Given that a single Steichen print went for close to $3 million just a few years back, and a single Gursky sold for over $3 million shortly thereafter, the notion that no one in what Maneker calls “the photography market” can afford to buy the Polaroid Collection is laughable on its face. If price is no object, then what is? This brings me to the logical conclusion that every potential buyer has discovered in examining the collection’s documentation that the bulk of it is contractually encumbered in ways that prohibit (or at least problematize) its sale, thus also making perilous its purchase as a whole. . . . […]
|
Follow me on Mastodon:
@adcoleman@hcommons.social
 |
I don’t know if something’s rotten in the state of Denmark, but something’s definitely off in the state of Minnesota. Evidence accumulates that Polaroid has known all along that it never owned most of the work in its collection outright, yet the contents of that collection now move toward the auction block with the approval of the Minnesota Bankruptcy Court. . . . […] I hasten to point out a fundamental conceptual error that Bennett and his colleagues have made, as exemplified by this last statement. Their subject, said dead salmon, was not “perceiving humans.” It was perceiving photographs of humans. The relationship between a photograph of a thing and the thing itself is indexical at best, and fraught with complexities and qualifications. Clearly Bennett et al need to read more theory of photography. On a positive note, Bennett and his group also scanned a pumpkin and a Cornish hen (both certifiably deceased) with no resulting critical commentary. What a relief. . . . […] |
 SPJ Research Award 2014All content of this publication is © copyright 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 by A. D. Coleman unless otherwise noted. All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced for commercial purposes without prior written permission. All photos copyright by the individual photographers. "Fair use" allows quotation of excerpts of textual material from this site for educational and other noncommercial purposes.
Published by Flying Dragon LLC.
|
Polaroid Collection: Update 9
In effect, if not by intent, several iterations of the corporate entity known as the Polaroid Corporation have used the bankruptcy courts of Delaware and Minnesota to launder the world-famous Polaroid Collection by legally severing it in toto from any binding, enduring contractual relationships with the picture-makers whose work it contains. In so doing, the court has endorsed the seller’s effective breach of contract in relation to thousands of artworks by hundreds of artists. As precedent, this decision will have ramifications and resonances that the court clearly has failed to envision. . . . […]