Dealers, Living in Their Small World
April 28th, 2012 by admin
There is no better way to understand the state of being a decorative arts dealer than going out and visiting their shops. Each one is an island unto itself, with the proprietor and his staff (hopefully) available to show the inventory and (hopefully) engage in a conversation about “the trade”. However as an industry, they should be speaking with one voice that can clearly articulate and implement a fresh image and promote more business. Sales + marketing = public perceived success. Throw in an effective lobbyist, and maybe things would happen.
What got me to thinking about this dealer dilemma was an article on MSNBC about the influence of American Girl products and “lifestyle”. They present a product to young, stylish, disposable income mothers which fulfill their daughter’s high expectations. The doll house look of period styles (American, French, 20th Cent) would appear to be a traditional element of American Girl. It’s also a way to change perceptions of the decorative arts for young and old alike. For art and antiques dealer it’s a leap of faith and not something they would orchestrate. Maybe a lobbyist could open up possibilities to engage the public and promote better competition and financial incentives.
The changes necessary for dealers to not only survive but prosper are very self evident in today’s state of business. Decorative arts dealers aren’t having the success that a Christie’s or Sotheby’s has experienced. However, middle tier auctions are doing fine too. With the great divide between fine and decorative art, and the many sub-categories of each, only the auctions format has been able to operate in multiple areas. This very specific defect is why every dealer will be limited in how it can grow. There is no dealer representative organization that can effectively coordinate the needs or aspirations of such a diverse industry.
The critical need to articulate what dealers do and how they can accommodate a public demand can’t come from any one dealer. The need for professional, outside industry direction, is the only way a coherent vision can be developed and promoted. Pushing for basic changes in laws preventing retirement investment in art and antiques can only be put forward this way. What better incentive for a long term investment of buying and holding than works of art?
Also troubling is the dealer’s dependence of either presenting at a show or having a lifeline with 1stDibs on the internet. Both are very limited and generic, but an opportunity might happen. Either way, you can’t expect the public to change their perception of the dealers who participate in these venues. If anything they are tied together and almost become transparent, unless you are looking at their inventory and something catches your eye. Then, a client is engaged. Engaging someone into this field should be easier than selling cars, which do have powerful trade organizations at their disposal. We too represent a life style, taste, and luxury.
In this business I truly believe “all ships rise in a high tide”. Dealers who don’t think and move forward will invariably not survive; it is a systemic industry problem. The auction format has succeeded, abet with gross conflicts of interest, deception, and fraud. Basically, the success of the Sotheby’s/Christie’s duopoly method is investment bankers gone wild. All auctioneers feast in this unregulated landscape.
They have managed to squeeze dealers into lone, fragmented entities that do not present any challenge to their well being. Don’t expect me, as a dealer to ever forget how they decimated the industry and stunted its future. Unfortunately, it’s the dealers who are asleep at the wheel and are paralyzed about how to react. Any creative individual or group action would help reverse this trend.
A New Reality for Auctions, in the Decorative Arts
March 6th, 2012 by admin
I was advised that my bashing the Duopoly auctioneers is a bit overdone. Perhaps is it, but looking at the state of divergence between the decorative and fine arts markets, these auctioneers realize which one has reduced maintenance and storage costs which tend to be pretty high and fixed, for an easier way. Now is a great opportunity for collectors but also dealers who see the hand writing on the wall; the private treaty format was conceived for these 800 pound gorillas to play the role of a dealer.
The fine arts trade in a very crisp format that works well for the auction process. A huge inventory of bought-in art is a lot better than chairs, tables, mirrors, chandeliers, and assorted bric-a-brac. And there is no contest on the average price point. Those that can stock an inventory can have a real competitive advantage over the auctions, not just to purchase but take consignments. Perhaps that is the greatest opportunity a dealer can have is to get it for free on consignment, like the auctions. And if you want to make an investment you can give an advance, just like any good Duopoly does with art.
From my point of view, I see so little amazing decorative arts coming on the market. I have seen many items many times in many places, and by many dealers. It’s not a pretty picture at what the auctioneers are offering today. However, if you keep your eyes open there is still great and interesting merchandise out there of excellent quality that the auctions just can’t sell successfully. The public too recognizes their failure of not being able to find and sell good merchandise. Their reputation in the decorative arts industry is no longer very intimidating and those dealers that have survived have been weaned off their supply.
When the Duopoly can’t control a market they jettison it; coins, stamps, and other chump change departments have spawned their own dealers and auctioneers. Why not the decorative arts too?
