@yspsales said:
Born and raised in South Carolina, I consciously avoid wilber slave tokens, slave tags, etc...
It is a personal decision.
If it is something I wanted to collect, provenance would be a distant and secondary consideration.
It's funny you should mention that. I'm in upstate NY. For a long time, the biggest collector of black Americana in the region was a local TV anchor who happened to be a black woman. A lot of the pieces in her collection would now be considered objectionable because of the iconography. I mean, Aunt Jemima has been canceled.
What's most interesting to me is to think about how this all plays out. Every time a person is cancelled left or right, right or wrong they and their followers will abandon the movement (keep in mind they start with less than 50%). Eventually there will be more cancelled folks than following folks. leaving few to idolize the the so-called elites who will have no one left to cancel except each other.
This could be a great plot for a Hollywood movie but they have to do it before everyone is gone or just make it a comedy.
As I recall someone famous was ridiculed as a conspiracy theorist and alarmist when a few years ago they warned that the campaign against certain southern statues would soon expand to include Columbus and our Founding Fathers. That prediction took about a year or less to come true.
I am shocked that our coins and banknotes (except the $20 bill) have escaped scrutiny so far. Heck, we even have a National Law Enforcement Memorial commemorative coin series this year. I don't expect our numismatic designs to remain a safe haven for much longer.
All some people want is not to listen to lying idiots on-air or look at false idols or have their children read childrens books with racial stereotypes. All they want is a better society for all people.
@yspsales said:
Born and raised in South Carolina, I consciously avoid wilber slave tokens, slave tags, etc...
It is a personal decision.
If it is something I wanted to collect, provenance would be a distant and secondary consideration.
It's funny you should mention that. I'm in upstate NY. For a long time, the biggest collector of black Americana in the region was a local TV anchor who happened to be a black woman. A lot of the pieces in her collection would now be considered objectionable because of the iconography. I mean, Aunt Jemima has been canceled.
I am always for teaching and learning. I can appreciate any collection.
One day we will regret not doing interviews of key players at major auctions. Dealer and collector stories are lost every day it seems. The internet seems to make it even less personal.
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
No one wants to change history, you can't.
No one wants to limit Freedom of Speech.
All some people want is not to listen to lying idiots on-air or look at false idols or have their children read childrens books with racial stereotypes. All they want is a better society for all people.
That is, of course, the political position of one set of lying idiots on-air. It is not, however, borne out by the facts.
See Chris Harrison, Gina Carano, J.K Rowlings, Goya Foods...
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
No one wants to change history, you can't.
No one wants to limit Freedom of Speech.
All some people want is not to listen to lying idiots on-air or look at false idols or have their children read childrens books with racial stereotypes. All they want is a better society for all people.
Keep dreaming - freedom of speech is in danger. No qualms with a better society - it needs some work all around.
Let’s try to keep the topic on coins. I know the larger topic can get one’s passions running. Let’s just make sure we stay within the bounds set by our hosts.
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
Freedom of speech is not in danger in this country.
Corporations are making these decisions based on their bottom line.
This illustrates an important point.
Your freedom of speech is not in danger. You can say whatever you want.
The same can not be said for people who have other viewpoints. If you don't recognize this then you are at best willfully ignoring what is going on.
Back to coins....
We are on borrowed time for what is considered acceptable in coin designs if the current climate persists. I am shocked every day that there is not an organized campaign underway to deface or remove the portraits on our coins. I suspect the lack of focus on coins is due to most younger generations not knowing who is pictured, or the fact that many of them don't use cash (or coins).
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
No one wants to change history, you can't.
No one wants to limit Freedom of Speech.
All some people want is not to listen to lying idiots on-air or look at false idols or have their children read childrens books with racial stereotypes. All they want is a better society for all people.
Yes, I do believe "protecting history" -- like monuments -- is completely different than getting rid of racial sterotypes in children's books. Children are not able to have an adult conversations about racist imagery.
Also, it's not about Dr Suess "being cancelled". It's the owners of those books deciding to change their products. That is them protecting their speech. Any conflations of "being cancelled" or "freedom of speech" arguments being made are ignorant of this fact.
@JBK said:
The same can not be said for people who have other viewpoints. If you don't recognize this then you are at best willfully ignoring what is going on.
Willfully ignorant, huh? So, if you believe a monument to a KKK leader should not be taken down, are you imprisoned for your belief? No? Cool. Freedom of speech in tact.
As for the purpose of the thread: I think provenance lines should be kept in tact. I don't see a valid reason to remove names from lists of past owners. Some do it because they think omitting a name might be more marketable and bring more money? Okay, and they can try.
But, as for me, I'd prefer more provenance than less, because it adds specialness to coins, which generally lack that sort of thing. Who cares about a specific 1921 morgan dollar? They are all the same widget, unless you own one owned by some important figure to history - then its special. We should strive to keep as much specialness in our coins as we can (in my opinion).
