We don’t hear ‘How much is it?’ fractionally as often as ‘Is it in original condition?’ Presumably this is Les and Leigh Keno’s personal legacy, by way of the American version of ‘The Antiques Roadshow’, to all antiques dealers. Frankly, given the muddy appearance of many of the items over which some dealers and collectors wax eloquent, I now sometimes think French polishing has a lot to recommend it.

Not really… In fact, what the Kenos are trying to communicate is that original condition means that a furniture item has not been either altered or improperly restored. Pardon my Anglo-Saxon, but the vernacular term we use for bad restoration is ‘buggered’. This can mean, variously, a poor use of materials with, say, a plastic varnish applied over a proper shellac and wax finish, or a piece that has been completely stripped by chemical and mechanical means down to the raw wood, or ‘improved’ with the addition of marquetry and inlay where none existed before- or, tragically and too often seen, a combination of all of the above.

Frankly, our mantra is the littlest possible restoration is the best restoration. Certainly for English furniture, the quality pieces were meant by their makers to be shiny and brightly colored. Two or three hundred years of use and natural oxidation always do their work, and nothing, even under optimum conditions, will look exactly as it did when it first entered the dwelling of the original purchaser. We are, as we speak, working on the paint finish of a wonderful Regency period chair, whose original decoration is still largely intact- together with 200 years worth of furniture wax, soot, and poor retouchings. Even with painted furniture, the term ‘patination’ is frequently used, a catch-all meant to lionize rather than apologize for the effects of age. As I think about it, Keith McCullar’s birthday is coming up- I think I’ll tell him, by way of compliment on his natal day, that he’s becoming nicely patinated.

The point of all this is, despite the frequency of the query ‘Is it in original condition?’ the question rarely indicates what the buyer really wants to know- nor does it imply particular criteria for a buyer’s purchase. While we like minimal restoration, we also like pieces that show well. For an antiques dealer, there is just the slightest commercial imperative- we do have to sell something from time to time and pieces with a tired, ‘original’ appearance do not have much commercial appeal. This is the irony, of course- a prospective buyer might ask about original condition, but then actually find more appealing, to the point of purchasing, something with some restoration. There is nothing wrong with this because, when asking about original condition, what they really mean to ask is ‘Is this piece in serviceable condition, and how close is it to how it originally looked?’ When we acquire items for inventory, condition is critical as we want to accomplish any required restoration to put it in saleable condition without having to reinvent the appearance of the piece in our workshop. Consequently, when asked about original condition, we nearly always are able to respond- ‘We’ve had to do very little to it.’ This has proven to be a satisfactory response. In fact, our own rules about condition and restoration pretty generally accord with the vetting guidelines of the better antiques fairs: a piece must be substantially the same as when new- very little restoration, but not necessarily in unrestored ‘original’ condition. Further, a piece must also be ‘show worthy’, that is, of pleasing, saleable appearance. Maybe that’s what I’ll tell Keith on his birthday- that he’s passed vetting and is of show worthy appearance.

For my handful of devoted readers, harken ye back to my entry of a couple of weeks ago, wherein I chastised those punters who ask, for wont of anything better to say, for the unusual.

Well, we have it, and ‘unusual’ is said with an attenuated Hitchcockian accent, appropriately enough, because it is an item associated with the great man, albeit tangentially. Specifically, we have acquired out of the stock of Warner Brothers a George III demilune pier table of large size, well known to many of you, whether you know it or not, the result of its prominent placement in the Alfred Hitchcock film ‘Dial M for Murder’. With the movie itself taken from the play of the same name, cinematically it’s what’s known as a ‘rug show’, with all the action taking place indoors, in this instance in just two rooms of the fictional London apartment in Maida Vale occupied by the main characters, played by Grace Kelly and Ray Milland.  We’ve got some great photos of Grace Kelly looking harried and Ray Milland deceitfully calculating- with the pier table prominently behind.

Although Warner’s, along with MGM and Paramount, would import vast quantities of European antiques for use in set decoration, it is interesting to note that this piece was actually purchased from ex-star, prominent antiques dealer, designer to the stars and progenitor of the Hollywood Regency style, Mr. William Haines. As well as the Warner Brothers inventory mark, the piece also has a label from Haines-Foster, then located in exquisite premises at 8720 Sunset Boulevard. It was an astonishing place. Purpose built for Haines, with a colonnaded façade and curved display windows, Haines served the ne plus ultra in the industry, with prominent commissions from Joan Crawford, George Cukor, and Louis B. Mayer’s daughter and son-in-law, Bill and Edith Goetz. Haines was also the antiques purveyor to and designer for Jack Warner, whose grand new house designed when Warner married his wife Ann replete with Haines-selected fine quality English antiques.

