Shocking Headline attracts Readers to Homosexuals' Rugs.

This week is a low impact week for me. As I write this, I am mentally preparing for an important meeting at the end of the week and I do not want to re-read my notes again. I am using my favorite technique to prepare, that is: If you don't know it by now, you aren't going to know it. What better way to not re-read them, than to write a blog entry? Here is a review of recent activities, travels, and thoughts.

The Hajji Baba Club

I recently attended a meeting of this venerable club of rug collectors by way of an invitation from my associate Sheridan Black at Custom Cool. I would like to publicly thank her and the rest of the "Hajjis", as they are known, for their hospitality. While not discounting the pleasantries of schmoozing, cocktail hour, and dinner, the evening's highlight was a presentation by Raoul "Mike" Tschebull, in which he offered his contemporary view of old caucasian rugs. 

The standout, light-bulb moment of the evening was his hypothesis that the negative space created in felt carpets (of the period) can and did spawn the creation of new design elements in woven or knotted carpets. Is he right? He certainly makes a compelling case, and his recognized authority on the subject at hand lends further credibility, and so I would be inclined to say he is. Regardless of your thoughts though, a critical and creative eye put to any design is sure to bring inspiration and the development of new designs. Furthermore, another point he made on more than one occasion during his presentation was that without veritable documentation, there is no way for any of us to know exactly what was going on in the past, and to extrapolate, to do so is merely an academic exercise. Not to say that there is anything wrong with that, but sometimes we all may need a reminder of exactly that. 

Note: Mr. Tschebull is the second of the two mentioned unnamed authorities in my last blog post (Found Here!). I did not wish to tarnish his name by including it directly in the last rant, err post.

Quality for the sake of quality.

I am currently reading a book entitled "The Craftsman" by Richard Sennett. While I have yet to get that far into it (why do people talk to you on a plane when you are clearly trying to read?), I feel compelled to share. As part of a three book series, this installment focuses on the individual craftsman, and the premise that an individual should do a task and do it well if for nothing else the sake of doing the task well.

Obviously, this perked my ears! "This sounds just like my premise of making great carpets for the sake of making great carpets" I thought to myself, before driving across town to find the one copy still in stock. Of course, I am not the first person to think this way, and I lay no claim to the concept, however I do subscribe to it. While I have no idea how the book will relate (if at all), it started me thinking. Who makes great carpets? and moreover, What makes a carpet great? While I have answers to my own questions, I am not about to share the names in the former publicly. Are you fracking crazy? (That's for my friends who are now lamenting the loss of their TV show...) The later however I will now address, and you can theorize...

Makings of a Great Carpet (Circa 2009 - Applicable to New Construction Only)

Reliance on superior materials. The carpet or rug must be made of durable, renewable, natural materials. A short list includes: Wool, Silk, Linen, Cotton, Nettle, Hemp, Cashmere.... I will acknowledge that cotton could be classed as non-renewable, depending on how environmental you are. Also, what dyes are used? Are they environmentally friendly and/or long lasting? Resistance to running and crocking?

Equity in production. Is each person or entity involved in the production earning fair and appropriate compensation for their tasks? Everyone involved is entitled to make money and profit is not a bad word, however, proportional distribution of said profits is important.

Design, and integrity of design. The manufacturer/importer must be using their own designs, or designs they have right to use, and furthermore the design(s) should stand on it own, and also not as part of a larger whole. This rules out custom rugs that only look good in the environment for which they were created.

Serviceability and wear. Can the rug be repaired? Easily cleaned? How durable compared to other rugs? Basically, is the rug going to last? 

Proportions. While you could consider this part of the design, I wanted to separate it as it own. Does the shape of the rug (and its proportions) relate well to the design. This is HIGHLY subjective, but a critical point.

Resources, their availability, and their use. Does the production of the carpet make best use of the available resources? Re-use of materials? Cradle to grave planning? How much waste is generated in the production of the rug, not just of raw materials, but also in electricity, fuel and the like. Are the waste materials diverted, to be repurposed or recycled?

