Antiques has to genuine in order to be called “Antiques”. There are not many good collectors in porcelain especially Chinese educated because there was no importance for them to find out the values of old porcelain. I have not come across books written about Antique Chinese before 1920’s. In the 60’s Chinese Government sells porcelain treasures which is also authentic specimen to pay Soviet Union the money owed for Korean War tells me that porcelain items are of no importance in China.

I have a good laugh at two old man who are respectable people in Kuala Lumpur. I brought a book written not long ago by a famous Chinese expert to show this old man. In this book a Yuan dynasty Blue & White Jar drawn with a Lohan (Arahat) riding on a carriage powered by a mythical lion. Another jar with the same motif was for sale at a shopping complex. This old man claim that the one in the book is better. I then question him on how he tells that the one in the book is better. I say that both may be the same unless I am able to study the two items. He was at the loss of word.

Another is this old man who claim to be well versed with Penang and Malacca family crockery ware. It started off when I said that my late father bought a Nyonya Ware Kamcheng ( foodpot) from a Indian Muslim dealer in the 60s in the presence of a few collectors. He then objected by saying that in the 60’s got ‘no’ Nyonya ware and it is called ‘Pua’ & ‘Nguar’ in Hokien means plates & bowls and that Nyonya ware came its existence after 1970’s. I then asked for the difference between the Pua Nguar and Nyonya ware. I am still at the puzzle because he has not made it clear. Does it mean that the ones in the 60’s does not have phoenixes and the ones in the 70’s does and which is of better value or the both are cheap stuff? If those item are RM5 to RM10, I wouldn’t bother to ask and but when it comes to above RM100 and above, then knowledge is necessary.

Since he claimed that there is no Nyonya ware in the 60’s, then we have Pua Nguar spitoon, Pua Nguar Kamcheng Pua Nguar tehko(tea pot) etc. and another is, call it what ever you like Nyonya, Straits Chinese or Peranakan spitoon, kamcheng, tehko etc. When I asked further he accuse me of stirring up trouble, so Nyonya ware and Pua Nguar collectors has to know which is which otherwise anyone will be accused of selling the wrong thing with the aim to cheat. This incident happened at Amcorp Mall Flee Market. I am still looking for answers so that I won’t fall into the wrong place.

The painting by Xu Bei Hong with one horse galloping is too easy to copy and with many of it in the market. The one that are with two horses, one horse lifting up legs is difficult to copy (Two photo attached with one alleged copy is mine and the other is from a book telling about Xu Bei Hong’s painting in China) yet it is being copied by unknown artist and the horses in the alleged copy does not looked like cartoon. If master copier like Chang Ta-Chien can copy Xu Bei Hong’s painting, Chi Pai Shih’s painting then copies will be called Chang Bei Hong’s painting, Chang Pai Shih’s painting and further that art students who copy the famous artist will follow like copier with surname Chen will be Chen Bei Hong and so on.

A European lady got a surprise because I told her that every collector must know what they have in their collection like genuine or fake. She told me that scientific ways can imitate porcelain items exactly the same, my reply is that every item in your collection will not fetch good value because money could easily buy the antique items in your pocession from factories. I cited an example that Nyonya ware items can be seen and bought everywhere. After that conversation I came to know why the Chinese proverb says that wealth never passed three generations. To the first generation, the artefacts in their collection are treasures. Second generation keeps them for fun without much knowledge, only by the word that they are treasure from the first generation. Third generation without knowledge to tell that those artefacts are genuine, will throw them away when they see so many copies in the market or after consulting experts who claim that they are fakes thus turning treasures in garbage.

The photos of the item which is Pua Nguar or Nyonya ware is not known to me yet and both photos of Xu Bei Hong’s painting and another ? Bei Hong’s painting with the horse that I mentioned are marked.

There are experts known to me that pluck facts from the air and claim that they are mighty thus leaving collector confused and causing wealth never passed three generations.

Greedy collectors wants museums’ pieces which is not for sale and ends up that in their lifetime not getting anything. Many collectors missed collecting good pieces available at one time but they are not interested to study themselves but to rely on experts’ opinion without getting proper judgement as in precedent found in The STAR World news pg. 43 titled “Forgotten vase sells for RM19 mil” which quote “Her blue and white “dragon” vase had been sitting at the bottom of her wardrobe since the l970s when an expert told her the piece was a copy.” Why do we collect? The answer is in page13 found in book titled “Collecting & Looking After Antiques” by John Fitzmaurice Mills.

