exhibit them at acor.

Besides those ‘facts’ there are no others, except they, as a group or even individually, are highly questionable and specious textiles.

Oh yes, there is one other : RK has declared them fakes and trust us on this one, mr pacquin, you can take that fact to the bank rather than your hopin’ and wishin’ a group of gullible ruggies will line up and wave their checkbooks at you as they peel them off the wall at acor.

Author: jc
email:
Wed, Aug 23rd, 2006 02:52:32 PM

In the latest and surely not greatest issue of hali, number 147, we spied, finally, a mention of pacquin's "Ottoman" embroideries.

In an almost "Stranger in a Strange Land" review of the acor Boston event, daniel, aka hamburger danny, schaeffer called pacquin's bogus as a three dollar bill needleworks "...controversial "Ottomanesque" silk embroideries..."

Well, you might say: "Thank God for small things", as it is about time hali addressed, even in passing, the stupid 12 page spread and glowing respect they paid to pacquin and his “discovery” in a previous issue.

RK is still scratching our head about the apparent bigger than life boner hali and company initially made in setting up as genuine this clearly questionable group of embroideries pacquin tried to float as circa 17th/18th century.

With even the most green behind the ears ruggies now realizing these "embroideries" are, at best, later-day copies of period Ottoman ones, not to mention the underlying suspicion they are out and out recently produced fakes, it is small wonder RK has been calling for some sort of public debate about not only the fact these pieces are not what they have been cracked up to be but, more importantly, why hali and acor chose to allow pacquin to even present them as genuine in the first place.

The lack of any oversight here smacks of collusion and, in our mind, gross dereliction of duty.

If the best fat-boy schaeffer and hali co inc. can do, after all these months, is to call pacquin's pieces controversial, it proves in spades what RK has been saying from the get-go -- Rugdom is infected (both at the top, middle and bottom) by a bunch of self-serving rug-idiots and poohbahs, like schaeffer, who can not be relied upon to do anything other than continue to push a rancid and highly specious status quo agenda meant to shore up and prevent any real academics and truth from entering, and countering, the fairy-tale land of BS the pacquin embroideries and, of course, the dodds/LACMA Turkish Rug have so regrettably established.

By the way, a number of other articles in issue 147 contain equally questionable statements and, if we feel like it, we will present our typically fresh aired facts and opinions about some of them – particularly the clearly fanciful, and self-possessed, presentation john weretime and cathy, aka where’s my commission, cootner penned about our recently departed friend Caroline McCoy Jones’s textile collecting career.

Frankly, RK is tired of being the only voice in rugdom willing to present positions that make mockery of those rugdom’s elite, which is composed of the icoc/acor grandees, auction house expurts, leading high profile advertisement guzzling dealers and the hali staff, invariably adopt to assure their own self-preservation and continued financial successes.

Oh, just as an after thought: Have any of you been stupid enough to buy one of pacquin’s “treasures? If so, all we can say, is caveat emptor, times ten.

Author: jc
email:
Sun, Jul 30th, 2006 12:14:03 PM

Over the past several years RK has taken hali to task for a number of reasons, not the least of which was their refusal to weigh in on the two of the most grievous issues rugdom has faced—the LACMA/dodds rug purchase and the uncontested bogus pacquin embroidery presentation.

The fact hali has done everything possible to avoid any discussion bodes quite poorly for any belief the magazine is anything other than a paid mouthpiece for, and compromised by an unhealthy attachment to, an establishment that allows a carpet-bagger like dennis dodds to operate with impunity and a pseudo-academic environment that encourages fraud and ignorance to flourish.

Whatever criticism we have sent in hail’s way, or to those like dodds and pacquin who are equally, if not more so, culpable, is well deserved.

In fact, RK has had little good to say in respect to hali or any of these participants.

However, RK recently spent some time on the hali website and did find something we can righteously praise.

In that most recent perusal we just learned of hali making available to all readers, not only their subscribers, a free online digital copy of a recent issue.

The issue they chose for this promotion is number 144 (Jan-Feb 2006).

We must commend them on the excellent job they have done, as the quality of the programming and the user-friendly setup is expertly done and works flawlessly.

RK knows how difficult it is to present material online and hali has done an admirable job. In fact, it is the best part of their website.

Might we suggest they offer an online only subscription which would allow them to offer a subscription at a very reduced rate to their exorbitant newsstand and subscriber prices?

