Rk’s comments about the appointment of the two new “faces” at Washington D.C.’s textile museum, dan walker and windle swann, appear to have annoyed some folks.
While we can understand their displeasure at having us pour boiling oil on their parade, we do feel the dissemination and factual nature of our observations were far more important than their pique at us for having made them.
Just the other day, and true to form, the comments made by windle swann about the carpet pictured below clearly demonstrate why windle shouldn’t have a seat in the textile museum’s men’s room, let alone one on their Board of Directors.
After making a number of questionable statements about this piece - all of which are in our opinion obtuse, totally unimportant and unworthy of quoting - here’s what windle concludes about this highly unusual and most interesting example: “None of these observations prove the age of Gantzhorn’s #350 of course, but they should raise doubts that the rug is "well before" or "safely pre-" 1850.."
Windle’s dating this rug, which is in the Detroit Institute of Arts and illustrated as #350 in Ganzhorn’s book, as post-1850 is truly dumb to say the least. But to do so based on the even dumber conclusions windle’s rug mini-mind conceived proves in spades why he is horribly ill equipped to assume any position at the textile museum.
Well, that said, Rk does perhaps recognizes the hyperbole inherent in that statement. We would agree windle could assume a number of positions at the museum. For instance, he could work in the coat checkroom, help emptying the wastebaskets each evening or maybe even keep dan walker’s swivel chair well-oiled.
But having a rug-clown like windle on the board of directors? Puhleeze, the only thing his appointment does is make walker’s as their new director look positively brilliant in comparison.