An Antique Dealer's Blog: Looking at English Furniture


Samuel Pepys, the noted diarist who bared all in his coded diaries, also worked for the British Naval Board under Charles II and James II. Pepys was there because of patronage, but he took his job very seriously. He realized that patronage was virtually out of control to the extent that the navy was ill prepared in many ways, even down to having ships that could float, let alone go into battle. Pepys systematically reformed his department and built the foundation for what would be the great British Navy. In a way, Pepys' work was about his personal responsibility to himself, the Navy and the Nation as a whole.

The ideological debate that the right is dying to have with Obama is centered on Obama's government involvement in virtually everything--finaince, health care, energy, etc. Clearly, our taxes will be going up and that is a great worry to any privately employed person. Scare tactics about rising taxes have worked for the right in the past, but because the economy was so screwed up on the watch of the Bush administration and its laissez-faire policies, it almost seems that the government could not do much worse.

I believe that if the right ever wanted a leg to stand on, they should focus, like Samuel Pepys, on the corruption, waste and fraud that exists within government. It doesn't have to be an ideological fight that wins the day. In fact, it seems that most people are tired of the ideological cant that radio personalities seem to obsess on. How much better it would be to have a reformer that seems to care about what we have that is being wasted rather than on how our lives are being ruined by socialism. Nothing would please me more to see the ideologues put in the back seat while people that care about making America work do the driving.  


The pleasure of being right is one that few of us want to cede, even when we are wrong. I can speak from personal experience on that score. I know that I am not alone, however, which gives me vague comfort at best and distinct unease as a rule. I think of how Rush Limbaugh has built an empire on his certitude which, in my opinion, qualifies as second rate demagoguery at best. De gustibus non est disputandum.

Eighteenth century England changed radically in its one hundred years. The power of the king, always shaky after Charles the First's beheading, was vastly diminished by 1800. Not only was their a petulant spendthrift in the role of the Prince Regent at that point in time, but his father, George III was periodically insane due to what is thought to be porphyria. Hence, the elected parliament, as corrupt as it was, became all the more important given the state of the febrile monarchy. But perhaps the greatest change in the eighteenth century was the birth of the middle class, a class that would not be denied their say or their share. The British shopkeeper had arrived.

Events are not governed by people even when they think that they are right. Political philosophies are incapable of taking into account such radicals as technology as George Allen ruefully discovered in his bid for elective office in Virginia. Indeed and in a similar vein, the Ayatollahs may survive the challenge to their grasp on power this time, but there will come a day when it will end. That day may be tomorrow or fifty years from now, but their time is running out.

The question that I keep returning to is that of certitude. Personally, I find it so much more interesting to be open to new ideas and new ways of doing things and that certitude seems to, as a rule, preclude such open-ness. It isn't always conservatives who live in certitude, I might add, but they sure do seem to want to buy up all the acreage and corner the market.  


A former client approached me at the Winter Antiques Show to tell me that he was making English "antiques" in Viet Nam with the help of craftsmen who were made redundant by a very famous English firm that recently went out of business. His words were that, "I would not be able to tell the difference..," between his table and a period one.

Color is perhaps the most important ingredient to an antique dining table, along with the choice of timber. If the timber is an interesting cut of first rate mahogany and it has good color and patina, a dining table can be remarkable. Neither of these things can be faked. You can make an interesting finish, but you can't create an old patina.

Whenever Congress wants to throw a diplomatic bone to a country, they usually delve into "cultural heritage" and offer incredible chauvinistic bribes prohibiting the import of antiques without licenses that bureaucrats can really sink their teeth into. I can see one of those Vietnamese dining tables in three hundred years coming before some cultural commission to determine just what it is and where it belongs. Imagine such a table, made in Viet Nam to an English design by English craftemen. Where does it belong?


The business of writing about the art market is a very difficult one. As each work of art is different, it isn't possible to generalize and yet space usually requires some form of short hand. When I suggested that Souren Melikian does not have a point of view that I understand, it was to do with his rare forays into English furniture. In my opinion, he doesn't get my field. Having said that, I find his articles extremely dense, referenced beyond my ability to understand and written, or so it seems to me, for the experts. His success is huge and his presence in the market is undoubted. May he stay with the things he understands best. That, of course, should be true for all art journalists.


The International Herald Tribune is yet another newspaper that I both love and hate. In reading an article on the art markets and how contemporary art was faring less well (it is in the tank as far as I can tell) than several years ago, it was suggested that people could use auction houses to sell through private treaty. I think this is what dealers do, but having only been a dealer for thirty years, I may be mistaken.

The IHT has been publishing Souren Melikian for many years now. I met him many years ago with my then editor at Art and Auction, Lin Vincent. She signed Souren to write for A&A and I must say that, after having read a number of his articles over the years, I am still not quite certain he says anything at all. His writing is erudite but empty, at least to me and his point of view jumps all over the place. He once wrote an article on an English furniture sale at Christie's South Kensington which touted all the bargains that were available. I guess I missed that sale as the bargains in my business are few and far between.

