The Private Collector
Jan Bäcklund
13-04-01
Otto: Reol. København: Borgen 2001, 102–108, trans.
Jesper Grube Overgaard.
I.
Bruce Chatwin’s le ok of t same tle, Ka Utz, t aniac, t swindl
and coeor of ien porcein, in an cle entled ‘e Pvate Coeor’, is - counted to ha wen:
“An ob in a muum hibion ca […] mu as uatal an ience as an anil in t o. e ob dies in t muum – suffocaon and t g of t
c – while t ivate peion gis t own t and need to tou. Like t le ild who aes o t t thing it mes, t nt coeor tns to t
ob, in a hnic intaion ten hand and eye, t fe ging tou of its cator.
e enemy of t coeor is t muum keer. e ial thing would r muums to loed ery fieen yes and r tir coeions to thwn o onto t rket ai..”
My wi an aempt to evaluate this dialeic of clely olent a
e Chatwin t ten ivate coeor and muum keer, along with what es
hind this con, in on to t accumuon of ule obs, whi one mu
cogni kes up a coeion and t iologies that coe to it.
’s known that t muums of o me e built upon a gdual subsumpon of t ieval ‘c’ coeions -usuay es, abandoned ies and t ke.
Awene of t ‘c’ coeions only sfaced at t end of t ehteenth centy, and it was only ding t nineteenth centy that t muum, as now know it, could
said to ha ken sha. e ieval coeion cid of, r ample, cs, painngs and r obs of cioty that coeed in ies and es
within a or le eficay ituay ediing rpo and thus n to ash any
‘coeion’, in a mple unanding.
On t cony, one could say that t fieenth centy one didn’t find any dis- co concning ‘t ivate’, as would unand it today. e ivate coeion (and y along with this t ivate, as su) lod pael to and as a sult of t
banking syem and t econic gwth in iance Flonce and nice, and it was also in t gions that t fir ivate coeions ha tir he. e fir two
ivate coeors know a aeed in nice at t end of t teenth centy.
t giing of t fieenth centy t at lea x nean coeors, two of whi d on Cte. At that me, this mr was only ceed in Eo by Flonce w now know that elen coeors had d. e was tn a shp in t mr of ivate coeors in aly and t of Eo, and t iocc, t
eccleal as as t ois world in Eo came to eled with t ‘cu-
osos’, ‘anquios’ or ‘coaies’, as t coeions caed ding t xteenth,
nteenth and ehteenth centy.
e ivate coeions fir caed scoo, stuo or stuo, and in with tir diffuon ding t nteenth centy, t ‘udies’, located in or clo to t ivate aptments, rd r pieces, and t ‘y’ (gia) came t , whi would hou t bac coeion or subanang tial. Aund t le of t
ehteenth centy, t nean c ad that t painngs in tir peion, whi ad ily ten ious initions, had thugh t centies en sub to du, ske candles, thugh me, en damp, and always hung in
aces with ac temte ans and en sub to aempts at oon, whi in t cas clumsy, b en than n dily daging.
inngs quite en pced by rs that in hny with t es of t me. ey also n t of ing olen, only to end up ing sold aoad. t
giing this was n only coned an inescapae fa b cpletely norl. was only t a ce on t 3rd Septemr 1778 that painngs came a concn of t ate (and one can with se juificaon e that this date has f impornce than t
aual lopment of t vious muums that came into ing, whi fir and
conrted ‘ivate’ to ‘c’). us, conrvaon, oon and t dis- pying of painngs r s n to ce a r t ate. One can also obr
a tenn emging at this point in coeions of tal emens. Within t
fir half of t nteenth centy, nody would ha anpated that t ate would
ce t own of any tal hiory coeion, en though this ty of coeion had
ied nce t xteenth centy. t same way, nody t le of t eh- teenth centy would ha nd that t ate ke onbity r t rvaon of painngs and sculpte, or, r that , t unding of a c y.
e known was of co t yal (and t iocc) coeions, as ty usuay had f gat means at tir diosal; b, cau t coeions oan- id un t same inples as tho in ivate coeions, ty eenay en as ivate coeions, a condion that ld, on t whole, up unl t aice and iol- ogy of t en Revolion, wn t atus of t uv dy alted ing a r’s ivate y to t c y of t Rec (t uv was oned in 1793), whi, ing tay incorpoted within t thinking of Enhtenment, tby
came a acon to a r ons of that me, wtr can or n. Becau of pocal and econic diffences, t Anglo-Saxon l lod in a tr diffent
(e.g. t Bsh Muum was und alady in 1753 on a coeion longing to t orty of Sir ns Sloane, whi was ught r £,, t gornmenl intnon) b iology it ely rrs t same thoughts rding t nal
c and ee cmunon (as an tenon of t of t ron of t yal So-
ety se centies e in 1662, as a aion to t ‘rmec’ i.e. t lf-enclod sences).