When talking provenance and previous ownership, there are probably 6-7 names that I care about (maybe more if I thought about it longer.) The others are nice to know but not essential and certainly don’t increase the value of the coin which is why I personally would care about it. If I got a coin that I found out the Kryptonite guy, as an example, owned then I wouldn’t even document it in my collection database. The name people will want to remember in 50-100 years and longer is chesterb!
@BillyKingsley said:
I am of the mindset that provenance doesn't really mean much...I care about what it is, not where it was. But if I found out something I owned was once owned by a known sexual predator of children, it would be tainted in my mind, because every time I viewed it I would be reminded of the person and their crime.
Didn't the same person brag about putting their coins in the oven to make the brightly colored toning as well?
Multiple reasons to avoid...both are enough in and of themselves in my opinion.
Good to see you post Billy!
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@JBK said:
The same can not be said for people who have other viewpoints. If you don't recognize this then you are at best willfully ignoring what is going on.
Willfully ignorant, huh? So, if you believe a monument to a KKK leader should not be taken down, are you imprisoned for your belief? No? Cool. Freedom of speech in tact.
Nice of you to wake up and join the conversation late and post reply after reply after reply.
I any case, I said "willfully ignoring" - you changed it to "willfully ignorant", a very different concept. As for statues, if you oppose erasing our history, you are indeed 1) demonized, 2) marginalized, and finally, 3) dehumanized. And you know very well that the statue issue has moved way beyond the statues you referenced.
@BillyKingsley said:
I am of the mindset that provenance doesn't really mean much...I care about what it is, not where it was. But if I found out something I owned was once owned by a known sexual predator of children, it would be tainted in my mind, because every time I viewed it I would be reminded of the person and their crime.
Didn't the same person brag about putting their coins in the oven to make the brightly colored toning as well?
Multiple reasons to avoid...both are enough in and of themselves in my opinion.
Good to see you post Billy!
m
Thanks! I'm still around the fringes of the hobby, but focusing on other stuff much more right now, so I don't check in often. Got curious about what the hobby was like right now and here I am.
IMO provenance added to slab labels and in auction descriptions are mostly selling fluff.
It reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where George buys the Chrysler Lebaron supposedly owned by John Voight.
Do you buy the coin because John Voight owned it or do you pass because it’s a Chrysler lebaron.
Sure historically speaking knowing who owned the coin is nice to know, but great coins are great coins regardless.
Even though some part of the collector in me thinks it’s cool, I also think why should I care? What difference does it make that some rich guy bought the coin and sold it to some other rich guy.
History contains many examples of societies acting to negate/eliminate ideas, principles, institutions and persons that for whatever reason are deemed (by vocal interest groups seeking to advance their agenda and obtain, maintain and/or increase their power, authority and influence) to be abhorrent, repugnant and dangerous.
This type of activity has in the past lead to horrible outcomes and a collapse of nation states.
Though currently in vogue in the USA the trend to cancel things is repugnant to the foundation of our society and the placing of individual rights and liberty on the center stage.
With respect to a coin's provenance and whether to cancel some or all of same, I can see arguments on both sides that are persuasive.
For me the coin Itself is paramount in me deciding whether or not I want it. Who the prior owners of the coin are is not important for the coins I collect.
@TradesWithChops said:
It just protects us from being censored by the government, or punished by it for our speech. --- unless that speech violates laws.
Well, technically, if we have laws that limit what we can say, that would mean we don’t have free speech..
Freedom of speech has limits, like calls to violence, child pornography, etc. Just like most freedoms, it's not a free for all.
@JBK said:
As for statues, if you oppose erasing our history, you are indeed 1) demonized, 2) marginalized, and finally, 3) dehumanized. And you know very well that the statue issue has moved way beyond the statues you referenced.
I was just using one specific example. That is, if you use your speech to dissent on a government action, you are protected by doing so and can not be arrested for it. you can still be fired from your job, though. And, if you are fired, your protections of Freedom of Speech are still in tact. Freedom of Speech != Freedom of no accountability. The best example of this is the one I already gave, where your speech infringes on your employers speech.
I don't think that anyone should be "1) demonized, 2) marginalized, and finally, 3) dehumanized" by voicing opinions such as removal of monuments. [And I know there are a lot of more controversial ones than a KKK leader]. I just chose that one to illustrate a clear example. Culture in general is becoming more polarized, which is a consequence of the internet. However, culture has always been the "final say" of what is and is not appropriate. Afterall, that's what law is! Law is what elected representatives declare based on what the communities that elected them want. Collective culture defines these values. The internet is allowing that collective determination to occur quicker.
I argue this is and has always been a core feature of the human species. But, feel free to disagree. I wont bite your head off for it!
Cheers
edit: about ignoring versus ignorant. point accepted.
