To say dodds's writing style is turgid would not be wrong and neither would saying the content demonstrates his less than admirable comprehension of the complexities writing about historic Oriental Rugs requires.
Of all the high profile ruggies, why hali let dodds write about this so-called, and poorly named in our opinion, "Academic Gap" is questionable, as dodds has not done anything scholarly in his long years as a rug dealer and grandee.
Again that's our opinion, which it seems only those in the know agree with, as the lumpen of rugdom believing the BS and bogus hype dodds receives.
Here is how dodds begins his article: "In his recent letter(Hali 137 p. 23.) Professor Cecil L Striker of the Art History Department at the University of Pennsylvania takes issue with the comments in the previous issue's editorial, and mentions the respect that he and others in academia have for Hali."
Respect for hali in academia? Give me a break, dodds, you self-promoting poseur. Who in academia respects hali?
Those who are given free subscriptions to help that respect along.
No, this is but another dumb ass comment from dodds, in an article printed by hali to hype themselves and him.
Disgusting, totally fabricated and invented nonsense, so much for facts here in this article.
Dodds then continues with "But his letter points to a glaring, long-lamented gap between the sources of information relating to oriental carpet studies."
Word master dodds, aka mr turgid, apparently needs some help framing his thoughts.
What does that sentence mean? It is surely lost on us and we are sure you, too.
"As soon as we step away from the study of 'classical' carpets into the realm of tribal and village rugs we lose our connection with much of the academic community"
First we'd like mr dodds to explain what the academic community at large has done, now or in the past, in regards to rug scholarship and research?
And second, we like to state from our vantage point it is clear dodds never had any connection to lose with non-classical rugs and we sincerely doubt he has much of one with 'classical' ones either.
"Professor Striker's letter exposes the disconnection (ed. with academia) and raises an important issue. It is clear the range of lecturers at our International Conference on Oriental Carpets (ICOC) is heavily weighted towards museum curators and private collectors/dealers or amateurs in its highest meaning"
Again we see a disconnect between dodds brain and his pen. In "what highest meaning" is dodds speaking: Surely not his knowledge, research or writings, as they are nowhere near any such pinnacle.
"In the academic programmes of the last four ICOCs. some two hundred papers were presented."
Well if quantity meant quality then the ICOC would have to be called a super-quality affair.
But since the reality is far, far from that, and most of the 200 papers are either re-hashed presentations of old material, worthless throw-away spiels by folks who need to get their conference fees and hotel rooms paid for by signing up as speakers or low level pseudo-academics by ruggies whose knowledge is on par with a rug-poser like dodds, we’d have to pooh-pooh any thoughts the ICOC really presents much that is meaningful or important. It’s not to say the ICOC lectures never do and are all bad but most if not the majority are less than satisfactory and only a miniscule percentage of them have stellar or even above average content.
Most of these ICOC presenters are like dodds, they can talk the talk but stumble badly when it comes to walking the walk.
OK then that’s it for our look at the first half of dodds's article, which is one that says little to us other than hali publishing and dodds writing it as a tit for tat exchange of back-slapping mutual admiration and hype.
To be continued….