Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;lrbguy, post: 3602251, member: 88829&quot;]I very much liked reading the first section as you edited it for this page.&nbsp; Section 2 not so much.&nbsp; You wrote: &quot;<i>If you have the funds, buy super coins. But, if you don&#039;t, you can still appreciate the history and types and build an impressive collection (even if it only impresses yourself; Who else matters anyway?) It is not good for the hobby if fewer collectors want the myriad medium- and low-grade ancient coins that most can afford. Don&#039;t emphasize grade and don&#039;t subtly imply that grade is the key to a coin&#039;s desirability. It&#039;s not.</i>&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>If you are suggesting here that the opinions of others about your collection don&#039;t matter and that you should not let them affect what you collect or how, I would respectfully have to disagree.&nbsp; By the same token, while the health of the hobby is important to me, I do not collect for the good of the hobby.&nbsp; I do not hold any hobbyist canons regarding grading as sacrosanct, but I do recognize that most people, collectors or not, prefer to look at a coin that is clear and presents well.&nbsp; I am therefore not appreciative of remarks that are intended to put down or make a person feel ashamed for seeking coins that grade well.&nbsp;&nbsp; So, at the risk of running contrary to the popular wisdom, let me state my own reasons for valuing higher grade coins, whether I may own them or not.</p><p><br /></p><p>I like to study my coins in depth.&nbsp; But my interest is not primarily historical, nor is it focused in the technicalities of production.&nbsp; I am interested in the iconography of my coins and the clever ways the ancients used detail to nuance the form and function of a coin as a vehicle for expression - but even that is not the driver that keeps me at it.&nbsp; For my ancient coins my interest is almost entirely taxonomic.&nbsp; I like seeing how coins may be grouped according to the fine details in their designs.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you understand taxonomy as a driver, then you can appreciate that to study detail you have to be able to see it clearly. Coins that are worn, poorly struck, covered by accretions, disfigured by damage, altered by unofficial hands of any time, are as welcome to me as scratchy records to an audiophile.&nbsp; If they are all we can get, we&#039;ll take them, but will keep looking and hoping that something better will come along.&nbsp; But don&#039;t expect me to crow over a wreck.</p><p><br /></p><p>It&#039;s not about my ego.&nbsp; I do the best I can, whether anyone else likes it or not.&nbsp; But I am not content with ambiguity and do not wish to be associated with disseminating misinformation if I can help it.&nbsp; For this reason I want coins that are sufficiently clear that the eyes of others can agree with me about what I think I am seeing, or give me a good disagreement if that be necessary. </p><p><br /></p><p>The coins I value the most are those which force us to re-examine or re-imagine the reasons why a design looks as it does.&nbsp; It needs to be clear for that to happen, and sometimes an &quot;also-ran&quot; will simply not do.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in