Known for its "industrial charm", New York's Red Hook section in Brooklyn will soon be home to Christie's Fine Art Storage Services--a subsidiary of the auction house. In Wall Street Journal's article "The Ultimate Walk-In Closet", Kelly Crow questions if Christie's "is walking a delicate line": balancing clients' desire for confidentiality and customs' desire to "deter potential smugglers and money launderers from hiding assets or stashing stolen or looted works."
According to Crow, "Christie's said it will run credit checks on customers and check stored items against registries of stolen art, but added that it can't police everything it brings into its new warehouse."
In light of recent events in New York and London where stolen objects were nearly auctioned off undetected, one can only hope that auction houses will check more thoroughly where items come from while providing safe storage for them.
Posts
Quick Link
2 weeks ago
15 comments:
Is a bank responsible for what is stored in a safety deposit box? What about storage lockers?
Should we immediately demand that blanket search warrants be issued against anyone in the United States that owns anything older than 100 years of age? Would you have us force our neighbors to take a full inventory of their attics and closets and account for the origin of anything deemed to be "antique"?
It is rediculous that you would want to treat citizens as criminals when there is no evidence of a crime. This is precisely the problem with the radical fringe of archaeology groups, there is no "middle ground" with you people. You are calling for a move to a form of government that is not compatible with our post-Soviet era.
Dear Mr. De La Fe:
Indeed SAFE calls for auction houses to check more thoroughly where items come from.
The article quoted here comes from the Wall Street Journal, not "the radical fringe of archaeology groups".
I agree that auction houses should use due diligence, in fact, they should be held to a higher standard than the average collector in certain ways. But the facility in question is a storage facility and the last line in your post was not in the article.
The real difference in opinion is just what the "higher standard" should involve.
A very interesting post, and interestingly timed. Auction houses should take greater care, withdrawing from auctions has got to cost them money, if not reputation.
Alfredo, what are you objecting to? I don't read anyone treating "citizens as criminals" anywhere. (BTW, criminals are citizens too, no? But never mind I digress). You seem to be the only one making accusations here. I find your "objection" or "comment" rather empty.
The difference between this "storage facility" and others is this: the existence of stolen art databases that help auction houses conduct due diligence. This means they have been alerted. I don't think we are talking about any "higher standards" here. Just take a closer look! Heck, we should ALL take a closer look.
David:
Unless the auction house is taken "ownership" or accepting a piece for consignment it is unreasonable to ask them to "police" their storage customers. When you go to a bank and store items in your safe deposit box, the bank does not check to see if your grandfathers watch or your wifes diamond necklace was stolen or whether or not the diamonds were conflict diamonds.
As for the "citizens as criminals" comment, it is the overall attitude which has been displayed and the solutions sought by organizations such as SAFE and the AIA in their anti-collecting agenda that is of major concern.
Alfredo, let me try again:
Any establishment that has been alerted of stolen property that is likely to pass through its doors has the responsibility to perform due diligence regardless of whose problem it is or who owns it. Auction houses routinely consult with stolen art databases. That's why even the Christie's said it will check stored items against registries of stolen art. This is called doing the right thing. Good citizens, good businesses (banks included) at least try to do the right thing.
As for the other comment, I would very much like you to elaborate for me "the overall attitude which has been displayed and the solutions sought by organizations such as SAFE and the AIA in their anti-collecting agenda that is of major concern".
Let's talk about SAFE, as this is where we are now. Can you point to me specific examples that would substantiate your claim? "Major concern?" For whom? I am not concerned.
I want to address this because it's not the first time I read these accusations that have no basis, at least as far as I can see. I have followed SAFE's website and blog for a while, but how do you justify these public denunciations? When people read unfounded attacks it's a real turn off to those who might agree with you in the first place. Are you not aware of this? Or are you so afraid of those who disagree with you you can't see straight?
I read your blog and others like yours but I had to stop because I am really offended by the nastiness. If you had something reasonable to say, it's drowned out by all the bull.
I understand that this is no longer the topic of this post, and would be happy to correspond with you off-line about this. I am not defending anyone here but my own intelligence. I don't speak for any organization but I've wanted to say this to you guys for a while now: please give us a break. It would be a lot more effective to argue on the facts if you want to put others down. If you want to win: facts, not rhetoric.
David Ian
David- I do not have your email address but please send me an email and I will gladly take it offline.
Best,
Alfred
delafe@imperialcoins.com
According to Derek Fincham in "Auction Houses and the Sale of Heritage" "these auction houses play an important role in the market, know exactly what they are doing, and yet the anonymity continues to shield their practices, and allow for the sale of looted and stolen pieces of heritage."
Why take it off-list? Specific accusations have been levelled by Mr De La Fe against this specific organization - one which I for one feel is playing a positive role in raising awareness.
I agree with David Ian that Mr De La Fe would be hard-put to actually find anything on the SAFE website which would back up his accusations.
So let us please see on-list his efforts to do so.
It seemed such an innocuous post at the top.
Alfredo, thanks for the contact. I spent some time reading more of these "discussions" on various blogs and lists and am quite honestly amazed by all that venom out there. I now am not sure I want to give out my email address.
I was just concerned that we are getting way off topic in this thread. We are not discussing anything private here. I have a bit of time (although not as much as you guys apparently) and I'd like to understand what's going on here.
Yes. let's hear it in public.
I second that! He's afraid to talk about this in public cause he knows that his attacks are baseless and his support/participation in the trade is in denial/negligent regarding the damage it does.
Damien- I am not afraid to discuss this topic publicly. I was following David Ian's lead on taking it off line. In fact, I will gladly take it over to my blog. I dont have the time to do the research at this particular moment because I am working on a rather large project, but will try clear a few hours in my schedule over the next few days to write my response.
Ok, Alfredo. Please take this as a friendly recommendation: In general, it's better not to make off-the-cuff statements against anyone without having to take hours from your busy schedule to dig for substantiation. You lose your credibility, and for this and all the other reasons I spoke about, I will not participate in anything on your blog. But, if you really have something specific to share, please do it here.
I meant: Better to do the research BEFORE you make the claims in a public forum, not AFTER you've been challenged.
Thank you, everyone, for your comments. While we are gratified by the show of interest, the comments are veering away from the topic of the original post. We will therefore not post anymore comments for reasons outlined in Blogging on SAFECORNER and also the purpose of this blog under "Welcome to SAFECORNER" on your right. Thank you for understanding.
Your are welcome to send a suggestion for a new post to safecorner@savingantiquities.org.
Thank you.
Post a Comment