Use of best methods. Does the construction use the best construction methods available for the type of rug? Best is broadly classed as the most enduring or historic techniques. Innovation is permitted provided it can be verified as an improvement. 

Craftsmanship and attention to detail. Is it well made? Is it finished properly? How does it compare to other rugs made by the same manufacturer/importer (consistency)? 

Execution of colour. As previously stated (See here) colour is what gets your attention, so for a great rug to be, the colouration has to be brilliant, well thought out, attractive, enduring, and with just a touch of poison. I could argue this would rule out beige, but for those rare cases where beige is executed well, I will allow it.

Taking the nine (9) criteria into account then, we can judge if a rug is truly a great rug. Of course, keeping in mind the concluding sentences of my last blog post.

Of note...

I mentally debated for about thirty (30) seconds before deciding to comment on an advertisement I recently saw, deciding that if a company puts something in print, in a distributed publication (regardless of the number distributed), whose audience is not bound by confidentiality, that it is fair game. Therefore! I give you...

"Rugs Designed By Homosexuals"

While perusing and ogling the Winter 2008/09 Issue of Butt Magazine (Butt. This link contains nude imagery of men. You've been warned.) About a third of the way into the magazine, there one finds a right-hand side advertisement for Delinear Rugs. No images of rugs, Pink copy (by nature of the colour of the paper), set against a plain matte black background. The company logotype is horizontally centered about two-thirds of the way up the page, with the tagline "Rugs Designed By Homosexuals" underneath. In the upper left corner, near the fold, you can find very limited contact info and a website address. Some will say that the ad can't possibly sell rugs with no images of them, but to understand the advertisement is to understand the magazine, and its target audience. Something the people at Delinear clearly do understand. This ad is simply brilliant, and I hope they get lots of response to it. For those of you who know me, this now ranks up with Jan Kath's Wunderland brochure as best rug advertisement (ever?). Brava! (And I do mean brava for those in San Francisco. *grin)

Cheers!

The March Report or: What you need to know of semi-random thoughts...

This post started as a simple friendly response to a common question, and turned into personal rant that is a bit harsh. As is said "If you aren't offending someone, you're not doing it right", so here it is, semi-edited for content. Enjoy!

Answers on request....

I was recently asked (by an unnamed associate**) to answer this question posed by the creator of the Friends of RugMark Group on Facebook (Click me for the link...If you're on Facebook): 

"Does anyone have expertise whom can offer the advantages to buying antique, vs semi-antique. vs contemporary pieces in regard to work equity and forced labor? It is difficult to determine as a layman."

I was honoured to be thought of as apparently possessing this exact expertise! Furthermore, having been recently influenced by an episode of the popular television program "House", I find myself missing the part of the brain that would normally filter what I am about to write, so the answer is:

Technically the answer to the question is simply: Yes. But I digress...

The primary advantage of purchasing a contemporary carpet (as it relates to this question), particularly one whose provenance is without question, is that you can eliminate any uncertainty regarding work equity and forced labour. One such way of assuring there is no forced or illegal labour is of course by purchasing a RugMark labeled carpet, being cognizant that detractors of RugMark will argue their system is not perfect and indeed no system is. The other way to assure yourself (with 100% certainty) is to weave a carpet yourself.

In an antique carpet you have no such guarantee or assurance. Given the age of an antique carpet (100 years plus) however, we must factor in appreciation of an object that has survived for such a period, and the related benefits of reuse and preservation (both as an object of value and of artistic merit) when purchasing such a carpet. 

Take for instance an exaggerated example of the great pyramids. These were without doubt made using slave labour, yet we as a society still choose to appreciate their grandeur. At the same time, we no longer use forced labour in construction (as a generalization) and as an individual you can assure none is used in the construction of the project with which you are involved. (Perhaps by building it yourself?) The point is obviously that as society progresses, expectations and acceptable practices change.