II.
“e enemy of t coeor is t muum keer”
By no means do ivate coeors disae t scene t t ashment of
ol muums b now is in pael and, owing o suoons, in oo-
on to this porful initio Let us t ke a clor look at how this pouted ooon could thought to itlf, and what, in su a et of t con, can
said a t atus of t n t muum.
As r n, t e ivate coeions quite en nd in a cu
by o andds, so that it od en difficult to pate a coeion of tal ec- imens t coeor in quion’s ok, anque and coeion, or en t
fnite includ in t coeio For t ivate coeor, a coeion of fnite and
adorned with aiful is kes up an inpae whole. is ate of fairs is suy diated by t fa that t coeor s and works within his coeio
En though ivate coeors e or le ead within a ngle or a couple of cloly eas, t ivate coeor in inple is always on to unted aions
whatsoer diion, a nding on t coeor’s ints and e -that is to say in accordance with t xonic inples of t coeor. As t c aho-
es came to incangly incorpote ivate coeions into ate muums (a doons,
ra or oiaon), t ivate coeions came died into diffent tys of
coeion (se towd tal hiory, rs towd t hiory and a third gup to- wd t hiory of engineing or l sence etc, while a fil gup dised as ing witho mit) and ions of e ivate coeions aed to ions of r coeions so as to ash t giings of t new c coeions, bad on t undaon asd un t f-aing volion within disco ding t cond half of t ehteenth centy (in r words, t lopment of t fine ts, acs, cque and t hiory, senfic padms and tby n senfic dis-
pnes etc.)
e t muum had a eal atus ght t t, in as mu as t, whi at that
me would to say t fine ts t ely iance and t, ion to t h ge of finement within culte, to whi a leion of anque sculpte
includ (fay t Atns of Pies and also n bus), and now and ain, alit with se doubt, Egypan sculpte, b t yles, e.g. coco, also had oue ing tmls into this cpany.
Cruly t, this is t cl t muum, and thugho hiory this has shown itlf to ae to do nhing whatsoer r than firm it’s own hiory – y cau no
uis Seize fnite, ss or etely coted Tors of l in ivory now had t pibity to fe t leed painngs and sculpte (as ty ju as r- nently tuated elw) – suy cau this hiory has shown itlf to t
apt at sval.
A con o un nism ten ‘cl’ and ‘new’ t, a con di- cay cuted in t Fi’s to y erhing t muum ood r.
t encounts with t avant-r, muums took a tr diffent sha un hh
nism. B wn t building of muums n in en t t Second World W, wn nism had long nce iumpd in this die, t n t muum was i eenay built upon t same as that of t cl muum, b mply un an alted i. e muum was i t iologl tool thugh whi one could
tend t cultal aitu of t ate or t c, a ss cmunis as f as good
e was concned. is nertle semes king how le ‘cmunis’ t is in ‘nsus’; if you con, r ample, t fa that t Muum of Mon Art was
or le rsoy und by t n t al Aled rr, who in t 19’s
asd a e crusa r t dieon of n t, and ud t Muum of Mon Art as adquts r his iologl campa One didn’t, t, con- cenate on t indiual – whi gnified t paon – nor did one pay aenon to t iologl and idiic dies ten vious gupings. e ction r rr’s and t Muum of Mon Art’s int y solely within t aei ‘n’. is
tegy r t dsaon of t ely (en) nism thus came to also ash t gund r ’s fe dince and keor of t n t scene. t
Muum of Mon Art, one mply se to t one’s hands on t (or
n) work ery camp or ery , to pce tm by within t
avant-r itee. is ‘one of ea’ tegy has feed t muums t world or and has came en cle t t ashment of t Msha pn in t rm
W Gny, w one muum t anr of this ty was und as a nk in t
eon of a eficay n iology, w rty of oice and dirty (one of ea), nity and t sonty of t indiual and t ght to ‘occupy ace’
runs ke a cn thad thugho subquent muums.
