| Original Message: That's what I expected. |
|---|
|
Hi George, It is always disheartening the first time this happens. I am sorry for your disappointment. I wrote the article that conclusively demonstrated that a large percentage of "amber" beads from Africa (and many places, in fact) is really plastic, in 1976. I've spent the intervening thirty years continuing to promote this factual information. Nevertheless, the misrepresentation of plastic as "amber" or "copal" is rampant in all parts of the bead community and world. Africans, who are closest to these beads, and have a—let's say—"cultural investment" in believing these beads are real amber, have been some of the least likely folks to understand and accept the truth. And who can blame them? They have been told these fakes were amber ever since the time this (phenolic) material was introduced to them (probably beginning in 1927). It is gratifying when the occasional bead seller comes to realize the true situation, and to desist from misrepresenting these beads. But it does not happen often. Then, some bead sellers are likely to take the attitude that 'everyone knows it's not really amber, and this is just a name we use'—but that can be a counterproductive stance too, because "everyone" does not know this. As I have mentioned in the past, that these beads are "culturally amber" is a pragmatic fact. They have a certain value, and (usually or often) are actually old beads, that are/were worn by people as part of their jewelry. However, when new plastic beads come into the picture and THEY become misrepresented (as both "old" beads and "amber"), what are we going to do? Right now, the Chinese are cranking-out plastic-amber beads like you cannot believe (based on the African styles of yesteryear). Chinese fakes are already routinely sold as "antique Tibetan amber." Is this happening in Africa too? I'll bet it is. Be well. Jamey All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users |
|
|