Netsuke is well known among collectors compared to Japanese porcelain like Ko-Kutani, Arita Nabeshima, Kakimon, Imari, Satsuma and others.

These two items are they Pua Nguar or Nyonya ware?

This two photos is extracted from a book that talks about Xu Bei Hong’s painting and the horse that I emphasized is marked.

This is the painting that I owned and the horse on the painting which is marked does not looked like cartoon.

Sunken Treasure

It is not worth being an antique collector because treasure can turn to rubbish and rubbish to treasure.
Words like fakes or reproductions are easily used and can confuse collectors. As in the case of an English expert, William Willetts who claim that a Ming bowl as a fakes and comparison was made at the museum which he is the curator and he was found to have made mistakes in authentication which also carry doubts in the pieces of the museum.
Experts who doesn’t know to state the facts on items that are fakes, will also not know how to state the facts on the items that are genuine in writing but by stating it orally has no risk.
Provenance in writing is a must and how to prove that the item is from the person or the family who previously owned it is a problem. Example Madame Lopez who rented a unit at Cho Tek flat, Jalan Imbi in the late 60’s and due to rental problem, her things were auctioned off and my late father bought some of the items and a whatever you like to call it Nyonya Ware, Straits Chinese, or Pernakan plate was in that lot and to prove that the plate is from Madame Lopez is a problem. I don’t know it is the fact on the piece or the piece that belongs to Madame Lopez is important.
The items that I am looking for from sunken vessels of the Yuan or Ming dynasty from Admiral Cheng Ho because the items are from Mongol and Chinese government financed barter trade which are finer and can fetch higher price.

31 August 2010

To all antique porcelain collectors' concern.

To collect antique porcelain item has lead to international laughter or joke because experts are misleading.

Most countries are markets with imported antique porcelain items without much historical links but the most important is whether it is genuine or fake.

Experts must be thrown away because thermoluminescence test is used for ceramics and residual traces of cover materials from the casting of bronze objects.

To add further laughter at are the experts in this field and collectors who trusted them.

History tells us that: -

1) In 1975, when a fisherman Ch'oe Hyong-gun snagged several heavily encrusted ceramics vessels in his net while trawling for croakers off Sinan- a district on the south-western coast of the Republic of Korean. His brother, a school teacher examined the finds and suspected their importance. He showed them to the local authorities, who dismissed them as imitation. Finally experts in Seoul confirmed them as genuine antiques, and the Korean Cultural Property Preservation Bureau in South Korea aided by the navy, began systematically excavating the site in October 1976. ( Extract from Reader's Digest August 1980.)

2) In Malaysia, an antique dealer won a case against a couple who bought a Ming bowl for RM600 paid by cash and three pieces of Angkor Wat sandstone panels which was paid by cheque for RM6000 and this cheque was stopped payment for reason that the items were modern copies. ( Article can be found on page 5 of Star dated May 30, 1981.)
This antique dealer has stated that : - "Take Notice Goods Sold are not returnable but returnable on the condition that the Goods Mentioned above are proved they are modern copies. The proofs must be sufficient and must haven written remarks from experts.

Two Englishmen:

I) Peter Clague, an antique dealer whose business place was Loke House, Medan Tuanku, Kuala Lumpur who gave a valuation report of fakes and was not called to testify.

II) William Young Willetts who sworn in an affidavit stating his degrees and diplomas: -
a) Bachelor of Science (Bristol University) 1940.
b) Academic Diploma in Chinese Art And Archeology (London University) 1945.
c) M.A. Chinese Archeology (London University) 1946.
d) Bachelor of Arts in Classical Chinese (Oxford University) 1950.

He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (1971) and a curator of the Art Museum (University Of Singapore) from 1964 to 1973 and curator of Muzium Seni Asia (University Malaya) from then to the present time (30th July 1980, the date of affidavit sworn).
He also had studied on the spot in the six week long visits made between 1964 and 1968 and had written a book named "Angkor Roundabout" which is only a tourist guide and not a book on the antiquity of Angkor Wat.

