Posted by Marvin Amstey on June 14, 1999 at 08:45:11:
In Reply to: Re: Recommendation: Make "Collectibility" a Low Criterion posted by Patrick Weiler on June 13, 1999 at 13:23:39:
:
: : In relating the story about Walter Denny challenging some collectors about the quality of a current production item to an old collectable rug, John hits on a troubling subject. Will one be able to tell the difference between the 100 year old yastik and the 10 year old yastik 25 or 50 years from now? And if they can not, what makes one more collectable than the other except age? I'm not as familiar with modern Ersari weaving as John is, but I've seen nothing Turkomen in modern production that will be as confusing as some of the Turkish work. On the other hand I've seen some "Afghan" work looking like very good old Caucasian work. Comments please.
: : Regards,
: : Marvin
: Marvin,
: I just saw some remarkable Chinese kilims, woven to look just like old caucasian pieces, on Emmett Eiland's web site. Not the shashsavan bagfaces like the Afghan weavers (and others) are turning out, but full size. I have not seen them in the flesh, but a small picture looks very convincing.
: Patrick Weiler
Another good example is the Aubusson rugs that Berji Andonian is manufacturing in China under the renaissance name. They are made by the same weaving techniques, with as many colors, in all sizes up to giant, and they are difficult to tell from the vey old ones except for the absence of wear. In a few years, people may be paying more for them (although, they are not cheap even now). Regards, Marvin