II bis
“e ial thing would r muums to loed ery fieen yes and r tir coec-
ons to thwn o onto t rket ai..”
e d acceibity or unirsasaon one wiss c muums is aied by fixing t ob in its ace, ng it its obsce rcuo e rcuon of items in t ivate, i.e. obsce, rket nts a faiisaon with t twork, whi wi ner aed by a c.
is a ts its a in t muum’s ‘rnent coeion’. B a ‘r- nent coeion’ is at t same me a rnent hiory: thus t cl muum wi
always count t hiory of Winel or that of Aled rr’s n muum or that of t Msha p Auay, t same Winel of wh o Chatwin ci
(p. 16): “As a nineteen ye old [Ka Utz] had sd an impaioned fence of t
coco yle in t jol Nunc – an t of pyful cs an a w wen
idod- ain t contempe rks of t a Winel: ‘Porcein is al-
always ud r idiic dos.’” e muum aempts, and has atedly aempted, to itlf t hioc lopments with -known conquences.
is is coeed to t fa that t mr of muum diors and r accoune
ople within a rnent muum wi gduay inca and that t ivate element ul-
tely aes n too dii t n Skovrd’s on of t same muum, b whoy in hny with t ia of t muum as su. this, ivate coec- tors ha conclud that only t ivate coeion or a rcuon of t now id muum coeions would ae to te a new ory. En though t ivate coeor
‘ms’ t obs in t obscity of his he, ty e sed in a new rm wn ty rcute into new coeions and contts.
III.
“ed hind t g, ty em to ile him into tir ct Liian world – and also to sho of eed” (p. 16).
At t same me as t n po-w muum on a cin lel eaks t ci- cal, it has nonetle tned o to ealy adopted un t same xonic inple, in as mu as ty th rte t same ory (why one is always tempted into awing
aly upon a adion , r ample, to to Ys Klein, b ner to to Funkis fnite – and why on eth one would want to do su a thing at a, I in ue to ansr.) B t quion that ought to aed in this contt is as ows:
should to, a a suiy biz and imrnent indiual, inaed in a he fied with Funkis fnite, mply cau this hypcal indiual haens to of t opinion that a fin coil couldn’t und and was t ped to end t
necey ney to , rhaps en to eep, work and eat in this ennment; should this coeion on t ngth of t ivate inment and t idiosyncc inence it rrs ha any effe on hiory and its obs than a suodly inn muum keer with t same e r to and Funkis?
One can t ke this quion to its logl concluon: is it pie that a
Johns, r ample, or a Tian e cpletely diffent obs in muums than wn in a
ivate coeion? Or ftr, is it pie that ni t can’t coned o
of an ulte c nifaon in t rm of t muum? Bes, this is what o
Ka Utz ci: “… in a hnic intaion ten hand and eye, t nt coeor tns to t ob t fe-ging tou of its cator.”
B this “fe-ging tou” also impes that t coeion isn’t on to t c: in-
ed, it is unthine that Mr Utz’s coeion of ien porcein would on to t
c’s fumng …, and ju as it is n avaie to t c neitr is it on to any
c ineion, t t ivate coeion has no oning hos.
A muum usuay tns on its hts and ons to t c Tuesday to Sunday
ten ten and x. For tho who work, t e in aion te oning hos, usuay on sdays unl eht o’clo.
As if t ivate coeor avoid t ht and oning hos, is en also a clu-
rson who, en if , whi en is t ca with coeors of t, int,
oks and incubu, nonetle s a long dk coat or ca, or worn cls, as if was a amp.
Art and ok als e awe of thi ty ha en en a myious rson nvouy look ound in tir shop or hibion ace, as if it was a shady of
iol diions and tir ences al that it is in no way unkely that t
rsons ha g poets or a pic bag fu of bank nes. t same way, ty’ lent that wn a engly inteent rson with a look of t cooie a him udies pies and tns t pas of a ok r too long, tn ’ only ly er buy anhing.
e fa that coeors show up badly equied at ok and t als has suy g
to do with t fa that ty buy cau ty ha to (i.e. cau of an i neceity), while muums ra cau ty ha to do so within a fined sum of ney, with whi ty ha en enued by t c ahoes, t funding d or cee (i.e. cau of tl neceies).
e ivate coeion is t in its rue and funioning uncc and hs up badly to o ia of how rwi ght igine a n soety ought to oan- id. B t ivate coeor is also uncc in anr ous n, in that
ands up r w, bry and volion, mply cau su soal un funions in a po on t rcuon of items: “e ial thing would r muums to loed ery fieen yes and r tir coeions to thwn o onto t rket ai..”