In this case, though, the pier table connection between William Haines and Jack Warner is incidental, but more substantially linked to the set designer for ‘Dial M…’, the redoubtable George James Hopkins. A designer with a career in movies that lasted from the late teens into the 1970s, Hopkins work, mainly at Warners, included some stunning sets- ‘Auntie Mame’, ‘My Fair Lady’, and- wait for it- ‘Casa Blanca’. In his salad days, he was reputed to have had an intimate relationship with the director William Desmond Taylor, whose yet unsolved murder has always conjured up lurid associations with drugs and unconventional sex. Don’t you just love the movies?

It’s hard to believe that, living in San Francisco, something of overarching importance to the gay community could occur that would not exactly escape my notice, but not command the degree of my focus that it should. The unfortunate fact that 2011 marked the 30 anniversary of the first reported AIDS cases is occluded by the drug treatments that result in the survival of those of positive HIV status. A film very much watching, “We Were Here” is poignant reminiscence by several San Franciscans recounting their own personal horrors associated with the AIDS holocaust.

HIV is still with us, with a friend ours moving into hospice just this week, ill with AIDS related lymphoma. And those who’ve lost friends and family will not recover them in this life and still grieve. We are proud to support the mission of All About Care, founded and run by Cynthia Karraker, herself made a widow by AIDS, whose mission has always been to provide help and support for families bereft of a spouse or sibling. You might wish to substitute that extra box of chocolate or gift voucher at the electronics store for a donation to All About Care.

One of the highlights of our endeavours is when we accompany our pieces, as we do with as many of our items as possible, to their point of installation. Perhaps overly fussy- can one really be in this business and not be fussy? -but Keith and I want to make certain that we can give it a last minute buff and polish, and make sure that the placement is, as much as we can make it, perfect. A bright room, working with the client, we’ve got just the right mix of gilding to temper the mahogany, and all contributing to a dining room that would make a meal of hash seem pleasing even to Lucullus. Suffice to say, we were pleased with this install, and, of paramount importance, the client was, too.

Attending a function yesterday with a number of dealer colleagues, I was surprised, as I always am, pleasantly so, to find a few who read my blog, including that entry of a couple days ago. One gent in particular- a fair minded, easy going fellow who, although some years younger than me but with a considerably longer tenure in the art and antiques trade- commented on the relationship aspect of our business, underlining its importance in the success of any gallery. Somewhat moderating his ardent commitment to clients was, a few hours prior to our speaking, a phone discussion of some duration with what he with some charity described as an ‘erstwhile’ client- in this case, a gentleman who phones him every week or two to inquire about pieces in inventory, but, according to our colleague, has never, ever made a purchase.

Mind you, we all have these sorts of people who float within our ambit, and Keith and I make our best effort to be kind and treat graciously anyone who crosses the threshold. Are we always successful? Well, frankly no, but the occurrences of real acrimony are infrequent enough that we can recall each instance in some detail. What’s more frequent are those people who are the one-time visitor who seek to give the impression of being a punter, but are not and never will be. When we discussed this with our colleague, we quickly came up with stock phrases used by pseudo buyers who, as far as we can tell, never buy anything from anybody.

I have to tell you, all these standard responses are for us prefaced by the standard query we invariably pose to the first-time gallery visitor, to wit ‘Are you looking for anything in particular?’ We ask this, of course, to engage and also to inform that not everything in stock is on the sales floor. Moreover, it is a rarity that, for the honest to goodness, serious browser we aren’t able to either source something we don’t happen to have, or point the requesting party in the direction of a dealer who might be able to assist. Very much separate and distinct from the browser, though, is the pseudo buyer who one may not know on sight, but when their mouths open and words emerge, these, then, are some responses that, in our experience, have in their turn a standardized secondary meaning that says, in more succinct terms, ‘no sale’:

‘We’re looking for lots of things.’ Always a puzzle this, as, frankly, we have lots of things in inventory, and can put our hands on lots and lots more. But when I have, with as much cordiality as possible, provided some kind of rejoinder making this fact manifest, I usually get a vague ‘Oh?’ in reply. Sometimes, though, I get this response:

‘We’ll know it when we see it.’ Of course. As well as a secondary response, this well-worn statement runs just behind ‘lots of things’, making it a popular primary response as well. But help me out here, Mr. and Mrs. Punter- when you do see it, will it resemble a table? A chair? An iron lung? This, of course, begs the next most common response:

‘We’re always looking for the unusual.’ Well, me, too, but possibly those who say this are looking for something I would consider as somewhat beyond the pale. That may actually be the case, as ‘unusual’ is always said rather archly, in the way that English barbers of an earlier generation used to inquire of their customers ‘Something for the weekend, sir?’ by way of euphemistically inquiring whether a French letter, as well as short back and sides, was required. We never know what’s precisely meant by ‘unusual’, but we’ve often assumed that we’re expected to pull something from under the counter that is more than marginally risqué. I noted that in the sale of the contents of Malcolm Forbes’ home in London, several pieces of Queen Victoria’s underclothes were on offer. I hope we aren’t meant to have that kind of thing around. Fortunately, San Francisco is well provided with stores that sell adult novelties, so we always have something near at hand to suggest as a shopping venue for what we might call fun seekers.