Michael Crawford
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2005
- Messages
- 5,233
- Reaction score
- 45
Sorry Robodad, but you're trying to argue some sort of scientific, quantifiable ideal for a concept that is NOT scientific or quantifiable. Value is a PERCEPTION, not a number on a spreadsheet.
If you were to chip a small piece on the back of a bust, then reglue it so it was practically or even impossible to detect, does that mean it's no longer broken? You can't see it...so it doesn't matter? And before you say yes, does that mean if you were to sell it you'd feel no reason to divulge to the buyer that it had been broken, even though they'd never be able to tell if you said nothing?
Another way to consider value - do you feel a reproduction piece of artwork is the same as the original? They look identical. An average person certainly can't tell the difference. And yet they don't have the same value. This is because value is always a perception, an emotion, driven not just by what is seen but by the feelings of the person paying the money. There isn't a logical, quantifiable explanation as to why two visually identical pieces of artwork are worth vastly different amounts of money simply because one was created by the original artist's hand and the other was not.
By the way, to argue that polystone is plastic because in a broad sense it is, is just as disingenous as you can get. When someone sees a mini-bust from Sideshow or Gentle Giant at your house, do you tell them "Oh, yea, it's made of plastic"? Of course not. Why? Because using the term plastic has a certain definition in common usage, and if you called one of the busts plastic and they then picked it up, they'd look at you like you were stupid. Clearly by the common definition of 'plastic', polystone is not. If it were, they wouldn't have felt the need to come up with a different name for it to differentiate it.
If you were to chip a small piece on the back of a bust, then reglue it so it was practically or even impossible to detect, does that mean it's no longer broken? You can't see it...so it doesn't matter? And before you say yes, does that mean if you were to sell it you'd feel no reason to divulge to the buyer that it had been broken, even though they'd never be able to tell if you said nothing?
Another way to consider value - do you feel a reproduction piece of artwork is the same as the original? They look identical. An average person certainly can't tell the difference. And yet they don't have the same value. This is because value is always a perception, an emotion, driven not just by what is seen but by the feelings of the person paying the money. There isn't a logical, quantifiable explanation as to why two visually identical pieces of artwork are worth vastly different amounts of money simply because one was created by the original artist's hand and the other was not.
By the way, to argue that polystone is plastic because in a broad sense it is, is just as disingenous as you can get. When someone sees a mini-bust from Sideshow or Gentle Giant at your house, do you tell them "Oh, yea, it's made of plastic"? Of course not. Why? Because using the term plastic has a certain definition in common usage, and if you called one of the busts plastic and they then picked it up, they'd look at you like you were stupid. Clearly by the common definition of 'plastic', polystone is not. If it were, they wouldn't have felt the need to come up with a different name for it to differentiate it.