It would surely be a way to encourage wider readership and, perhaps, the best way to regain many former subscribers who have cancelled because of those high prices.

Coincidently, the article pacquin wrote about his “discovery” of the trove of alleged 17th/18th century Ottoman embroideries is in that issue and consequently is now viewable online.

We suggest any reader who has not had the opportunity to read it in its entirety do so now.

Here is the URL for it:

http://www.exacteditions.com/exact/browse/340/360/1268/2/61/0/

We also suggest readers write into hali and suggest they initiate an online only subscription.

Author: jc
email:
Mon, Feb 27th, 2006 09:23:40 PM

As we just wrote elsewhere on RK’s board, we called erik risman and during that short call learned mark hopkins was and is solely responsible for choosing, or is it originating, the exhibitions acor will present in Boston in April.

We have characterized hopkins both in private and now in public as being a boorish lout who is a rank amateur when it comes to historic oriental rugs. We do recognize, however, his position is even less than that in reality.

We all have reputations that are often exaggerations or outright fabrications but hopkins has one that is based on fact and we are not the only ones who know from first hand experience how true it is.

RK laments the time is high for these louts and petty burghers, who think they control rugdom, to be called out for what they are.

Let's remember acor was started as an alternative to the icoc but little lord franses, who still pulls all the icoc strings, saw the threat and began co-opting all the acor-ites and has now succeeded in folding them one by one into the icoc.

So now acor, which was never much of anything anyway and neither is that bloated self-conscious icoc organization, is basically a vassal to icoc.

Let's get it together and have conferences that are intelligent -- who needs 50 speakers at an icoc or 20 at an acor; who needs 5 exhibitions that are often of dubious quality or parentage when 1 great one would suffice; who needs a rush rush schedule of 20 minute presentations when 1 per day of enough time to let a QUALIFIED speaker expound on his/her topic?

No no these "conferences" with their BS, lofty academics are not what is happening. What is, we feel, would be best described as a meeting of interested parties who partake of quality vs. quantity within a schedule that allows enough time to explore, to meet and to spend time sharing their appreciation of these artworks.

RK eschews joining or even participating in these public icoc/acor circle-jerks and while we'd prefer to be part of them, the rank amateur status, piss poor planning, execution, overbearing and boorish leadership interest us about as much as a dirt sandwich.

Make your own mind up but remember after everyone of these past affairs the same criticisms and grumblings are heard and those responsible promise to affect changes "next time".

Well, dudes and babes, “next time” was already 20 years ago and still nothing has changed.

Author: Ben
email:
Sun, Feb 26th, 2006 11:04:11 AM

RK Replies:

Greetings Ben:

Thanks for posting this info. We looked at the ebay item and have even emailed the owner about the materials used to make the embroidery.

In response to the questions we asked the owner has replied he is not sure if the ground cloth is linen or cotton but he is sure the embroidery thread is silk and not mercerized cotton as we thought might be the case.

Now that certain types of weavings and rugs have become valuable it is worth the time of repro-artists, fakers and their henchmen, to "create" these phony examples to be sold to the gullible and inexpert.

We have now seen many new repro suzani and soumak bags, not to leave out those fake Lori Pembak and other Kazak area weavings that have been hitting the marketplace (auctions) for years.

Seems we will now have to contend with fake Ottoman embroideries, of different types, as well.

Did the ebay piece, which we have posted a photo of below, come from the same 'workshop' as pacquin's embroidery group?

We can't answer that but would imagine they are not related in any way other than being fakes.

Thanks for alerting us to the ebay auction. We rarely look there and only when someone sends us a reason to do so.

By the way, the Ebay repro is far more convincing and "real" than the miserable fakes pacquin, hali and those at acor who deemed it advisable to exhibit them in Boston, fell for.

===========================================

Hello, I've been following your discussion of the Ottoman embroideries described in the recent Hali.

I just found a modern copy of an Ottoman embroidery for sale on ebay, and I thought it might be useful to compare this to the Hali pieces.

The seller kindly describes his embroidery as a modern reproduction.

This embroidery, unlike those in the Hali article, appears to be woven on linen.

The auction ends today, but the item# is 7392047392, and the seller's name is gilkarin. Ben

Author: jc
email:
Fri, Feb 24th, 2006 07:32:18 PM

Again, we can but marvel at the reticence, or is it disinterest, everyone is exhibiting.

