Quote:
Originally Posted by raulus
Even the Vatican, when they censored classical art, just went around putting fig leaves over the naughty bits.
But perhaps such minimalist censorship is maybe not that possible to do in this case.
|
Nic, why would you say it "is maybe not that possible" for a TPG to not want to encapsulate a card that has such an obvious racially derogatory image and connotation on it, or am I misunderstanding you? I could see not necessarily wanting to have my business name permanently associated with a card/item that many current or potential customers may find extremely offensive.
Or did you mean by your statement that in this case the TPG cannot just gloss over and more or less ignore the card's negative image and connotation, and really has no choice but to either refuse to grade such a card, thereby condemning the card's image and connotation, or go ahead and accept it for grading and apparently have no issue with the card's image and connotation? The TPG obviously can't go putting a proverbial "fig leaf" over parts of the card that may be seen negatively, and so they must make an "all or nothing" type decision in this case. Is that more like what you're trying to say?
As I asked in my last post, I wonder if the TPG's response to grading the OP's T203 card would have been different had he sent in a different T203 card without such a possibly negative image and connotation?