Provenance is a historical record, and a matter of fact. At some point, a coin was in the possession of X collector or Y dealer. An omission of a certain name (whether willfully or as a a result of lack of evidence) does not change the fact that it was in a certain individual's possession at some point. This is complicated a bit by the fact that provenance exists in two different forms: the most comprehensive version (of interest to the collector and the historian, as a means to preserve as much of the record as possible), and the 'retail' version (the one used by a seller to generate the most interest to a wide audience. We saw the latter prominently in the collections of Bernie Madoff after they were liquidated at auction. High quality wristwatches and the like were turning up on the secondary market immediately after their sale with the Madoff provenance omitted, because people it was not a saleable point - people did not want to own collectibles from a guy who defrauded thousands of people and stole years off their lives in the form of retirement funds.
Comments
Born and raised in South Carolina, I consciously avoid wilber slave tokens, slave tags, etc...
It is a personal decision.
If it is something I wanted to collect, provenance would be a distant and secondary consideration.
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
>
Yes...but for totally different reasons. LOL.
Although isn't "karma chameleon" cultural appropriation?
It's funny you should mention that. I'm in upstate NY. For a long time, the biggest collector of black Americana in the region was a local TV anchor who happened to be a black woman. A lot of the pieces in her collection would now be considered objectionable because of the iconography. I mean, Aunt Jemima has been canceled.
Ron Guth wrote an interesting numismatic related article back in July 2020.
https://numismaticdetectives.com/blog/f/first-they-came-for-the-statues
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Tin foil hat??
People who think this is a fiction, do not spend a lot of time on college campuses.
What's most interesting to me is to think about how this all plays out. Every time a person is cancelled left or right, right or wrong they and their followers will abandon the movement (keep in mind they start with less than 50%). Eventually there will be more cancelled folks than following folks. leaving few to idolize the the so-called elites who will have no one left to cancel except each other.
This could be a great plot for a Hollywood movie but they have to do it before everyone is gone or just make it a comedy.
As I recall someone famous was ridiculed as a conspiracy theorist and alarmist when a few years ago they warned that the campaign against certain southern statues would soon expand to include Columbus and our Founding Fathers. That prediction took about a year or less to come true.
I am shocked that our coins and banknotes (except the $20 bill) have escaped scrutiny so far. Heck, we even have a National Law Enforcement Memorial commemorative coin series this year. I don't expect our numismatic designs to remain a safe haven for much longer.
No one wants to change history, you can't.
No one wants to limit Freedom of Speech.
All some people want is not to listen to lying idiots on-air or look at false idols or have their children read childrens books with racial stereotypes. All they want is a better society for all people.
I am always for teaching and learning. I can appreciate any collection.
One day we will regret not doing interviews of key players at major auctions. Dealer and collector stories are lost every day it seems. The internet seems to make it even less personal.
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
That is, of course, the political position of one set of lying idiots on-air. It is not, however, borne out by the facts.
See Chris Harrison, Gina Carano, J.K Rowlings, Goya Foods...
Keep dreaming - freedom of speech is in danger. No qualms with a better society - it needs some work all around.
Let’s try to keep the topic on coins. I know the larger topic can get one’s passions running. Let’s just make sure we stay within the bounds set by our hosts.
Freedom of speech is not in danger in this country.
Corporations are making these decisions based on their bottom line.
I tumble for you… I tumble for you...
I tumble for you I tumble for youuuuu!
depends how your algebraic group defines operators. of course, with most groups, 1+1 is going to be either 2 or 0. although, it can be something else.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
This illustrates an important point.
Your freedom of speech is not in danger. You can say whatever you want.
The same can not be said for people who have other viewpoints. If you don't recognize this then you are at best willfully ignoring what is going on.
Back to coins....
We are on borrowed time for what is considered acceptable in coin designs if the current climate persists. I am shocked every day that there is not an organized campaign underway to deface or remove the portraits on our coins. I suspect the lack of focus on coins is due to most younger generations not knowing who is pictured, or the fact that many of them don't use cash (or coins).
Yes, I do believe "protecting history" -- like monuments -- is completely different than getting rid of racial sterotypes in children's books. Children are not able to have an adult conversations about racist imagery.
Also, it's not about Dr Suess "being cancelled". It's the owners of those books deciding to change their products. That is them protecting their speech. Any conflations of "being cancelled" or "freedom of speech" arguments being made are ignorant of this fact.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
This. Corporations have First Amendment protections as well.
Regardless, the first amendment protects your right to free speech -- but that wouldnt stop PCGS from nuking this thread if they want to.
It just protects us from being censored by the government, or punished by it for our speech. --- unless that speech violates laws.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
Willfully ignorant, huh? So, if you believe a monument to a KKK leader should not be taken down, are you imprisoned for your belief? No? Cool. Freedom of speech in tact.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
@Zoins
As for the purpose of the thread: I think provenance lines should be kept in tact. I don't see a valid reason to remove names from lists of past owners. Some do it because they think omitting a name might be more marketable and bring more money? Okay, and they can try.