How can you all accept the LACMA fiasco and now this transparently bogus attempt to pretend to question if these embroideries are or are not "real" (or just an attempt to kite them off to stupid, gullible buyers)?

On a scale of ten dodds's greedy and stupid LACMA sales pitch was an eleven and far more grievous than the pacquin and hali embroidery boo-boo.

But the fact no one says anything or better yet does anything to counter these travesties is, in our estimation, equally as bad and actually worse.

As for dodds, RK recommends de-frocking and banishment. While pacquin should be made to sit in the corner, next to professor clown, with his dunce cap on for a long, long time.

Author: Sue Zimmerman
email:
Mon, Feb 13th, 2006 08:46:41 AM

RK Replies:

Of course RK.com would be interested in knowing what "test" you are speaking of?

And, yes, if you can supply convincing arguments about this procedure we would support and facilitate your inquiry.

You are welcome to email us privately at:
jc@rugkazbah.com

or to post your info here on the board.

Frankly, we'd prefer you do it here so our readership could follow this but should you need the privacy of email, we will gladly oblige.

==============================================

Hi, RK,
I spend a lot of time indulging myself in what is thought of, around my vicinity, as my "hobo ways". I also spend a lot of time in what is called "thinking too much" to my face and "lazy" behind my back.

Pure science is a happy hunting ground for lazy hobos like me. It's wonderland of tests just waiting to answer just the right questions put to it. I prefer my lazy time to my hobo time so I turn to pure science often.

It just so happens there are bona-fide courtworthy scientific tests that can be used to determine, probably down to the decade, when a textile was manufactured from the 1800s to now. Simple, inexpensive, nondestructive tests. The Dodds rug may be beyond them but I doubt the embroideries are.,p> If I were to be able to prove this would it alter your position at all? If it does I can move what I have found from it's place in my backburnered projects into my hobodom lab for tweaking. Please think about it. I can not plug in and turn on the proverbial fan from here. I can't reach it. I would need help.

This week I must take a break from my druthers as I am expecting rather judgmental guests and am in danger of being nominated for the Extreme House Makeover Show if I do not make time to clean up my own little domain. Don't want to qualify for that. So, I can return to pick up this discussion again later. I leave it up to you to decide whether or not that is worth your time.

Sue

Author: Sue Zimerman
email:
Fri, Feb 10th, 2006 10:27:01 AM

RK Replies:

Sending dodds and pacquin off to San Quentin or Attica, with or without hali's gullible editor ben evans in tow, is a cute though rather unfeasible solution but your raising it did make us smile.

No, Sue, that would be way too fantastic for even RK to imagine and, though we might share some small sentiments with you, such a result is past any we could have devised.

We'd prefer seeing some self-regulation here, with dodds and pacquin put on the carpet(pun intended) by rugdom's 'establishment'.

But the chances of that happening are as improbable as your visiting your local Salvation Army and seeing a mint condition early period Safavid main carpet for sale at a $100.oo on half price day.

Yeah right, forget about it.

By the way, we knew you were talking about the embroideries and directed our comments there and not at the LACMA/dodds mess, even tough that is a far larger fiasco than the promotion of the pacquin fool’s gold strike.

Otherwise, RK agrees totally with your sentiments and what about those technical details??

In pacquin's article, as we have already mentioned, a structural analysis of the bogus embroideries is listed and the irregularities in those details noted by us.

In fact, pacquin clearly states in every regard the group of embroideries he has "discovered" are completely different than any other known type of period Ottoman embroidery.

So, Sue, besides the very pertinent question of who put one of these embroideries in rippon-bozwell’s November 2004 sale (it was lot number 143 and sold for 5400 Euro), the failure of both pacquin and hali to seriously consider those glaring technical differences, even though they acknowledged their existence, is an equally important question RK feels need to be adressed and explained.

After all when one knows it doesn't walk, waddle or squawk like a duck but still insists it might be a duck, important credibility issues are raised, now aren't they.

And, frankly, that's what's at the bottom of all these messes -- the failure of rugdom to recognize and promptly correct travesties promulgated by those who have high profile positions of respect and importance therein(dodds and hali) or, as in pacquin's case, someone who is supported by them.

We are not now, nor have we in the past accused anyone of doing anything other than being incredibly guilty of having no professional standard of conduct and, even more so, in not expressing the necessity to make and enforce one in light of these and other previous transgressions.

However, it sure does appear to us more damning evidence than what is already known today might very well be revealed when and if either of these issues ever hits that proverbial fan.

