Author: zhoupu

Auction of looted relic sparks anger [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2009-5-13 06:13:07 |Display all floors

Reply #235

Originally posted by oioioi at 2009-5-11 10:43


Ok, as someone claiming to be educated, I'm sure you'd like to see this thread return to a slightly more civilized tone.

I'll say this, and this should please you. Ideally, the seal should h ...



Sure, we can talk educationally ... but, meanwhile, from BBC and headlined "Looted" Chinese relic ..

quite obviously and undeniably about the LOOT !



---
Whampoa



'Looted' Chinese relic auctioned  

The piece sold for more than five times its estimated value
A Chinese bidder bought an 18th Century jade imperial seal for 1.68m euros (£1.5m) at a Paris auction house, despite protests by Chinese officials.

Beijing said the Qing Dynasty relic was looted by British and French troops from its Summer Palace in 1860.

The Chinese bidder refused to give his name, but said he was acting on behalf of an art collector in France.

The piece sold for more than five times its estimated value after a tense bidding race with another Asian buyer.

Strong indignation

The authorities that manage Beijing's imperial Summer Palace said that all such relics should be returned to China.

They say the seal was originally taken by British and French troops from the palace in October 1860, towards the end of the Second Opium War.


China says the bronzes were taken abroad illegally 150 years ago
A statement said: "We once again express strong indignation at this sort of repeated action that hurts the Chinese people's feelings, harms their cultural interests, and violates international pacts."

The auction house said the seal, mounted with two carved dragons, came from the personal collection of a descendant of a French general who commanded some of the invading troops.

The sale comes two months after the contested sale of two bronze animal heads also said to have been looted from the Summer Palace.

A Chinese collector bought the heads of a rabbit and a rat for 15m euros ($19m; £13m) each, which were part of the collection of late French fashion designer Yves Saint Laurent.

The buyer then refused to pay, calling his decision an "act of patriotism".

The Chinese government, which had tried to stop the sale, denied any involvement. Christie's said the sale was legal, a position backed by a French court.

[ Last edited by whampoa at 2009-5-13 06:15 AM ]
When asked what they least admired about the West, they replied
MORAL DECAY, PROMISCUITY and pornography which...
DEGRADED women.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-5-13 08:31:20 |Display all floors
Originally posted by whampoa at 2009-5-13 06:13

Sure, we can talk educationally ... but, meanwhile, from BBC and headlined "Looted" Chinese relic ..
quite obviously and undeniably about the LOOT !


Glad we can discuss like civilized people. Yes, this article is certainly about the seal. However, just because the heading of the article contains the world "looted" doesn't meant the BBC necessarily think that the object was looted. The article is about Beijing claiming that the item was looted, and he fact the the word in the heading is put within quotes actually shows that BBC doesn't think the item should be considered looted.

The same goes for the two sections in the article that you've highlighted with red. These sections don't tell the reader what BBC thinks, but rather what Beijing claims (which we already know; the item was looted).

Your third highlighted section (blue, red and bold) is slightly more relevant. It tells us that the item belonged to a descendant of a general who commanded some of the invading troops in Beijing. This makes it possibly (even likely) that I may have been wrong in my earlier assumption that the person who just sold the seal had bought it in some art auction; instead it seems possible that he instead inherited it, and that the seal rather incredible has stayed within the family for about five generations (this is certainly what the article is trying to imply although it remains purposely vague). Of course, this doesn't change the fact that the seller was the legal owner of the seal until he sold it, just as the new owner who just bought it now is the legal owner of the seal.

One thing that you fail to highlight in the article is important (I don't know how you could miss it):

"The Chinese bidder refused to give his name, but said he was acting on behalf of an art collector in France."

This seems to indicate that (unfortunately) you were wrong about the seal now being "back with the Chinese" and that we will soon see it in the National Museum in Beijing. Instead, we are now in a situation were we have absolutely no idea about the nationality of the new owner of the seal. All we know is that (s)he is located in France.

I guess that's the sad end of the story.

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.