Posted by H. Ulfan on June 22, 1999 at 17:44:45:
In Reply to: Re: Are better rugs peferentially preserved?/Harry's post posted by Steve Price on June 22, 1999 at 16:42:16:
: Dear Harry,
: I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that the technical factors I mentioned are the whole of it. They aren't, of course, but I think they are significant contributors to the likelihood that a rug will be preserved. That is, I believe that there will be some correlation (not a perfect one!) between those things and the value placed on a rug. I am more likely to bend over to pick up a quarter from the sidewalk than to pick up a nickle, but will usually do that for a nickle. I rarely do so for a penny. Same principle. People are likely to exert more effort for some thing that's worth more.
: Steve Price
Hi Steve;
No , I did not think that you ever suggested that
the technical factors are the whole. As a matter
of fact , your eclectic way of collecting indicates
the exact opposite. As far as the pennies are
concerned , hey that's another issue altogether.
There's no question that we tend to preserve
(and care for) things that cost us more. The
question is , though , should we pay more for
works of art that are technically superior ? I don't
think so. An example : I'd pay a lot more for a
naively made coarse little Qashqai with beautiful
little stylised things in it than for the finest Kashan
(500 KPSI) with the usual shitty (excuse me)
flowers allover that took maybe 50 times longer
(timewise) to make than the Qashqai.
Regards , Harry.