But, as for me, I'd prefer more provenance than less, because it adds specialness to coins, which generally lack that sort of thing. Who cares about a specific 1921 morgan dollar? They are all the same widget, unless you own one owned by some important figure to history - then its special. We should strive to keep as much specialness in our coins as we can (in my opinion).
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
When talking provenance and previous ownership, there are probably 6-7 names that I care about (maybe more if I thought about it longer.) The others are nice to know but not essential and certainly don’t increase the value of the coin which is why I personally would care about it. If I got a coin that I found out the Kryptonite guy, as an example, owned then I wouldn’t even document it in my collection database. The name people will want to remember in 50-100 years and longer is chesterb!
Legend ⭐️
Good to see you post Billy!
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Nice of you to wake up and join the conversation late and post reply after reply after reply.
I any case, I said "willfully ignoring" - you changed it to "willfully ignorant", a very different concept. As for statues, if you oppose erasing our history, you are indeed 1) demonized, 2) marginalized, and finally, 3) dehumanized. And you know very well that the statue issue has moved way beyond the statues you referenced.
It's later than we think. It's almost...1984.
I don’t know who they are, but yes please!
Thanks! I'm still around the fringes of the hobby, but focusing on other stuff much more right now, so I don't check in often. Got curious about what the hobby was like right now and here I am.
Well, technically, if we have laws that limit what we can say, that would mean we don’t have free speech..
IMO provenance added to slab labels and in auction descriptions are mostly selling fluff.
It reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where George buys the Chrysler Lebaron supposedly owned by John Voight.
Do you buy the coin because John Voight owned it or do you pass because it’s a Chrysler lebaron.
Sure historically speaking knowing who owned the coin is nice to know, but great coins are great coins regardless.
Even though some part of the collector in me thinks it’s cool, I also think why should I care? What difference does it make that some rich guy bought the coin and sold it to some other rich guy.
My Ebay Store
This thread is an interesting read.
History contains many examples of societies acting to negate/eliminate ideas, principles, institutions and persons that for whatever reason are deemed (by vocal interest groups seeking to advance their agenda and obtain, maintain and/or increase their power, authority and influence) to be abhorrent, repugnant and dangerous.
This type of activity has in the past lead to horrible outcomes and a collapse of nation states.
Though currently in vogue in the USA the trend to cancel things is repugnant to the foundation of our society and the placing of individual rights and liberty on the center stage.
With respect to a coin's provenance and whether to cancel some or all of same, I can see arguments on both sides that are persuasive.
For me the coin Itself is paramount in me deciding whether or not I want it. Who the prior owners of the coin are is not important for the coins I collect.
Freedom of speech has limits, like calls to violence, child pornography, etc. Just like most freedoms, it's not a free for all.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
I was just using one specific example. That is, if you use your speech to dissent on a government action, you are protected by doing so and can not be arrested for it. you can still be fired from your job, though. And, if you are fired, your protections of Freedom of Speech are still in tact. Freedom of Speech != Freedom of no accountability. The best example of this is the one I already gave, where your speech infringes on your employers speech.
I don't think that anyone should be "1) demonized, 2) marginalized, and finally, 3) dehumanized" by voicing opinions such as removal of monuments. [And I know there are a lot of more controversial ones than a KKK leader]. I just chose that one to illustrate a clear example. Culture in general is becoming more polarized, which is a consequence of the internet. However, culture has always been the "final say" of what is and is not appropriate. Afterall, that's what law is! Law is what elected representatives declare based on what the communities that elected them want. Collective culture defines these values. The internet is allowing that collective determination to occur quicker.
I argue this is and has always been a core feature of the human species. But, feel free to disagree. I wont bite your head off for it!
Cheers
edit: about ignoring versus ignorant. point accepted.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
Provenance is a historical record, and a matter of fact. At some point, a coin was in the possession of X collector or Y dealer. An omission of a certain name (whether willfully or as a a result of lack of evidence) does not change the fact that it was in a certain individual's possession at some point. This is complicated a bit by the fact that provenance exists in two different forms: the most comprehensive version (of interest to the collector and the historian, as a means to preserve as much of the record as possible), and the 'retail' version (the one used by a seller to generate the most interest to a wide audience. We saw the latter prominently in the collections of Bernie Madoff after they were liquidated at auction. High quality wristwatches and the like were turning up on the secondary market immediately after their sale with the Madoff provenance omitted, because people it was not a saleable point - people did not want to own collectibles from a guy who defrauded thousands of people and stole years off their lives in the form of retirement funds.
would a NFT blockchain with proof of ownership create the effect some fear - a tainted coin??