When someone shares with you something of value, you have an obligation to share it with others.
Saturday 28 March 2009
Uncertainty as deadline to pay for bronzes passes
Uncertainty over the fate of two bronze animal heads, looted from Beijing in the 19th century and recently offered for auction in Paris, heightened after the deadline passed for payment by the winning bidder.
Uncertainty over the fate of two bronze animal heads, looted from Beijing in the 19th century and recently offered for auction in Paris, heightened after the deadline passed for payment by the winning bidder.
Thursday was the last day for Chinese collector and auctioneer Cai Mingchao to pay up.
He announced that his decision not to pay after the auction in Paris on February 25 was an act of patriotism meant to teach a lesson to Christie’s auctioneers for offering the two heads, which he and Beijing insist are rightfully mainland property.
Despite mainland public and government criticism of the auction, and attempts by Chinese lawyers to obtain a court injunction against the auction, Christie’s proceeded to offer the heads of a rat and a rabbit, part of the collection of the late French fashion designer Yves Saint Laurent and his partner, Pierre Berge. The winning bid was HK$153 million for each.
The two bronzes are part of a large collection of relics looted from the Old Summer Palace, or Yuanmingyuan, by European troops during the second opium war in 1860.
After the auction, the State Administration of Cultural Heritage said Christie’s would face tough screening of its business activities in China.
Mr. Cai, a Xiamen-based businessman, reaffirmed his earlier decision on Thursday, saying: “Forget that. This money I still cannot pay.
“I would have become an accomplice to Christie’s because making the payment amounted to doing Christie’s a favour.”
Mr. Cai acknowledged the deadline, but he said he had not received any notice from Christie’s.
Gillian Cheung, public relations manager for Christie’s Asia in Hong Kong, said the company had no further comment concerning the deadline and what steps Christie’s might take.
Liu Yang, a lawyer who led an unsuccessful attempt to seek a court injunction in Paris to stop the sale of the bronzes, said it was too early to say what Christie’s might do.
“But sometimes the ‘no comment’ itself is a reply,” he added. If Christie’s adopted a low-profile approach to downplaying the dispute, he said, that would not be a bad idea at all.
He said he hoped the parties would soon start negotiations for the repatriation of the items.
Wang Fenghai, secretary general of China Association of Auctioneers, said he felt the same way about a possible resolution.
Mr. Wang said he hoped Christie’s would learn a lesson from the controversy and that a profit should not come at the expense of others.
“The sales are no longer a pure business deal, but something that has been infused with national sentiment,” he said.
Mr. Wang also noted that Christie’s had every right to take Mr. Cai to court because what Mr. Cai did amounted to a breach of contract.
1 comment:
Uncertainty as deadline to pay for bronzes passes
Raymond Li
28 March 2009
Uncertainty over the fate of two bronze animal heads, looted from Beijing in the 19th century and recently offered for auction in Paris, heightened after the deadline passed for payment by the winning bidder.
Thursday was the last day for Chinese collector and auctioneer Cai Mingchao to pay up.
He announced that his decision not to pay after the auction in Paris on February 25 was an act of patriotism meant to teach a lesson to Christie’s auctioneers for offering the two heads, which he and Beijing insist are rightfully mainland property.
Despite mainland public and government criticism of the auction, and attempts by Chinese lawyers to obtain a court injunction against the auction, Christie’s proceeded to offer the heads of a rat and a rabbit, part of the collection of the late French fashion designer Yves Saint Laurent and his partner, Pierre Berge. The winning bid was HK$153 million for each.
The two bronzes are part of a large collection of relics looted from the Old Summer Palace, or Yuanmingyuan, by European troops during the second opium war in 1860.
After the auction, the State Administration of Cultural Heritage said Christie’s would face tough screening of its business activities in China.
Mr. Cai, a Xiamen-based businessman, reaffirmed his earlier decision on Thursday, saying: “Forget that. This money I still cannot pay.
“I would have become an accomplice to Christie’s because making the payment amounted to doing Christie’s a favour.”
Mr. Cai acknowledged the deadline, but he said he had not received any notice from Christie’s.
Gillian Cheung, public relations manager for Christie’s Asia in Hong Kong, said the company had no further comment concerning the deadline and what steps Christie’s might take.
Liu Yang, a lawyer who led an unsuccessful attempt to seek a court injunction in Paris to stop the sale of the bronzes, said it was too early to say what Christie’s might do.
“But sometimes the ‘no comment’ itself is a reply,” he added. If Christie’s adopted a low-profile approach to downplaying the dispute, he said, that would not be a bad idea at all.
He said he hoped the parties would soon start negotiations for the repatriation of the items.
Wang Fenghai, secretary general of China Association of Auctioneers, said he felt the same way about a possible resolution.
Mr. Wang said he hoped Christie’s would learn a lesson from the controversy and that a profit should not come at the expense of others.
“The sales are no longer a pure business deal, but something that has been infused with national sentiment,” he said.
Mr. Wang also noted that Christie’s had every right to take Mr. Cai to court because what Mr. Cai did amounted to a breach of contract.
Post a Comment