The reason for being in London, my location at present, is to attend the Olympia Fair which opened on the fourth and the Grosvenor House Fair which opened yesterday, the tenth. The Grosvenor House Fair far exceeded my expectations with some superb booths. It would be silly to name them as there are only eight English furniture dealers at the Fair. Suffice it to say, that it was worth the trip. The Olympia Fair, which has been striving mightily to overtake the GHF, is not really living up to expectations. Although the space is great, the broad mix of dealers showing there has diminished as the cost of booth space has risen. Nothing is forever in this economy and it is certain these two fairs have changes in their futures.


I have to salute my daughter, Alice, who is currently riding in a six day AIDS/Lifecycle event from San Francisco to Los Angeles. She has raised nearly $4,000 from a host of relatives, friends and former employers who have been extremely generous. She is greatly enjoying the ride for several reasons including a thirty mile flat stretch, something she doesn't see too often around San Francisco where she lives. It is almost an ideal vacation in that she is doing good, getting exercise, getting to know even more of California and doing something she could have only dreamed about one year ago. Long may she run.

If you substitute the word tennis for taste in the phrase, good taste, you realize one of the shortcomings in trying to define taste. Tennis has results, win or lose, that determine how good someone is at the game. The same is not true for taste. And yet, unlike tennis where people have to admit whether they are good or not so good, no one admits to having shortcomings when it comes to taste.

As an antique dealer, I try to buy furniture that is old and relatively unscathed. Antiques are generally looked after because they were expensive when they were made creating a sense of care that is broken only by ignorance or neglect. What is so admirable about antiques is how well they were made, their proportions, their color and their style. They produce a harmony that well thought out things have.

It might be argued that because everyone has to make choices that they therefore have taste and because it is their taste and they like it that it is good. This is a solipsism that holds about as much water as a sieve. Taste is not democratic and like the gifted tennis player that works at his game, a person with taste is someone who works to understand the harmony of color, form, style, craft and proportion. Sound familiar? 


There was an article in the Wall Street Journal last weekend about the art the Obamas are hanging in the White House. This was a topic for discussion on the Brian Lehrer show on WNYC today. People were caring about the color or sexual orientation of the artists? Huh? Please, just hang good art.

There is no color, no material, no form, no plant, no song, etc. which is out of bounds to the creative mind. Taste is not defined by the materials one uses, but by the harmony they do or do not bring forth. What role, if any, does function play in taste?

It is hard to talk about taste without sounding aloof at the least and downright snide at the worst. My intent is to get people thinking about taste and to remind them (and me) that you should always keep an open mind about everything. Taste is contextual and you can learn from that.  

There are times when I think TV and the newspapers revel in drivel. Last week, the NY Times sent a reporter to the International Contemporary Furniture Fair with a curator of contemporary design from the Cooper Hewitt National Design Museum. The curator has excellent quotes but few of the things or even the principles of what she talked about appeared in the photos accompanying the article. Huh? Did she like the show? The article was filler, also known as a nullity. Too bad, I rather liked the fair. (In full disclosure, my niece had a booth there.)

Able to watch TV while in my hotel room in San Francisco, I was treated to the parsing of Dick Cheney's speech, endlessly. Why are we re-heating a VP who we would all like to see the last of? Eisenhower should not have worried about the military industrial complex as much as our lust for so-called entertainment. What other entity would juxtapose a sitting president with an ex-vice-president that believes in torture? Another nullity in my opinion and a big blot on the news media for not recognizing that the man is trying to paper over his record.

And yet the Sunday NY Times Magazine had a wonderful article by Matthew B. Crawford whose chosen metier is motorcycle repair despite a PhD in political philosophy. One thing Mr. Crawford clearly understands after many desk jobs where his goal was to please a manager whether his work was good or bad is that a human being really enjoys tangible results from getting a job done. To fix something and make it work has significance and requires great knowledge. I can empathize with what he says because I worked in antique furniture restoration for years and I know that the knowledge required in that field is significant. To turn something around that may have been heading for the trash heap can make your day, your week, your month and possibly even your year. Mr. Crawford knows and so do I.


Having just been weighed at my doctor's office for a physical, I knew my weight to within a pound or two. I don't, as a rule, retain such knowledge but in this case, it was inevitable. So, I was surprised to see a scale in the bathroom of the hotel I stayed at in San Francisco. I avoid bad news like the plague which means that scales and such are just inviting a mild depression about the last french fry that conquered my conscious desire to not eat it.

After two days at the hotel, I thought that maybe I had been losing a little weight and that I should attempt the scale. After all, if I did not wear my glasses, I might not be able to distinguish the numbers and I could quickly jump off the scale if it appeared that the overage was well above the average suggested by my doctor's machine. Blow me down, I was eight pounds under that machine's calculation. Not only could I eat one dessert, but I could have several.

And then I realized something. The mini bar was the thing. Without a doubt, the mini bar and the scale were in collusion. Deceive a customer that their weight was down and a trip to the mini bar, financially ruinous as it can be, would not be disastrous in the regions where a Snickers is most likely to stick. But common sense prevailed for once as I connected the dots on this insidious plot by the hotel to garner more change at the expense of a vacationer's lapse. After all, everybody needs to go on a diet after a vacation, don't they?

