The publication of the Neville Kingston Collection finally has ended up in our hands.
For those of you who have not yet heard the name, and RK hadn't until several months ago when this publication was touted in a past issue of that rag hali, it seem Mr Kingston was a quiet collector who amassed a large collection of Turkmen weavings.
For whatever reasons, might we guess to prepare ground for a coming sale, Kingston decided to publish his collection and hired elena tsavera to write the text.
We have not had the opportunity to delve into what madame tsavera has written, however, if it is anything like her hired gun work for the hoffmeister, aka hoffscheister, collection publication all RK can say is why bother. Didn't comrade elena already spin enough fairytales and present more than her fair share of eminently bogus interpretations as facts?
But let's not judge her work until it is read, so 'nuff said.
We have examined the book's technical characteristics and we can say it is far better bound than rageth's book but, alas, in general it is equally as ordinary and 'textbook' quality.
The color printing, though, is far more substandard than rageth's. In fact, besides a few of the illustrations, most of the printing in the Kingston Collection tome is horrid. The German publisher's, Arnoldsche, did not even get close to what we would call acceptable artbook quality color printing.
The layout is far better than rageth's book, but then just about anything would be as jurg rageth's DIY(do it yourself) book publishing effort produced a terribly amateurish and poorly designed product.
RK did notice, and we must say with great surprise, the publication by tsavera of a now totally debunked and discredited James Mellaart "reconstruction" from the Goddess from Anatolia publication.
Drawing done by James Mellaart in the late 1980's supposedly from reconstructed fragments from Catal Huyuk that were never before published. There were a number of these in the Goddess From Anatolia publication that are now viewed as nothing more than imaginary imagery Mellaart erroneously included in his text for that book, which was published in 1990.
For madame tsavera to include this drawing when the entire world knows all of Mellaart's late 1980's reconstructions are not valid is just one more example of the lousy academics she brings to Turkmen Studies.
We will discuss her referencing this Mellaart drawing, and the rest of her text in our full review.
But this being summertime RK is laying back and we will probably not get to finishing our review of tsavera's text for at least the next few weeks.
So stay tuned...