Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?

(Example: Production Builders:Teledyne)

Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:54:23 +0000 (GMT)
From: <>
Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
In-reply-to: <>
To: gabriel l romeu <>
References: <> <>
cc: Classic Rendezvous <>

Dear Mr. Romeu: I'm afraid we're going to go beyond the purpose of CR with this disc ussion and, quite possibly, induce narcolepsy in many members. So I'll end my part of this thread with these comments. All ideas, words and concepts are the creation of men.

As far as bikes are concerned, I believe that the idea that in many ca ses what passes as "patina" is merely damage that, in the case of bikes, that for whatever reason, the owner is either unwilling or u nable to repair. The tale that this injury tells is too frequently one of accidental or deliberate misuse and, in the long run, will lead directly to the deterioration of the bike. In order to make a virtue o f bike neglect, the issue of "patina" is trumped up. Vice become s virtue. As for "people in the know" what I was saying that there are many su ch people in the collectable field and their ideas vary.

Duration of esteem is the true judge of merit. George Hollenberg MD Westport, CT, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: "gabriel l romeu"

Date: Saturday, June 2, 2007 6:30 pm Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration? To: Cc: Jerome & Elizabeth Moos , Classic Rendezvous

> > The real issue here, like the concept of "originality" is,

> like all
> > philosophical issues, the creation of men. There is nothing more
> > noble about an "original" work than a well restored one, m erely
> > because the idea is put forth on the "Antique Road Show."
> very true, that is a 'argument by authority'. However,
> 'nobleness' is
> a hierarchical judgment and is also a creation of men, and may
> be
> ascertained by any man.
> > "Originality," like all qualities, has its devotees, a nd they love
> > all "original" things, even when that "originality" do esn't reflect
> > intrinsic merit, but, merely time co-operating with chance.
> It does represent an 'intrinsic merit' to the individuals that
> love
> original things making the assertion. merit again is a judgment
> call.
> It is all perspective.
> > Furthermore, such ideas vary within groups of various collecta bles,
> > collectors and countries. European furniture dealers and colle ctors
> > don't share the views of their American counterparts about
> > restoration.
> The European antiques market never had quite the cachet of the
> American,
> they have had an established historical tradition while
> Americans are
> constantly attempting to establish and verify one. It has been
> my
> experience that Europeans are much more open to diversity of
> styles and
> more readily consider contemporary furniture, while Americans
> have far
> more interest in antiques and copies of antiques. I have found
> this
> living in the northern part of Western Europe and family
> residing there.
> Can't be sure of the rest.
> Furthermore, when I visited Mr. Alberto Masi lately he
> > displayed no shame in a "Feria" bike he had restored. It w asn't
> > "original," but, so what, it was beautiful and most an y collector
> > would have coveted it, save those that demand "originality. "
> > Personally, unless bikes are in very fine condition, I much
> prefer a
> > restoration-a well done one, of course.
> Your use of A. Masi is again an argument of authority. again,
> does not
> justify any particular 'truth' to your personal preference. it

> is all a
> matter of preference, isn't it?
> what most people 'in the know' prefer about original finishes is

> how
> they speak to an objects history of use. This adds many more
> layers of
> interest than what the actual object represents. one of the
> most
> interesting thing about functional objects (as opposed to
> something
> hanging on a wall) is the way they interact with an individual.
> every
> mark tells a story (whether assumed accurate or not), and
> invokes the
> response of a connection to the past. this is important to
> many. as
> one that makes functional objects, this is very important to me
> as I
> design around intended use and the object only gains relevance
> when it
> is interacting with an individual. Like, it's the people, no t
> the
> object. I also like traces of the maker in an object.
> I used to paint very detailed floorcloths of overhead views on
> canvas,
> most if not all of them were hung on the wall. this convinced
> me to stop.
> the pristine object that either was designed to be used and is
> hanging
> on a wall not being used may feel rather 'soulless' to many of
> us. The
> patina and wear adds many levels to think about when pondering
> an
> object. It adds to the aesthetic experience. Some may also
> think it
> adds to the beauty.
> There are some that think that hanging a bike on the wall to
> retain it's
> pristine nature (never seeing a road again) is an outrage,
> unfair to the
> bike and to someone who will appreciate the many other
> experiential
> qualities beyond the visual. I can understand this but am not
> judgmental enough for condemnation hoping that it is being
> preserved for
> someone in the future that will truly experience it in all it's
> riding
> glory.
> as a photographer, I was so pleased to have my working double
> stroke M3
> and really despised those hiding their Leicas in the safes and
> display
> cases when it was a difficult time (early 70's on) to get a good
> affordable rangefinder for the street by us doing real work.
> The CL
> came out and was fine, but I was lucky enough to find it's
> heavier and
> more versatile predecessor. took quite some time and good
> timing to get
> the jump on a collector.
> just another opinion.
> --
> gabriel l romeu
> chesterfield nj usa
> ± Ø ±

George Hollenberg MD