I knew when I read "Consider the Lobster" that I had found a great American writer in David Foster Wallace. (I don't know why it took me so long to find him, but that is another matter.) I am currently reading his book "Infinite Jest" which is roughly a thousand pages long with an additional one hundred pages of footnotes. As promised, the book, which required three hundred pages of dense reading before I finally clicked into his style and the plot, is an infinite jest. It was so funny that I found myself laughing out loud at parts of it which I haven't done with a book for a very long time. He doesn't spare you, however, as he mixes in some grisly stuff that brings you down quite hard. And then he takes you right back up again. It is extraordinary writing. I recommend it highly, but only if you can concentrate on it for more than half an hour at a go.

The English antique furniture market caught an upward momentum in pricing in the 1980's that has only just faltered with the economic melt down. The re-valuation is in process and that some of the high prices of just two years ago now seem one notch short of insane.

The speculative money that enters off beat markets such as antiques has gone to ground. The auctions of the 80's which were almost social affairs have dwindled to being ten to fifteen people in the salesroom. The self styled experts have disappeared leaving the field to the antiques trade which almost cannot afford the new low prices because many of their customers have gone to ground as well. Has the value of English antique furniture diminished?

I would say that English antique furniture has gone down in price, but not in value. English antique furniture is a decorating gold standard that works in both town and country. It is comfortable, handsome and extremely versatile. Every decorator who wants to create a sophisticated space that combines such requirements will think of English antique furniture first and foremost. It has not lost its appeal and it may be even more appealing at lower prices.

None of this answers the question of just how much English antique furniture is worth at this moment. The re-valuation may already be over, or it may have just begun or be somewhere in between. However, I know as a dealer that if I see something unique somewhere and it appeals to me and I want it, I will go to great lengths to take that piece back to my shop. The truth of the situation is, for me at least, that the item is worth more than the money.


A client called me the other day to make an observation about the price of something in auction that he had been offered by a dealer. He did not buy it and the dealer has put the item into auction. The estimate is less than one tenth their asking price. The client is furious. This is awkward. One dealer commented that there was nothing to be gained by putting your name on things you sell in auction. I think he is right. 

The question remains, however, what sort of a profit should the dealer make? Double, quadruple, ten or one hundred times, are any of these numbers fair? Frankly, none of them could be fair and all of them could be. It depends upon the item. If it is unique, a dealer can ask whatever he wants and if he is a good salesman and services the client well, most clients will be happy because they want the object more than they want their money.

There are a great many ethical concerns about money that have no answer in this society. Should very wealthy people earn more on savings than the average joe? They do. Should there be apartments worth one hundred million dollars? There are. Why should cost of living increases in leases be compounded? They quickly outstrip the cost of living increase. Should a ball player make twenty million dollars and is that the reason why a ticket to a ball game is so high? The questions are endless and unfortunately, there really aren't any right or wrong answers to them. To take a quote from Kurt Vonnegut, "And so it goes."

One of the difficulties in discussing taste derives in part from the necessity of making judgments. Who gets to say whether one person's love for pink and green is in bad taste and should be outlawed as their paints of choice on their suburban bungalow? It is THE question because the reality of what taste represents is so ambiguous. I know it is THE question because the town that I had my first shop in mandated that all the buildings in the commercial zone be earth colored. Huh?

Taste, good taste that is, does exist. I have nothing against pink and green, but I might not want to see it as the two primary colors on my next door neighbor's house. The harmony of things that are well thought out and placed is undeniable and I would say that the dissonance of things thrown together with insufficient thought is equally undeniable. Are dissonance and harmony the same for everyone. In music they are, but is the same true for the visual?

The fact is that good taste, as non-definable as it may be, reveals itself to people that are looking for it and, more importantly, thinking about it. The understanding of good and bad taste precludes nothing, not even pink and green as they may be fine on a Miami bungalow and appaling on one in Bangor, Maine.

The cumulative thought and the visual library that both our conscious and unconscious minds creates are, at least for those people with aesthetic ability (a concept that I would say is similar to athletic ability) that which allows for judgment. I will listen to such an aesthete all day long. Their judgment has value for me and they are for me true arbiters of taste. Unfortunately, there aren't that many of them.


Three people used the word taste one morning last week so I thought I would try to define it. It isn't that easy. It is an ambiguous term that doesn't mean much and yet when certain people talk about taste, I listen. Herewith are just a few of the things I have thought about regarding taste.

1.Understanding what is good taste comes from a cumulative absorption of knowledge.

2.Some people are quicker to understand taste than others.

3.Taste is not democratic, not everyone gets it.

4.There is no mathematical model for taste.

5.Taste is not in the eye of the beholder.

6.Being stylish and having taste are not necessarily related.

7.Bad taste may be stylish, but it will never be good taste.

8.Agreeing on what is bad taste is easier than agreeing on what is good taste.

9.Committees don't have and never will have taste.

10.Venerated things might not be tasteful. 

I could go on with this list. I am reminded of the first line of "A Tale of Two Cities" when I think about taste. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times." Substitute taste for the word times and the oxymoron works just as well/badly. I guess there really is no accounting for taste.