My impressions of the hype and hyperbole surrounding both kaitag embroideries and their alleged historical importance have already been expressed here on RK.com in another thread.
Recently on Jozan.com roaol tschebull, aka “mike”, an ex-bank employee turned rug-dealer “reviewed” the kaitag show in DC as follows:
“The pieces themselves were hung in a harmonious way in a coherent space, they were very compelling textiles to view, they were small enough so that lighting was adequate, and each was on a stretcher, so the viewing plane was flat.”
Was the brevity of this “review”, that’s right it was only one sentence, due to tschebull’s lack of anything else to say or did this textile idiom just not stimulate him further?
My take on it is both – because what can you say other than “Gee I like kaitags or Gee I don’t” as these weaving are the most trumped up textile weaving group I have yet seen over the past 35 years and tschebull, regardless of his own self-important and inflated reputation as a writer on the subject of oriental rugs, just couldn’t find anything else to say – combined to produce this joke of a “review”.
There is an old saying “if you can’t say something nice better say nothing at all”. Maybe tschebull was motivated by that, too?
And by the way when one of the salient points of a textile exhibition review mentions the objects had a “flat viewing plane” that doesn’t demonstrate much potency on behalf of what was on view or on the journalistic skill of the reviewer, now does it?
Here is one of the “stars” of the kaitag world, which has been “dated” to the 17th century.
Yeah right and if you believe that this is 17th century I guess you also believe in the tooth fairy and Santa – ho ho HO.