Article Summary: An opinion piece exploring issues surrounding the problem of inauthentic pieces that are circulated withing in the hobby.
The Dirty Little Secret of the Hobby
The hobby, overall, is quite a complex pursuit. By the nature of what we collect, there is a lot of secrecy, some of which pertains to “sources” of props, in that a source, for a collector or a retailer, is an advantage. In addition to “information”, another bit of capital to gather and protect is “access”. Information and access can get you very far in learning about props, evaluating them, and acquiring them.
The Cost of Access & Information
Not much in this hobby comes free. Sure, we all network, and we all have relationships and even friendship. But I’ve found, even with friends, there is an expectation (a legitimate one) that in sharing in these two powers – access and information – a proportional amount of sharing should be extended back.
We develop relationships, trust, and learn to have a circle of friends and acquaintances with whom we “go to” with certain information and opportunities. We learn what our contacts want, who they know, what they have access to – share the same – and act accordingly.
Of course, there are pure acts of altruism – sharing to be nice, to look out for one another.
Also, not too many collectors are well off enough to act on each and every golden opportunity that passes their way. So good will comes in play simply by default.
Confidentiality
Because of these dynamics in play, we all become accustomed to trust – based on relationships, past fruitful successes, via reputations. It’s not uncommon for a friend or dealer to say, “I can’t tell you that”, and we all learn to accept it. It’s quite common. And honestly, we all learn to not even question it under a variety of circumstances.
Much of this goes into the I Want to Believe territory, but can happen even with the most seasoned and savvy of us.
This is inherently problematic, and as aggressive as I am in ferreting out information and getting to the heart of matters, “The Secret” is something that wasn’t really on my radar in any significant way until as recently as a year or so ago. The more I learned and pursued this phenomenon, the more I was shocked at the level at which it’s gone unnoticed, under the collective radar of the hobby.
“The Secret”
So what is “The Secret”, why is it important, and what impact does it have on the hobby?
“The Secret” is this: there is a significant amount of “non-original” props and wardrobe (both in circulation and being offered more and more) that is characterized as “original”. In other words, there are many props and wardrobe that are, essentially, replicas passed off as original.
How Does this Happen?
Of course, there are many ways in which “fakes” are created and introduced into the marketplace as original. What makes “The Secret” different? This trend is very different in that it has origins going back to the production itself, in a variety of ways.
As an example, the hobby is becoming more and more visible to a variety of people by virtue of impressive prices realized at public auctions. Profiles in History is getting great press, and reporters (not familiar with the hobby) usually come at such coverage from a perspective of noting the top realized pieces and prices at the close of an auction. It becomes a matter of this sold for that.
Crew and prop makers are learning more and more that the pieces that they create for use in the production they serve are potentially extremely valuable in their own right – in some cases, the prop they create has a potential to be worth more than their compensation for their work in creating it.
Also, those artists are some times fans of the films they help to make, and want a memento for their work and efforts.
Therefore, it’s becoming more and more common for those involved in making props (and to a lesser extent, wardrobe) to make “extras”, either during production or following production. For themselves, friends, family, or for sale. The temptation is there, and it’s quite easy for them to do at little cost or effort.
Now, if you’ve read my views on what constitutes and “original” prop (see What is “Original”?), you’ll know that such a piece – an “extra” does not meet the “original” criteria.
An “original” piece is something:
1) made by or acquired by the production,
2) during the production, and
3) used or intended to be used during the production.
All three of these traits would have to be true to be “original”.
An “extra”, even if made at the time of the production, by the same prop maker, using the same materials and methods, even if indistinguishable from truly “original” pieces in every way, is still not original. It was not made for the production – it was made for the prop maker – and it was not used or intended to be used during the production. It is, however, an exact replica.
What Are the Consequences?
The consequences are extremely important, as it affects the integrity of the hobby as a whole.
Imagine spending hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of dollars on a piece purported to be “original”, when in reality it is a replica.
That would obviously have a significant impact on the purchaser, as well as the seller, once the facts were uncovered.