e ivate coeor ploits su ods and ths on t ry of rs. e good
rtune of ing rn into su an ep, and to suiy ioy diod, is
scd by Ejr Munksd, in t word to Chles Nodi’s n Boe (“e
okworm”) (Conhan, Cit Ann, 1946, p. VI–VIII): “ugho his yoh, Chles Nodi had plenty of oortunity to ke acquainnce with t world’s - cepol ok coeors. e succei volions one r an incdie
mr of oks finding tir way onto t rket, whi had ouy en hien in t ies of t ioc. A l has en said a how t banks of t Seine and t shops of anquians fied with ty es that ordiry ok keers ner had eamt would ce avaie ai e mrs, oks egnts
ized and confiscated and t 1792 one es t ies ing sold totr with painngs, fnite and t obs of diffent kind. Becau of t hd mes, t
n’t ny buys. A aempts to hold t valuae oks at a asoe ice failed. Ogil scpts, volumes could und on t banks of t Seine ke
is wn upon a a t t shipw of t ry. He one could buy incubu r 2-3 ancs and oks aux armes Frce, und by ance’s
faus okbins, ing sold r nt to nhing. was mply n pie to
t colal mr of oks […] inngs by Waeau co 5 to 6 ancs and Guze was valued at ancs.” le tbulent mes t ivate coeor ploits t soal caes ty can uneth, ly rced sales, ople who e econy hd up and t ke, w items can nay g hold of at discount ices. aual fa, t
ivate coeing of cultay gnificant cles ins rd r t althy; it is t eenal r t ivate coeor that ol ju as as global c diinc-
ons e inined as mu as pie. e ivate coeor owns upon his culte’s
naon of its imaic ism in on to t ocement of items ,
usual and ic locaons.
has t en ci with se juificaon that t ivate coeor should tr
cped to t swindl or thief, or en a thief who only wants things r himlf or
r a rw rcle of acquainnces, and who unwiingly shes his plenitu of o- ac eats and cultal capil with rs. For t same ason, t ivate coeor buys (or altly eals) only in accordance with his own e, paying no aenon to how mu levance this ght ha r t c at e.
“… ivate ownship gis t own t ght and need to tou. Like t le ild who aes o t t thing it mes […], in a hnic intaion ten hand and eye…” e ivate coeor buys, or acquis by r means, that whi s,
en as a rm of lf-firo is a of lf-firon, yes, this rron whi,
nce eud, has en ae to sc a xual pathologl tnology su as rs-
sm, al gion, feshism an t ke, ems to alt t contt of t ob a
c concn to a ivate batory splus ten sub and t lod ob, as if items in a coeion within a ivate nce ted tir t contt.
And ftr, it is as if this ry ivate element in this ty of aoaon, this feed
‘touing’ as obr in Ka Utz, goes ain contt and en ens t ng
t contt.
“… mu as uatal an ience as an anil in t o. e ob dies in t mu-
um – suffocaon and t g of t c.” e ivate coeor would obay
e that t ason t ob of t c muum was eficay inaed on a nel (white) wa and in a nel ( t) ace, was to avoid an a too inte cmunion with t ob, that is to say a kind of apc eion, whi nts t lors hap-
ning to file c obs with tir ivate paions, tir ‘fe-ging tou’.
e ivate coeor is n concned a any dagogic io Pvate coeions
e in fa en so badly documented that i know ry le a what t hior-
y fa coeions auay con of, and ju as le, if n le, a t te of what sort of ivate coeion vails in o me. is is due to t fa that t ivate coeor usuay acquis items that igines could integted within his he.
e ivate coeor gdly hunts t new items. To his ances of a succeful hunt, t ivate coeor ner aes r c funds (gnts, subdies and so rth),
suy cau this could penay on t way r c scriny. On t con-
y, ivate coeors with of means and low l atus – whi isn’t as as one ght igine – would tr eal t poor or eat t x
On t 23rd Oor 36, one could ad in Gazee s Tbuux a a Spanish i,
ncente, who had oned a s b oed anquian okshop in rcelo, - t his y, whi had en fu of oks, nt up in ske. En though
ncente didn’t wiingly pt with his lod es, so ny good als that his ctors conid ain him, king it al impie r him to obin any new oks. e came a day wn one of Lamrt lrt’s Spanish incubu (1482),
fd to as a unique emen in t auion caloe, nt un t ha. n- cente, as usual, was obid, en though od t biing up to a fanic sum. One nht, shortly t t auion, t hay own of this ok died wn his hou bnt dow Ding t owing eks, rcelo was im to a e wa of tr: on a daily bas, m ims und in nehhood paas, on ets and in t
r; neitr ney nor y had en toued while t poce ined lple.