Later it was discovered that he is the founder of the South East Asian Ceramic Society in Singapore and Malaysia. (Sunday Mail Weekend Extra dated 26th June 1994.)

On 17/10/80 Mr. Willetts gave evidence and comparison was made on the same day at Muzium Seni Asia. He also retracted certain statements, he made earlier. The Learned Magistrate, Che Mokhtar Bin Che Ali who did not record the retraction of the statements by Mr. Willetts and on May 29,1981 when plaintiff's counsel was cross-examining Mr. Willetts who is defence witness number three concerning the retract statements, The Learned Magistrate Che Mokhtar Bin Che Ali disappear from the courtroom leaving everybody in the courtroom in suspense. (Extracted from Civil Action 5934 of 1978 in the Magistrate court Kuala Lumpur.)

During the trial Mr. Willetts had tendered two letters of correspondence between him and Sotheby's to let the court know that he had corrected an error for Sotheby's that piece of Chinese Ceramic items was actually put up for sale as Iranian.

3) New Straits Times World news section by Associated Press dated Friday 22/12/1995 titled "Malaysians convicted of RM1.6m vase scam" tells us that a couple sold 45 pieces of fake Ming and Yuan Dynasty porcelain vases to five San Francisco Victims for US$640,000 and it was discovered to be fakes by featured expert of art appraisers from Christie's Fine Art Auctioneers in New York and Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Sheffler said among other thing I quote". "If they had been real, the 45 rare and extremely valuable vases would have been worth approximately US$20 million" and also that certificates of authenticity had failed in its performance in this press statement.

Example:
a) Saturday Star World News section by Reuters dated Nov.9,1994 titled "Liberace's Cadillac fails to thrill bidders" which claim that 1931 V8 Roadster, used by the flamboyant pianist in his stage show, was expected to fetch 100,000 sterling pounds, attracted only a 55,000 bit when it was auctioned.
b) Thursday Star World News, October 8,1998 titled "No Takers for possible early Lincoln photo" tells that a daguerreo- type claim to be the earliest known photograph of Abraham Lincoln failed to sell at an auction on Tuesday when bidding petered out at US$150,000 and this items was put up for sale by Christie in New York.
c) Miller's antique price guide tells that "The never-ending problem of fixing prices for antiques."

For the 2 example, Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Sheffler is implying that Liberace's Cadillac and Lincoln's photo are no good otherwise it would have been sold at a higher price.

4) Sunday Mail 28th July 1996 titled "Royal Fakes". It turned out that a pair of Chinese Porcelain 'Famille-verte' caches pots of the Kangxi period, on loan from the Queen Elizabeth, the Queen's mother are reproductions done in factory in Paris and was placed at Grosvenor House Art and Fair. Who was expert or experts who verified the cache pots to be Kangxi period is not known which creating embarrassment.

5) NST World News Thursday Aug. 15 1996 titled " Malaysian couple jailed for selling fake Chinese Porcelain". I do not know whether it is the same or different subject. If it were to be same subject then we are having 2 stories to be one subject. Assistant US Attorney Ross Nader in this press statement said "The couple told buyers that 45 porcelains dated from the Ming and Yuan dynasties in China. All were actually manufactured in the last 25 years. Before sale, the couple asked Clarence Shangraw, then chief curator of the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco, to verify the porcelain's authenticity and recommend that the museum buy some, but he said they were fakes." I do not know what degree or degrees Clarence Shangraw posses but compared to Mr. Willetts professional reputation is recognised by as prestigious as Encyclopedia Brittanica. Mr. Willetts was caught making mistakes when comparison was made in the museum. (Sarkar on Evidence (12th edition) Value of Expert Evidence in General verified genuineness by making comparisons with the exhibits in the museum against the fakes)

There are so much to laugh at that it is about to be a laughing subject than a collecting subjects.

All the press records are extracted from Malaysia's newspaper.

Earlier this year, a Chinese magazine and Nanyang Siang Pau dated 2/6/2002 featuring the same topic that Taiwanese get specialists to make imitation porcelain to cheat Taiwanese collectors. When imitations can be made exactly the same as originals, then museums and university of antiquity subject is not required anymore. Collectors who do learn about weathering process are idiots. Let idiots be idiots forever.

