Home > Archive >5/12/06
Tue, May 23rd, 2006 10:54:55 AM
Topic: 5/12/06

RugKazbah has had server problems caused by corruption of script.

Our going offline was caused by difficulties similar to cloubland.com's problem, however, our team of webmasters solved the problem quickly and we are now back online, as you all can tell.

This hiatus has given us a chance to reflect on our mission and how, so far, we have accomplished those goals.

While there is little ostensible proof to show what we have done, besides building an ever-growing audience, the main objective -- to build the foundation necessary to affect the changes that are so important – has been successful, albeit in way that might be invisible to most of you.

Rugdom is a mess and anyone who says different is either too dumb to realize what is wrong or too involved to admit it -- clearly RK is in neither of these categories.

As we wrote some days ago on another thread, unless there is some significant increase in participation from our readers, or clear and present signs you all are doing something yourselves to improve rugdom's dire straights, we will not be posting much more here.

Our time is valuable and in short supply and though we enjoy and take pleasure in sharing our experience and expertise in this forum, we do have other interests that need our attention as well.

Our archive of past posts here on RugKazbah.com is rich in information and our site search engine works well to make that info easily obtainable. We hope many readers, rather than looking for what’s new, will read what has already been written – almost all of which is timeless and will never be out of date.

So, should we not see any increase in participation in the ways we have outlined above, we will not be writing much here over the next while.

The choice is yours, we have made ours.

Author: jc
Tue, May 23rd, 2006 10:54:55 AM

We do not want the recent flurry of posts we have made to fool anyone into believing we were kidding when we said we are bored with the lack of participation from our audience and will not post here as frequently as we had in the past.

We mean what we said but, at the same time, will always answer any posts, even ones with little merit or ones we find dishonest or duplicitous.

That said we will also defend our positions when, and should, any intellectually or emotionally challenged miscreants decide to spill their problems here and expect to get away with it unscathed.

Author: Sue Zimmeran
Thu, May 18th, 2006 06:16:31 PM

RK Replies:

Sue, your efforts and passion to make those efforts are duly noted by us.

We respect those who are able to focus their energies on a subject and remain interested and passionate about it.

However, no matter how much interest or passion someone marshals, knowledge, expertise and experience are far more likely to bear results.

And proveable facts are the supreme level of all inquiry.

Love them or leave them, fact is the king.

So regardless of what you see in any digital photo, or any printed one, the fact remains the LACMA rug was in Bausback's catalog, was then reproduced in the Austrian Collectors show catalog, was in the icoc exhibition in Philadelphia and illustrated in the Atlantic Collections catalog from that exhibition, was in dodds's egotistical advert and now is in the basement of LACMA.

This is fact, it is not my opinion, nor did I hear this from anyone else.

So please either wake up and smell the flowers or believe what you want.

But don't come here and try to revise history -- RK has plenty of patience for anyone who has no axe to grind or who can look reality in the face and smile.

Hopefully, you will find your way now to either of those camps, if not we wish you a final adieu.


I disagree and will leave it at that.

Author: Sue Zimmerman
Thu, May 18th, 2006 05:40:32 PM

The Jan 12th post I referred to was the "LACMA/dodds rug in situ" post made on that date.

I have not seen the Atlantic collections rug which is said to be identical.


The rug from page 11 in the 1981 Bausback exhibit catalog and the rug Dodds sold to LACMA are not the same rug.


There is evidence for this in at least ten places. Most of the differences are in difficult to articulate areas. Some appear to be corrections of the (probably earlier version) Bausback rug that the Dodds/LACMA rug weavers made.


Others appear to be Dodds/LACMA rug weaver's mistakes which must have escaped what appears to have been very careful knot by knot inspection of what I suspect is a knot by knot reproduction.

>>>>IT IS THE SAME RUG. The easiest area to see a few of the variations is in the goofy nonsensical yellow motifs each of the rugs has on their ends that have only two yellow motifs of that type.

>>>>>IT IS THE SAME RUG (Keeping in mind, of course, one of these rugs is pictured upside down.) The other areas require closer inspection but are equally there to see for very patient viewers.

>>>>PATIENT VIEWING OR NOT IT IS THE SAME RUG. These variations are not of the sort which would result from restoration. Anyone can check them out for themselves. It's worth the time to do this because of where what will be seen points.


Author: Sue Zimmerman
Mon, May 15th, 2006 12:25:05 PM

RK Replies:

We are not exactly sure what Jan.12 post you refer to, as there is none from that date.

There is a post from Jan. 15, which illustrates the LACMA rug as it was included, anonymously, in the catalog from an Austrian Collector's show held in 1982.

Both this and its publication in the previous year's Bausback Jubilee exhibition (1981) were both prior to it being in dodds's possession.

The Atlantic Collections piece is, like those, the same dud of a rug dodds sold to LACMA but at that time is was his.

By the way,what could have possibly made you think the one in the Atlantic Collections catalog is a different rug?


While reviewing the Dodds/LACMA art crimes thread I noticed that the rug sold to LACMA and the one featured in the photo on the Jan 12 post are different rugs. Is the rug in the "Atlantic Collection" book one of these or is it yet a third version? Sue

Author: Harry Krishna
Sat, May 13th, 2006 05:53:45 PM

RK Replies:



You must not cut back on your writing, jc. Much too important. Think of the loss to literature. Please, jc, at least, prepare a catalog of your word play on the names of the rug Sultans.

Think of the loss to humanity and the progress of art history.

Think of your gifted webmasters: where can their talents find another outlet so worthy? Your web design team. How can they create ano ther web site when rk.com is so superior to anything they might hope to accomplish?

There is still so much work yet to do. So many anonymice still to be caught and exposed. So many miscreants to be punished by your crushing wit.

What you write is timeless. You said so yourself. You have an obligation to the generations still unborn. You must never slow down in your noble work.

Please, jc. Reconsider your decision. The only reason so few of us post here is that we all realize how far ahead of us you are, and it embarrasses us to be in your shadow, even as it sheds light and warmth on all that fall into it.

Author: John Lewis
email: john_lewis@mac.com
Fri, May 12th, 2006 11:15:56 AM

RK Replies:
Greetings, John:

RK is not doing this to sell books, nor, frankly, does RK care if people subscribe to hali or not.

RK's intent is to bring some reality and truth into rugdom and that we have done.

Our archive is rich. Have you, for instance, read every post therein?

So, while we realize your admonition is accurate, it is not all encompassing, as that archive has plenty of reading matter -- again most of which is timeless, even auction the reports.

Anyone who writes in here will get an answer, that's a promise.

Those who write with something of value will receive more value in return.

Those who write in with valueless, BS will be rebuked, ridiculed and made to regret doing so.

We hope the former, and not the latter, will be the case, however, we know well the incredibly low level of intellect and resourcefulness most in rugdom thrive on.

RK didn't say we would cease to write, just that we'd write less and less often.

Stimulate us and we'll respond and that's a promise, as well.

Thanks for your interest and kind words, they are appreciated, truly.


You have an "ever-growing audience" and the surest way to stop it growing is to stop posting.

Your comments on auctions and "rugdom" are a delight to read, and if you upset a few people that is their problem.

In the meantime some of your following write to LACMA, do not renew HALI subscriptions and some even buy your books.

If you want more engagement from your readers, there are easy ways to get it.

Home   Buy/Sell at the Kazbah   Terms Of Service