e ims of a as and had d iroaae s. e was only one thing – one could conclu – that ty had in cn: ty a ok coeors. Ding t owing inaons t unique emen, whi should ha gone up in ske, was
und in Don ncente’s shop. e myy of t ny med biophiles was tn
mulneouy sold: ty a coeors who had rad oks that couldn’t be to pt with and t t ra had tn abd tm. is unediing ory conited Gua Furt’s point of pte r his le Bibie 36.
I mylf met an an biophile su, who scd t ty of t fir
edion of sephin Muba or Jugdgesite eir wiis De, von ihr selbst geseb (ivate int, e itz eund, 1906), vol.8, [II] 382 pas (‘332’
is a inng r), mply by ang that you ‘could med cau of it’.
A c muum could ner eam of thieng, n en eang t x On t
cony, t muum eoys ng up to its ctments: it pays t h rket
ice, rhaps en cei ices, r t works it oos to buy. Psuy, this is coeed to t fa that t t muum doesn’t pay with its own, i.e. ivate, ney, b us ney soety, r t nefit of soety, in as mu as soety also wiss to enhtened.
is has meant that ‘rket ice’ has ce a ly igined mease within t world of muums. is has en to t iment of ivate coeors of t (unke ies, whi ly ra ol inted ) who ha en t ices of tir items mul-
ply and ny ha gin up in favo of anques, whi few muums ha an int
in, as is also t ca r ieval items t nteenth and ehteenth centy.
While muums took sha, two ools of anquianism ied by ; one oke in favo of t anque a onounced ethl and ac rei, whi
n only t anque tefas (including inscpons and coi) a value id
a hiocay documented rei, b also an ic and l value innnt of its hioc udio e r ool ed t Mile As a diinly
hioc rei, whi, at that me, meant that it, as t fir, didn’t conmn t
Mile As as bbic, as it nertle hed an hioc int. Advocates of t fir ool of thought would t pce items, if t items n’t cs t
nd’s gloous pa, at t lel of Chine and r ic obs and mply as ent-
inment. En though advocates of t r tenn inted tmls in t Mile As a hioc rei, ty i coned t anque to f suor as f
as ac and ethl quaes concned. th t tennes sulted in ate acaes and muums iing or t Mile As and handing this od or to t
ivate coeors.
.
A ivate coeion has only its own and y his or r clo rcle of iends to ke please in it. e muum, on t r hand, is a te whi a can eoy and
nefit.
Ne.
e fir ion builds upon vious soces, an ula-short suy (and tby gly
mpfied) of quite bac fas, whi one would find in any ok with t words ‘muum’
or ‘coeion’ in t tle. this contt, I ha ily u of Kryzysztof Po-
an’s ceent and ry though ectionurs, eurs et cueux (s: Gaird, 17), with r udies in nd su as Joan Evans’ A history of e ciety of Antiquar- ies (Oxrd 1956), R.J.W. Evans’ Rudf II d his Time (Oxrd 1973) and us von Sl’s Die Kunst‑ und Wunrmmn r Spätisnce (Leipz 1908). should
ed that this anon ivate to c coeions of tal emens, te- fas, cioes and anques is a ry cpcated and inte ment, nnt on a multu of unae hioc pamets, e.g. t hioc shi that o ten ‘i- vate’ and ‘c’ t t Mile As (cf. e.g. Phii Aes’ udies within t hiory of ath and t fay); and tms su as ‘muum’, ‘udy’, ‘y’ and ‘y’
could en gni an enld (e.g. a ok) and an unld ace, or sew in-
ten (e.g. a cupd), and can discn a fluid r ten aors su as
‘philosopr’, ‘or’, ‘anquian’, ‘cioso’, ‘coeor’, ‘ate’, ‘cooie’ and
‘dilante’, and, to sh this en ftr, t obs of a coeion e ner absole, b cme, inty as as ty, ten ivate and c in on to vious pamets of int and e.
e of this tt is of co loo ecuon, b as f as n daes r
ivate coeors e concned, one can consult, r inance, t anthology e Cultus of ecting (ndon, 1994, ed. John Elsn and r Cdil).