Also, because sellers go back to the same sources over and over, any such piece from the source of an “extra” passed as “original” would cast any and all such pieces tracing back to that source as highly suspect and questionable. Any piece from that source would suddenly shift from authentic and original to replica status unless proven otherwise.
This would be compounded by the fact that it’s common for pieces to change hands, going into resale, etc., often at different pricing. Those who resold such pieces would misrepresent them to new buyers based on what they were told at the time of original purchase and acquisition (see article Fraud, Misrepresentation, Puffing)
A Hypothetical Scenario
So, as an example, let’s say hypothetically that original scenario noted above came true, and someone purchased a $10,000 prop from a seller that was found to be an “extra” (i.e. not “original” as described/marketed). Further, that seller has been selling or broker pieces from that same bad source for years, in excess of 50 props, originally selling for $2,000 each, on average. One third of those props had since resold to new buyers, generally for more money than was purchased for, averaging $3,000 each.
How would all of that be resolved? Where would the buck stop? There would be a cumulative loss of $100,000 across a number of collectors, direct and indirect from the original seller… Even if the seller were a professional, issuing a COA with a lifetime guarantee, could he cover that sum? Would he shift the burden to the holder of the props to prove them fake, rather than he prove them authentic? What about the differential in resale prices realized?
This is a scenario that has not (to my knowledge) played out in this hobby, but I’m certain it’s a matter of “when”, not “if”. The more I have researched this issue, the more confident I am that it is very prevalent, and increasingly so. These pieces are “out there”. And more are coming every day.
Why is “The Secret” a Secret?
There are many reasons why this is not openly discussed.
One, many simply are not aware of the issue.
Two, it would be extremely difficult to learn, more so to prove, a piece is an “extra”. The most practical way to learn of this or determine it is if there were someone “on the inside” to come forward to expose what is essentially fraud. And realistically, that is not very likely.
Three, those interfacing with the sources – the seller or broker – has a monetary gain in selling or brokering pieces, so is directly invested in the success of such relationships and ventures. If these transactions at some point involve “extras”, in what way can the seller or broker identify them as such? In what circumstances would they ask the hard questions, and in what circumstances would they not. This also goes back to what I discussed in another article – “trust-based” authentication (see article Trend: “I Want to Believe”).
Overall, I think it’s a difficult set of circumstances to process. And I think it’s challenging in that maybe it’s easier to hope no such pieces have infiltrated one’s own collection than cast a critical eye on what you have and what you really know about where it came from. Also, to merely bring up the topic is uncomfortable, because there are so many dynamics in play; just the notion of discussing it stirs the pot, if you will.
My view is, it has happened and increasingly happens, so better to cast a light on it now and raise awareness of “The Secret”.
How Can I Protect Myself? How Can it be Stopped?
One, which is important to do regardless of this issue, it’s important to ask questions not just about what you are looking to buy, but what you already own. Research should never stop. As noted in the opening of this article, one of the two real powers in this hobby is information and access. Those tools should constantly be exercised and leveraged to bolster the provenance and authenticity of pieces in your collection as well as seek out new pieces.
Two, specific to the actual issue, I think talking about it openly to both raise awareness and bring facts to light is of benefit to all hobbyists.
Unfortunately, I don’t think there is any way to “stop” this problem. All we can do is try to find ways to mitigate it by sharing information and trying to collectively identify bad pieces and bad sources. The point of interface is the source with the dealer/broker, and to a lesser extent, the buyer. That interface is the best opportunity to ferret out such bad pieces and sources, so it is challenging for collectors to have an impact on that which happens outside of our reach.
Therefore, another important action is to question sellers in a way that puts them on notice that 1) this is a real issue, 2) you are keenly aware of it, and 3) your expectation is that more information regarding the source and provenance may be in order to protect your interests and to authenticate the provenance of the piece in question.
In other words, the best way to combat “The Secret” is to essentially “desecretize” it by way of discussing it, questioning it, raising awareness of it, and putting a challenge to those involved in sourcing pieces that there are consequences to anyone playing a role in the pollution of the hobby by way of introducing non-original “extra” pieces into the marketplace.
Jason De Bord