===================================================

Hi RK, There must be a misunderstanding here.

I wasn't thinking of the Dodd's rug I was referring to those involved with the embroideries.

All of the questions you ask could, and rightfully should, be answered in a court of law.

This should be easy, with a little ingenuity and for those who have access to the pertinent structural details and understand structure on an expert level.

I can't travel. There probably isn't a copy Hali within 30 miles of me to check to see if there's anything of structural substance there.

Pertinent structural details and photos in rugdom are lacking, due, maybe, to what I perceive to be the understanding of structure being frozen at a coloring book and crayon stage of development.

The quality of reported structural details, analysis, and photos needed are probably beyond the talents of most to deliver.

At best.

If no experts or rugdom elite are willing to clean rugdom's house they could, and should, at least anonymously publicly post here what is necessary so those who will know what they are seeing can have the opportunity to do the right thing.

As you well know I've been asking for high quality photos for years with very few results. I have no ties to rugdom other than wandering around in it wearing a virtual sign that says "I work for wheat". Everyone turns away.

So, no, I wasn't preaching to the choir. My words were, and are, meant as a challenge.

If experts and rugdom's elite can't bring down obvious bumbling fakes and the garden variety cowardly opportunistic designers of such with jail time for art-crimes no one else can.

If collusion is involved so, probably, is mail fraud.

If that is the case, with the help of those in the know the Feds could probably have an open and shut case.

Rugdom has more than a little to answer for in the credibility department if it is seen as indefensible to those less bumbling, more organized, more intelligent, and more hardened into art-crime criminal networks, who's eyes have certainly detected and are following these embroideries entrance to the marketplace and the consequences which may or may not unfold.

Count on that.

Sue

Author: jc
email: jc@rugkazbah.com
Wed, Feb 8th, 2006 03:58:09 PM

We just had a short phone call with pacquin, the embroideries ‘Admiral Byrd’, promoter and article writer.

He told us he had "read a few paragraphs" of our position papers on his "newly discovered group of Ottoman embroideries" and had also looked a very small bit at some other topics we have written about.

He then told us he found what we have written "distasteful" and that he "would not be reading what we write on RugKazbah.com again."

When we mentioned he should read everything we have written about his "discovery" before he made any decisions about our position, he then ended the conversation.

Honestly, we didn't expect much more from someone like pacquin, who clearly knows far less about Ottoman embroideries than he has been credited.

RK finds it amazing anyone could fall for these patent fakes and suggests pacquin change his mind and read not only what RK says about his bogus embroideries and feeble attempt to present them as possibly genuine but also what we have written about other rug and textile genres, as pacquin is not only a "collector" of embroideries.

By doing so he might learn enough so as not to be buying fool's gold and then presenting it to the public as anything but in the future.

He's not a bad guy, just another misguided neophyte ruggie who thinks he knows far more than he actually does.

Lord knows he has plenty of company there and RK is sure there are plenty of folks who can console pacquin for brutal truth we have made him face and plenty of shoulders for him to cry on about it.

Author: jc
email:
Wed, Feb 8th, 2006 10:26:52 AM

The plot thickens, or is it the plot sickens?:

It appears one of the embroideries from the hali article, actually the one illustrated above, was recently at rippon bozwell's auction room in Germany and was estimated for 5,500 euro.

This "sale" raises a number of questions RK is concerned about and we believe so should everyone else:

1. who was the consigner?

2. who was the buyer?

3. did pacquin or his supplier in Turkey feed the piece into bozwell's salesroom to create and establish a benchmark price for these fakes?

4. is bozwell and/or hali in any way involved in this shell game?

The appearance of the hali article and the alleged sale at bozwell's, added the plain and simple fact these embroideries are as fake and phony as a 4 dollar bill, surely would lead any compis mentis individual to question the possibility of collusion between any and/or all of the above named participants.

That would be at the most extreme end of this highly questionable turn of events. At the least, the lack of anything that could be characterized as normal vetting procedures on behalf of any of these participants is surely suspicious and very questionable.

Author: Sue Zimmerman
email:
Tue, Feb 7th, 2006 11:43:43 AM

Well, RK, The ducks are all in a row. Conveniently, they are lined up not side to side but from dead center foreground to horizon. Their feet are stuck in the muck, too. Can't move.

