Auction Controversy

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Everywhere you don't want me to be
    Posts
    2,890

    I dunno what Auction Bridge is


  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Mid Levels
    Posts
    19

    Slyvesterjay

    Thanks for posting that article.. its good to see the other point of view.

    Its worth pointing out as well that all this happened during the most bloody civil war in World History, the Taiping rebelleion.. somthing else that is largely forgotton.

    The English and French should not have been so arrogant to expect China to allow them to trade.. however, the unspeakable horrors dished out by the Emperor to the British envoys, who were diplomats, were horrific, and I think it is fair to say that the British Army was left with very little choice but to launch a campaign to rescue them.

    Whether the burning of the summer palace was justified is a difficult point. Lookig back now it seems barbaric. However, it was meant as a punishment to the Emperor and to break his conceit and tyranny. It weas not aimed at the Chinese people - who had no real idea of what treasures the gardens held and cetainly did not mourn its loss. In fact it was meant to help the common man, who sufferred at the hands of the Emperor.

    Lord Elgin thought long and hard about his actions, and was painfully aware of the furore caused by his father in Greece.

    I think there are no real winners or lossers in this case. And maybe we should just all be thankful that diplomacy today is the primary source of conflict resolution, as the alternatives are fairly grim.


  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    In the Lair of the Village Idiot's Apprenctice
    Posts
    3,385
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvesterjay:
    I dunno what Auction Bridge is
    Well there is no hurry to find out is there?

    What about hurrying for a double dutch auction?

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Everywhere you don't want me to be
    Posts
    2,890

    The only double dutch i know is the skipping rope game. I must live a sheltered life.


  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    In the Lair of the Village Idiot's Apprenctice
    Posts
    3,385
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvesterjay:
    The only double dutch i know is the skipping rope game. I must live a sheltered life.
    Ha! you lose!
    As in your hurry to reply you forgot to mention A U C T I O N

    btw you are correct about dd but simply saying dutch auction did not have the zing.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Everywhere you don't want me to be
    Posts
    2,890

    I've witnessed several Dutch Auctions in Wan Chai bars


  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvesterjay:
    I have quickly become a big fan of Chip Tsao's Politically Incorrect column in HK Magazine.

    This week he did a great job uncovering the history behind the looting of the bronze heads from the Summer Palace. As those who've read my posts know, I'm a big believer in historical accuracy and context...
    Since you're such a big believer in historical accuracy and context, have you ever wondered Chip Tsao's article could have contained inaccurate historical points? Or do you consider what he said is absolute "historically accurate" just because his viewpoint suits your view point?

    So I have a question for you, Mr. Historical Accuracy:

    The year in question is 1858. I found it hard to believe that the Brits and the French would still be "knocking on the door, demanding more trade", considered the Chinese had just signed the unequal Treaty of Nanking more than a decade earlier, which subsequantly ended the Opium War. By 1858, the Brits and the rest of the Western powers already had major Chinese ports at their disposal. The trade monopoly held by the legendary Chinese "13 Hong" in Canton had been broken down COMPLETELY. So Mr. Historical Accuacy, *exactly* what more trade were they demanding?

    Was it *really* trade or something else that they were demanding?Keep in mind that the Brits already got HK by then. It won't be long until the Germans, French, Japanese and the rest of the world's great power to have a piece of China.

    Were the Brits mad at Lord Macartney being forced to kowtow to Emperor Qianglong or were they mad at the Chinese for not accommodating them?

    As to the reasons why the Manchu Qing government refused to open more ports - they were very clearly AND sensibly stated in Emperor's Qianlong's letter to King George III. Did the Brits get this? No, they pumped the Chinese people with opium, which resulted in the famous Opium burning at the Fumen Bridge by Lin Zhexu, the reason for the First Opium War.

    If you actually *research* history - not to rely on some kind of secondary information, you will see a more pragmatic viewpoint that is neither overtly pro-Western or pro-China.

    Whichever way you looked at it, the Western powers invaded China, not the other way round. You can justify it all you want, but the truth remains.

    Should we blame the Chinese?

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by kombuchakid:
    Goodness knows what would have happened to the priceless collection of Chinese historical relics had they not been "looted" by retreating Kuomintang forces and taken to Taiwan, where they remain on display at the National Palace Museum.
    Look, this argument is getting *really* old. This line of reasoning has been raised and re-raised in the West so as to make those former antique looters feel better and justified about their past looting.

