Home > Archive >Fools Think - Others Know
Author:jc
email: jc@rugkazbah.com
Mon, Dec 6th, 2004 02:10:57 PM
Topic: Fools Think - Others Know

Yesterday we received an email from one of our longtime readers who brought to our attention the recent mentions RK.com has received on professor price=clown’s amateurish and often ignorant rug website. As RK.com’s audience knows we avoid like the plague visiting or ever bothering to read the daily chattering in steev’s sandbox but we did look in to see what this latest attempt to prove he, or one of his cronies, knows better than we do.

Alas, what we found is nothing more than we’d expected – another round of price=clown and company’s ignorance is bliss pseudo-academic blah-blah.

Below is the final installment, written by windel swan who is someone equally rug challenged as professor price=clown, of their attempt to vocalize on the kejebe question we raised here on RK.com’s discussion board several weeks ago.

By the way we imagine the “self-professed expert” they refer to is none other than RK.com, who by the way has never proclaimed himself to be an expert but has burst the bubble of those, like windel and steev, who have professed themselves to be. Anyway here’s what windel wrote and the erroneous photo comparison he offered up to document his dopey stance:

“The self-professed expert should compare the kejebe design with this early re-entrant type rug in the Alexander collection, where I believe he/she will find more correspondence than with any structure placed on a camel or, as to the “ram’s horns”, any set of horns on any quadruped. A saph in the T.I.E.M. also bears a close relationship.”

Nice going, windel you fool. If you can’t even comprehend what you read how do you expect to comment on it? I never made such droll comparisons, your buddy steev did.

Let’s go on a read some more of windel’s brilliance:
“At the moment, I can’t suggest more than that the arch form in the Alexander piece may derive from Kufic writing or architectural motifs or even some combination thereof. Similar devices can be found in several Seljuk carpets. Anyone wishing to understand the development of Turkmen designs should begin by examining early Turkish carpets. This will not provide either definitive answers or a time continuum, but will fill in some of the gaps.”

Dear windel: The only gaps here are in your and the rest of the sandbox crowd's limited rug knowledge and pathetic opinions.

For your information it is more than highly probable Turkmen rug designs are the source and archetypes for many of those found in Turkish rugs. Or did you forget the Ottomans and other lesser known Turkmen groups settled in Anatolia from at least the 10th century onwards, bringing a majority of those designs with them from their homelands in western Central Asia?

Nice theory windel but it’s back to the drawing board for you, dunce. And take that windbag price=clown along with you so you’ll have some company.

Author: Steve Price
email: sprice@hsc.vcu.edu
Mon, Dec 6th, 2004 02:10:57 PM

Hi JC

You're right, you didn't quote Turk0tek two or three times in the previous week. It was three times in the previous two weeks. My bad.

Author: jc
email:
Sat, Dec 4th, 2004 02:31:01 PM

Rk.com is totally disinterested in starting or continuing any type of dialogue with professor price=clown, who is in our estimation a fool of the highest order.

His latest contribution to RK.com's discussion board, in keeping with his previous attempts to prove himself as anything other than the ignoramus and clown he is, accuses us monitoring and mentioning his piddly chat-room of a rug website here two or three times "this week". This is completely false and only a figment of steev's confusion, as anyone can easily verify from the one applicable posting and it's date.

Whenever professor=clown gets his facts straight and, (if possible although we doubt it) learns enough about antique rugs to enable him to have a discussion here on RK.com, we will welcome his input. Until then we can only suggest he refrain from the urge to see his name here, unless he really does enjoys being shown to be the clown of the rug world we, and countless others, know him to be.

And by the way windel: The prayer rug from the Alexander Collection you chose to illustrate is well known to us - we have handled in a number of times over the years. It is far from the date, our friend Chris, gives it in the catalog and RK.com is on record stating it is at best mid-18th century. We agree with a lot of Alexander's views concerning his carpets but do not agree with many of what we feel are extremely early dates.

Overdating in the rug world is rampant amongst certain dealers - like little lord franses, his vassal john eskanazi, spuler, sailer and, all of their former supplier in things Turkish, garry muse. As Alexander purchased a number of pieces from them it is little wonder he inherited their dating schemes.

We do believe the prayer rug in question came from little lord franses who claimed, at the time he was looking for a buyer, it was a "Seljuk" period weaving. Hardy Har Har is all we can say to such a spurious claim as well as windel's dimwitted comparison to the Turkmen kejebe icon.

Author: jc
email:
Fri, Dec 3rd, 2004 02:10:11 PM

Clown:

Again your facts are as screwed up as your ideas about rugs.

Go sit in the corner with your dunce cap on. It's about the only activity you excel at. Enjoy

Author: Steve Price
email: sprice@hsc.vcu.edu
Fri, Dec 3rd, 2004 01:09:49 PM

Hi JC For someone who never looks at ****, you manage to quote us often enough. This is the second or third time this week. Which of your long time readers sent you that e-mail? Was it India's president, Dr. Avul Pakir Jainulabdeen Abdul Kalam? If so, I'm honored.

Home   Buy/Sell at the Kazbah   Terms Of Service