Do Pre-War Collectors buy Modern Cards Featurin Game Used Items of Pre-War Players

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

Plastic? Screams modern?

Sorry, but yeah, that screams "modern" at me. Anachronisms that I can't get around:

1) The shiny glare. Old cardboard doesn't reflect light that way.
2) The SP logo looks distinctly modern. It has a slight art deco feel to it, but that style didn't yet exist during Jackson's playing days.
3) The marbled grey background looks like a kitchen countertop in a contemporary suburban home. Its not a motif I think anyone associated with baseball, or even used, in the dead ball era.
4) The term "Legendary Cuts" is obviously modern hobby-speak, as is "Legendary Debut Bat Cards".
5) The "TM" mark is not something you see on the front of old cards.
6) The White Sox logo is contemporary, not the one used in Jackson's time.
7) Hard to tell form the photo, but I'm guessing the wood chip is in fact behind a plastic window?

And of course you also have the fact that the very idea of shredding bats to put wood chips into cards is a modern concept that nobody did back in Jackson's day.

So yeah, I'm sorry but I don't like that card, even though it does have a very nice photo of Jackson on it.

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by seanofjapan

Sorry, but yeah, that screams "modern" at me. Anachronisms that I can't get around:

1) The shiny glare. Old cardboard doesn't reflect light that way.
2) The SP logo looks distinctly modern. It has a slight art deco feel to it, but that style didn't yet exist during Jackson's playing days.
3) The marbled grey background looks like a kitchen countertop in a contemporary suburban home. Its not a motif I think anyone associated with baseball, or even used, in the dead ball era.
4) The term "Legendary Cuts" is obviously modern hobby-speak, as is "Legendary Debut Bat Cards".
5) The "TM" mark is not something you see on the front of old cards.
6) The White Sox logo is contemporary, not the one used in Jackson's time.
7) Hard to tell form the photo, but I'm guessing the wood chip is in fact behind a plastic window?

And of course you also have the fact that the very idea of shredding bats to put wood chips into cards is a modern concept that nobody did back in Jackson's day.

So yeah, I'm sorry but I don't like that card, even though it does have a very nice photo of Jackson on it.

OK, you broke it down bit by bit so I guess I understand your thinking, however I'd suggest the aesthetic when viewed as a whole has a throwback vintage look and not at all modern. But that's fine.
Wood slice is NOT behind any plastic, none of the memorabilia cards I own are sleeved behind anything...

I find the thinking interesting on the topic, I guess I've certainly stuck and offered far more than 2 cents worth.
I wonder if the same people thinking desecration and destruction hated and still loathe the 60's action of hot-rodding...taking a perfectly good 34' Ford and cutting down its roofline, messing with fenders, cutting and changing etc?
Similarly the current love affair with resto-modding must be equally challenging to one's need to keep all classic things in their original form?

How about going into a historically period perfect home and ripping out a functioning and as designed kitchen and replacing it with something modern and sleek and chic? Bathroom too, heavenly days. Talk about destruction!!

But lets keep it in our wheelhouse.
Was this an act of abhorent destruction, or merely the need and desire of the owner to own and make appropriate to their desire? Is it ok because the owner performed the act so long ago, it was somehow less distressing and destructive?
Cut down from an advertising sheet:


Or how about this piece.....the auto I promise has not resided in this card since inception. Cut auto's ok even if they destroy the integrity of their original housing? What if there was text immediately before the auto giving context and history to it's penning...?


I'm going to guess most don't feel the same about signatures. How come?
This attitude that the jersey/bat have been destroyed, as if nothing remains, is patently untrue. It exists in miniatures to be sure.

[68Hawk]

And while I own exactly one bat card, as shown above of Shoeless Joe, I also own this (just a store model, nothing exotic):


I own one Soccer memorabilia card of Pele's...


...but also own a genuine game jersey of his from his Cosmos time:


I enjoy ALL my pieces, and can honestly say about equally. I get no more 'authentic' an experience holding the Ruth bat than I do gazing at the Jackson card sitting on the wall across from a 1964 Gold Crown pool table.
Honestly, there's a price and value difference, but these cards can have an incredible artistic and creative vibe if you allow yourself to enjoy them.

And yes folks, I promise never to cut up my stuff and put it in little home made cards.
But there is room in my mind for both to exist and bring enjoyment to many who might only be able to afford the one iteration.

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

OK, you broke it down bit by bit so I guess I understand your thinking, however I'd suggest the aesthetic when viewed as a whole has a throwback vintage look and not at all modern. But that's fine.
Wood slice is NOT behind any plastic, none of the memorabilia cards I own are sleeved behind anything...

Its really a matter of perspective I think. I'm not intending to disparage the cards but rather explain why they aren't for me. I know they are going for a throwback look, but it just doesn't work for me, for the reasons I outlined earlier.

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

I wonder if the same people thinking desecration and destruction hated and still loathe the 60's action of hot-rodding...taking a perfectly good 34' Ford and cutting down its roofline, messing with fenders, cutting and changing etc?

There is a huge difference between the two in terms of value added though.

The cars used by hot rodders would have simply been junked without their intervention.

Game used bats of HOFers on the other hand would not have been junked without Upper Deck or whoever buying them to turn them into cards: they were already considered quite valuable. They would have been preserved without really requiring much in the way of cost or effort to do so.

Also, while hot rodders were altering the original condition of those cars, they were doing something qualitatively that was vastly different from just cutting them up into little pieces. They spent a lot of time, effort and imagination to turn something that society at the time placed no value on into something useful and interesting. Its quite creative what they did.

Buzz sawing a bat into little wood chips and putting them into cards isn't even remotely the same. The bat already had significant value. There isn't much artistic originality involved in cutting them into little squares. I just don't see the same value being added as I do with the hot rods. The only benefit I see is that cutting them up and distributing them like that makes physical contact with the bat (or a small part thereof) more accessible to more people. But I'm not sure that is on balance worth the cost of the destroyed bat (and of course destroying bats to make cards makes contact with an intact bat less accessible over time).

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

Or how about this piece.....the auto I promise has not resided in this card since inception. Cut auto's ok even if they destroy the integrity of their original housing? What if there was text immediately before the auto giving context and history to it's penning...?


I'm going to guess most don't feel the same about signatures. How come?
This attitude that the jersey/bat have been destroyed, as if nothing remains, is patently untrue. It exists in miniatures to be sure.

I'm not a huge fan of the cut signatures either, often times it is obvious that the original signed item (photo, card, etc) was a much more attractive piece than the card they put them into after cutting out the autograph. But the cost/benefit analysis is significantly different than with bats or jerseys. In terms of accessibility, cutting a bat up might turn 1 bat into 500 woodchips (or however many? I have no idea), thus significantly increasing the distribution of that "piece" throughout the hobby. Cutting an autograph doesn't do that though, you start with 1 autographed photo, you end with 1 autographed card. On the other hand though the qualitative level of destruction is usually much less with cut autos - sometimes its just an autograph from a piece of paper where all they've done is trim the edges a bit and nothing of significance was lost (as opposed to an entire bat, jersey, etc being destroyed).

So I don't know. Personally I'd prefer to get a redemption card for an autographed photo, piece of paper, check, whatever of a famous person than I would to get a cut autograph in a card.

[Stampsfan]

No