Page 198 - C.T. Loo A paper about his impact and activities in the Chinese art Market

198

loss or removal of Chinese antiquities. He observed that “…the worst destruction has

been accomplished by Chinese irresponsibles” (March 1929a, 25) rather than dealers and

their agents whose removals of objects have “commonly been conducted without wanton

destruction and most frequently from deserted ruins” (March 1929a, 25). And most

importantly, March argued that in contrast to the ignorant Chinese looter, the American

collector “cherishes and reveres them as great works of art of universal moment” (March

1929a, 26). March further stated, “Far Eastern art in Western museums has had a large

share in raising the West’s appreciation of Eastern cultural attainment” (March 1929a,

26), and “it is not improbable that the knowledge of a market largely created by Western

collectors has saved many choice pieces from oblivion”(March 1929a, 25). Loo was in

total agreement with March in stating, “Perhaps I may say here that we Chinese feel

greatly indebted to Americans who have gathered our treasures into their collections. Not

only are they preserving relics of the past for the aesthetic appreciation and scientific

study of posterity, but by helping towards a fuller knowledge of Chinese art in the present

they are bringing America into closer touch, sympathy and understanding with China.”

(Loo 1931, 4)

It is not difficult to see that March’s argument was in line with Loo’s, as dealers and

collectors/museums stood at the supply and demand ends in the market. Both presented a

universal and timeless idea of Chinese art, and an appreciative American audience in

contrast to the purported ignorant Chinese people. Both emphasized the working of

market rules. What their arguments concealed is the capitalist and imperialist agenda

behind the international circulation of Chinese antiquities. They shared the logic that