You know what to do. Sue

=======================================

RK Replies:

What RK does, and has done, would be far more powerful and potent if others joined in and added their objections and voices to our call for truth and reality, re: the LACMA/dodds rug.

If 100 people wrote to LACMA, or called their director's office, to register their dismay and disappointment that LACMA purchased and now still believes that late period genre rug dodds pawned off on them is a masterpiece or museum worthy it would have a major effect on the issue.

The rug is, and has been proven to be, neither. When and if 100 or more people would call the museum, it will then be impossible for LACMA to continue to ignore RK.com's position and offer to help them return the rug and finally end the charade its purchase has forced the museum to adopt.

So thanks for your words, Sue, but they would be far better put into the ear of LACMA's directorship or their mailbox.

Here you are only preaching to the choir.

Author: Sue Zimmerman
email:
Mon, Feb 6th, 2006 09:35:12 AM

Surfing the web for ever elusive pertinent and, apparently, 'above top secret' classified textile structural details I found myself Googled to SpongoBongo where the piece shown on this thread can be seen again.

There the design is labeled "Cintamani". ( I say -- well maybe, kind of, sort of, not, to that.) Apparently, someone at Rippon Boswell in Germany is OK with it, though, estimating it's worth at EUR 5,500.

Someone also doesn't have a problem calling it a second half of the 18th century Ottoman yastik either. There can be seen what is called a "slight" brownish stain in the center for proof of that. So there.

The auction house road, in my quest, obviously would not be a rewarding one to take further, I reckoned, so I just stayed long enough at the Rippon - Boswell site to read the "As Is" terms of sale.

So, it seems to me, someone has a really bad day shaping up for them in the future. First they end up with this ugly dirty pillow cover and then, probably, the old ugly dirty frying pan over the head solution. Sue

=========================

RK Replies: Yes Sue, you are 100% correct.

RK.com was going to mention the sale, at bozwell's auction emporium, of another one of the bogus embroideries sooner or later.

We are still doing some research about that sale and can tell you from great experience this would not be the first time something questionable passed through their salesroom.

But the pure and unadulterated fake appearance and ‘history’ these embroideries carry puts them in a league far above those other ‘normal’ repros.

And that is the issue here and the one RK.com is exploring.

Author: jc
email:
Sat, Feb 4th, 2006 12:54:29 PM

RK is not surprised no one has written in about pacquin and hali's complete breech of ethics, let alone that of rug scholarship, in publishing that article about these fake and ghastly embroideries.

Rugdom is full of stuffed shirts who either are so gullible as to fall for the bait, like pacquin did, of fool's gold or are too inadequately prepared to know what is real and what is fake.

RK doesn't mind being alone in our opinions, we know the difference, thank you, and are not afraid to make our positions known publicly.

Too bad the rest of you who also do, and yes we know there are others like us who know the difference, are not moved to join us in our efforts to rid rugdom of the poseurs, fools, clowns, know-littles and know nothings who believe they speak for rugdom, or at least are rugdom's spoke persons.

The pseudo establishment that controls rugdom -- the icoc and acor potentates, the hali and ghereh publishers and all the rest of the bureaucratic pooh-bah have very little other than hubris and myopically fulfilled self-interests to show for their now decades of control and influence.

The LACMA/dodds fiasco and now the pacquin/hali debacle are just two of the latest incidents proving our position and call for overhaul in the rug world.

When the rest of the sleeping folks, who somehow believe they are part of rugdom but rarely do anything other than buy rugs, books and magazines, wake up and realize only through voicing their displeasure and disgust will anything begin to change.

Sadly, RK has been here before and knows well our words will fall on mostly deaf ears but we will continue and are not ready to throw in the towel. Well not just yet, that is.

Author: Rupertdacat
email: rupertdacat@hotmail.com
Thu, Feb 2nd, 2006 09:58:06 AM

Dear JC, Contra Pacquin, it seems simplest to conclude that these textiles were created with the intention of deceiving modern day dilletantes, rather than comforting long ago Ottomans. Your vigilance and standards are no doubt appreciated by many lurkers to your website. Keep up the good fight (but for your's and rugdom's sake- try to tone it down a bit). Rupe

==========================================

RK Replies: Greetings Rupe

Thanks for the appreciative remarks.

Just for drill, what would you like to see "toned down" on RK.com?

Speaking of things we'd like to see, how about posting with your real name? What are you afraid of...cat got yer tongue?

Home   Buy/Sell at the Kazbah   Terms Of Service