Porcelain items.

Porcelain items are made for household use and after production changes it become antiques. This add higher value because the texture change and material used from one era to another are different. Blue and White Chinese porcelain has imported and local material for decoration and these two materials give two different blue. Secondly the drawing tells the time. An English expert taught that the best way is by comparing with authenticated specimen. Many dealers, collectors and overseas expert went to look for antique porcelain wares in China but they didn't know that most of the good pieces are no longer there because :

1) Manufacturer do not keep every piece they make and if they make every piece and keep other parts of the world will not know what Chinese porcelain is?
2) Fine house ware and family heirloom were cheaply sold by opium addicts over century.
3) In the 60's Chinese government sold antique porcelain items to pay Soviet Union for the loan taken to fight Korean War.
4) Cultural revolution demonstrators don't believe in dragons and phoenixes destroyed a lot of treasures that was left after the three incidents.

Collectors, dealers and experts always say that there are a lot of imitations. Paintings are copied by other painters. Jade can be old but carving can be new. Bronze ware using acid to etch it slowly makes it look very old. Collectors must know what they have been keeping so that it will not bring a problem to the next generation. A knowledgeable collector will not base on rumour buy , rumour sell. Many collectors don't even have a tool and some doesn't know how to use the tool. Experts always say that imitation can be made exactly the same as originals then we don't need experts to authenticate because we can find makers making genuine artefacts, which is not worth collecting anymore. It is difficult to trust experts who authenticate the items and give oral remarks without producing genuine items and explain how conclusion is arrived. This will lead to confusion and owner will not learn anything.

A discovery that scientific testing done in Hong Kong with certificate of authenticity is not reliable.
In 2003, Thesaurus Fine Arts sold a ceramic teapot purportedly from the Tang Dynasty and a pottery tile supposedly from the Ming Dynasty and both pieces came with ' certificate of authenticity' from scientific testing laboratories in Hong Kong and further tests by two laboratories showed each less than 100 years old and possibly new and another no more than 130 years old and might even be new. ( Extracted from Associated Press)
In 2005, Thesaurus Fine Arts has to pay US$350,000 in penalties and cost. This case happened in Seattle in U.S.A.

All ceramic and pottery artefacts are fakes unless and until proven genuine.

In collecting antiques, the proverbs says among the blind, the one with one eye is the king. The rules are :-

1) There are items that I have, the museum doesn't have.

2) There are items that the museum have, that I don't.

3) There are items that I have, the museum also have.

4) There are item that I don't have, the museum don't have but another person have.

5) There are items that museum have, another person have and I don't have.

6)There are items that museum have, another person have and I have.

There is a need to know how to conclude that the items in the collection is genuine unless experts declare that imitations can be made exactly the same as originals, then museum pieces and items in private collections can be easily ordered from factories making the genuine items causing "No genuine and no fakes". There are no good collectible item of high value anymore in this case because genuine items can be easily produced. It is the item that tells the genuineness and not the stories because stories can be made wherever and whenever necessary.

The ball is now in the collectors court and vendors has to prove the items in the trade are genuine.There are many dishonest collectors who cheats themselves and blame it on others. They usually claim that their collections are good but without knowledge of the fact to support what they claim.They may even go to jail when the facts of genuineness are not laid for the next generation or buyers. Even a million dollar piece is put in front of them will be useless because they don't know how to tell the value involving the piece. It turn out to be their problem when they claim copies and ended up that their collection are copies as well caused by illteracy.

03 August 2010.

Sung Dynasty 960 AD - 1279 AD Ting ware Conical Bowl

Sung Dynasty 960 AD - 1279 AD

Ting ware Conical Bowl with incised motives. Conical bowl has small foot rim and will not topple with food gravity

Sung Dynasty 960 AD - 1279 AD Ting ware Mei Ping Vase

Sung Dynasty 960 AD - 1279 AD

Ting ware Mei Ping Vase

Sung Dynasty 960 AD - 1279 AD Celadon Pot in form of lotus

Sung Dynasty 960 AD - 1279 AD

Celadon Pot in form of lotus