    Yes, those priceless culutral relics would mostly be destroyed by the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution. But I asked you why the looters would take the "treasures" away in the first place. Don't tell me they wanted to "preserve Chinese heritage", otherwise people wouldn't have sold their collections to the museums, Sotheby's or Christie's. Where do you think the antique dealers got their stuff from? In the antiques world, the more you change hands/ownership, the fuzzier it gets when it comes to provenance, after changing several hands, the looted antiques become "legit" and you can claim them rightfully yours.

    There are many closed-door negotations between the Chinese government and Sotheby's/Christie's regarding looted properties - majority of the time the auction houses would just return the properties to the Chinese. But Christie's know what those bronze heads stand for and how much they can fetch - so even though everybody knows that they were stolen, Christie's still held the auctions as scheduled, knowing Chinese would eventually pay up. What you don't know is that there are "official" bidders sent from the National Hertiage/Antiquity Bureau to buy up looted properties overseas. This is why people who buy up Chinese antiques nowadays are always Chinese "collectors" - in reality, the Chinese have already paid up billions of dollars to buy back antiques that were originally belonged to them. Christie's have FULL KNOWLEDGE of what had transpired, they played the game and they benefited from it.

    Quote Originally Posted by kombuchakid:
    We can set aside the obvious fact that these bronze heads can hardly be described as being of great national importance and ask the more pertinent question: can the party demonstrate the credentials required to ensure that China's treasured past is safe in its hands?
    What is important (and what is not) to Chinese national importance is only up to the Chinese people to decide.

    Time is different now and people's mentality and attitude can certainly be changed. The US isn't the segregated world it once was. China and its people are getting richer, when you have satisfied basic needs, you move onto finer things in life, some want fancy cars, some go vacationing overseas...and then you have those people who start to pay more attention to Chinese history and cultural heritage. Why is it wrong? I mean, many Chinese people were not even born during the Cultural Revolution then...

    Could people stop using this "since the Red Guards destroy cultural relics during the Cultural Revolution, why do they start caring now?" logic. It shows that they are incredibly ignorant.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by tobytobes:
    Slyvesterjay

    The English and French should not have been so arrogant to expect China to allow them to trade.. however, the unspeakable horrors dished out by the Emperor to the British envoys, who were diplomats, were horrific, and I think it is fair to say that the British Army was left with very little choice but to launch a campaign to rescue them.

    Wow, do you guys not study history? Chip Tsao "forgot" to mention that the above incident happened right in the middle of the Second Opium War and the Treaty of Tianjin. Why would there be Anglo-French forces readily set sail from HK to Beijing? It was because they have already sacked Guangzhou by force (this was 1857 - a year before the summer palace imprisonment happened). The Anglo-French forces sacked Guangzhou because they were upset that the Qing officials held their ship on smuggling charges, historically known as the Arrow incident - even Western historians claim that the Qing government has legitimate reasons.


    It weas not aimed at the Chinese people - who had no real idea of what treasures the gardens held and cetainly did not mourn its loss. In fact it was meant to help the common man, who sufferred at the hands of the Emperor..
    You're talking about human rights now???!!! I'm sure the good ole Catholic conquistadors had the same intension in mind when they slaughtered the innocent Incan people. Please lighten up!

    I would disagree, all these unequal treaties that were forced down China's throat (at the glorified excuse of opening China for trade), you said they were not directed at the Chinese people? You're incredibly naive. Once Westerners opened up Chinese ports, they marked out their territories, some even had signs on buildings that said "Chinese and dogs no entry" - and this is happening right in China! If I were a Chinese living at that time, I would have joined the White Lotus, Taipeng, or Boxer rebellions. What do you expect them to do - clap their hands while yelling "hurray" to the foreigners? Feel free to come in and take whatever you want?? What do you do if your cities are under siege, when the West are taking every opportunity to ransack your city? What if it was the Chinese who sacked London? I'm sure all of you would have different sentiments and justifications. You guys talk about the Brits and French as if they were the most merciful people on earth. I'm sure they were in China for innocent sighseeing tours...

    Yes, the West can attack all they want but it's a crime for the Chinese to defend their countries. That was war time, my friend.

    The imprisonment was a consequence of the British attack on Dagu Fort in 1858 because the Chinese *dared* to resist the Treaty of Tianjin. Chip Tsao obviously had the historical timeline backward.

    sylvesterjay claimed himself to be big fan of historical accurancy and context, but he didn't talk about the incident in its proper historical setting - he just took someone else's words on face value. Not the right attitude for someone who cares about historical accurancy. How can you just isolate an incident, without mentioning its cause and effect? He relied on one-side information just like the Communists whom he so despised.