Returning then to carpets. Was the antique carpet made with what we would now consider unethical labour practices? Yes. No. Maybe. Perhaps. Perhaps not. Is it still worthy of appreciation? That is for the eye of the beholder to answer, but in all likelihood it should be appreciated. There is no way of knowing for certain what labour conditions (or any other) were like when the carpet was made (the point of "not knowing" is commonly made by respected, as of yet, unnamed** authorities on the past), but at the same time we need to consider that during the time it was made, the practices may have been widely accepted. This is of course contrasted with the use of illegal and forced labour now, when there is wide agreement that it is not acceptable to use such labour. To make a long story short (too late): That was then and this is now. Applying our current thoughts is anachronistic and thus not applicable. So, the answer is not as easy as black and white. I would advise primarily that you trust the dealer from whom you purchase and ask many questions. If they are not willing to engage in active and straightforward dialog and/or you aren't comfortable, do not purchase from them.

And I just cannot resist, while I'm at it...

As I was reading the aforementioned question, I was struck by several things the author of which writes, both in the question itself and in other places on the Facebook group.

1) "Semi-antique" Right or wrong I hate, hate, hate this term. Have I used it in the past? Yes, when I was a much younger, a more naive man, and my employer strongly sanctioned its use. I'm at least 1% wiser now, and admit this was a "youthful transgression" (among others), and no longer subscribe to its use. Actually, I will go further to say it should not be used. This is a ploy by salesmen and saleswomen (who may or may not be related to used car salesmen) to lend greater provenance to a potentially otherwise lack luster rug or carpet. What they want to say is that the rug is Old and Used, but not yet old enough to be antique. The problem is that old and used aren't appealing (as we know from a previous post of on The Ruggist) and are not as valuable, whereas Antique and derivatives thereof seemingly are. It's the difference between shopping at a thrift store and buying at an auction house, where in theory you could find the exact same item. I think as another birthday approaches I may call myself semi-forty, whatever that is.

2) "How many of us have a really nice rug (or desire a really nice hand knotted rug) but can't be sure if child labor was utilized to complete the complex knots that only tiny fingers can perform?"

Seriously? Seriously? Where to start? How about with a proof:

Given: Only tiny fingers can complete complex knots.

Given: Really nice rugs (presumably) have complex knots.

And: Children have tiny fingers.

Therefore: Really nice rugs are made with tiny fingers, and thus by children.

So using the statement of "facts" in the question itself, the answer is that you can be sure that only child labour was used. There is no other answer. Now to be fair, I am being a complete and total ass. The major flaw is that the question wants to ask "How to be sure... ...about child labour?" and for that, see the long winded answer above, but instead the author makes the assumption that only tiny fingers can make complex (tiny?) knots, and thus the answer can only be as above. 

Continuing, there is another assumption that a "really nice rug" somehow has to be complex and made with tiny knots. Kudos to those who make and sell such rugs for brainwashing consumers. Now don't get me wrong, I am not saying those rugs are not really nice, I am saying that there are other rugs that are just as equally nice, that employ knotting or weaving techniques not nearly as complex and tiny.

Furthermore, the "tiny fingers make tiny knots" argument has been used for years in an attempt to justify child labour in rugs; topically those that are both Old and Used, and Antique. This is often uttered by the same salesmen and saleswomen who sell semi-antique carpets. It is a failure to frankly and accurately answer the question (as I attempted in the first part of this post), and is an old bad argument that doesn't hold water as they say.

This conclusion brought to you by the ^#$%^$#&#*$@# Ruggist.

Reading this you'd think I have a personal issue with the author of those questions, but I can assure you I do not, nor do I even know him. The questions he asks have been uttered by many people seeking to know more about the rugs they purchase. They have formulated these questions based on  previously received information (from those same used car salesman-esque salesmen and saleswomen from whom they are again purchasing). The answers they've received however are often at best inaccurate, at worst patent falsehoods, and due to the number of this class of sales force, they will seemingly continue to exist in perpetuity.

The author is fully correct to say that as a laymen it is hard to know if the answers you are receiving are truthful, and to "know" what you are getting yourself into. The issue of knowing however is not confined to the layman. As I once read "Put five rug experts in a room, and you get six opinions."

With that, I leave you my sixth opinion.

**Referencing unnamed sources makes you a real Journalist.