If they can’t make a go of it, I’m sure their respective managements will make that decision. When you peruse any of the weekly advertisements in the English Antiques Trade Gazette or American Newtown Bee, there are no shortages of auctioneers willing to take on decorative arts and furniture. It also seems there are more available good pieces out there than run through the Duopoly.
Of course they will always get the seminal estate or collection; Elizabeth Taylor, Yves Saint Laurent, etc; but without the buzz of the name these one hit wonders don’t come along very often anymore. Perhaps there’s no one left, but the picking are getting slimmer and that is where a dealer and or private treaty has its best hope.
For the dealer in the decorative arts, having control of merchandise to sell and not auction to the highest bidder in a rigged environment should be an advantage to not only the seller but the buyer too. Just like a car or a piece of real estate, the price is always negotiable. That is what a private treaty sale is all about and why Sotheby’s and Christie’s want to pursue this method. However, the price of entry into this field requires a different sensibility that dealers in the decorative arts can and should still do better.
A New Decorative Arts Reality
March 4th, 2012 by admin
Over the last 10 years there has been an amazing divergence in how the decorative and fine arts compare in growth and how they are marketed. Fine art has become the playground of a younger as well as older generation while the decorative arts are treated as an appendage to the interior design trade. With today’s ultra minimalism of less is more, the walls of any home offer the biggest and cleanest palate to start decorating. How can you best complement that starting point?
My business has had a long history of working with many incredible designers who created interiors for the rich and famous, both in real life and in the movies. For today’s designers, the art is fun and a convenient starting point to develop the environment of a room. This is the point where the decorative arts must be instilled into a new generation of people. Seeing the decorative arts working with contemporary art offers an opportunity to any period or style of a fine piece of furniture under it or around it in the room. And yes, there is a ceiling and floor too.
Furniture and lighting exist all around us and are the things we use. Maybe a TV can compete for the walls, but for basic eating and sleeping you have some furniture to help fulfill your living requirements. The opportunities to have good decorative arts complement the wall art however, does require more attention and detail than most would admit. Size, shape, color, and function all play a part in how it should work with the feeling one should experience when entering the space. Why then, is it so hard to find or want to find a meaningful item to fill a void?
For collectors, the decorative arts have tended to be highly specialized with smaller more focused areas that seem closer to art. It is memorabilia like baseball cards that are more art than just decorative. Coca-cola memorabilia or stamp collecting, these areas have a traditionally strong base of collectors and dealers. They also don’t offer any complementary feeling to the art on the walls, or for that matter any functionality. Good decorative arts need to use functionality as an advantage, but go teach that in the world of today’s interior designers and their clients. It requires a new and inviting approach.
I’ve been reading the Steve Jobs biography written by Walter Isaacson. One of the fascinating tidbits in the book deals with Jobs understanding that Tiffany was a preeminent designer and manufacturer. I’ve always appreciated the diversity of work Louis Comfort Tiffany was able to produce, and always with a sense of refinement and quality. Jobs understood how Tiffany made something be a timeless work of art that can function perfectly. Let’s start with the lighting.
A new sensibility of how the decorative arts will best enhance the living environment is now taking shape. Clutter in a living space does not work anymore. The style of over opulence in an 1890’s Victorian home or 1980’s New York apartment isn’t and shouldn’t necessarily have to be back in vogue. Living nicely should also imply having taste and style, which minimalism greatly restricts. Even environmentally, they make sense. Making the decorative arts an approachable and desirable part today’s lifestyle might need more than a prayer and hope. But a great marketing plan, like Apple…..
A Look Back, Newel in the 1950’s
February 14th, 2012 by admin
It is sometime in the late 1950s and Cecil Beaton comes knocking at the door, or rather in those days, just walking right in. He probably was here to hopefully do the sets for a Broadway show or for whatever! He knew Newel and loved being there to play. And so it was at Newel in those times.
The antiques business was a sideline enterprise compared to the rental side of the business. Photographers of the best caliber rented from Newel for advertisements and fashion spreads. At that time, the theater business was thriving and every Playbill noted in the credits, “furniture and furnishing from Newel Art Galleries”. With an iconic set designer like Oliver Smith having a free hand in designing period and theatrical Broadway sets from Newel he must have been the envy of every interior designer. Ok, have a ball designing “My Fair Lady”.
Window display back then wasn’t too shabby either. If you ever walked over to Tiffany’s and checked out Gene Moore’s window displays you probably would just sigh at the site. If you wanted to see Newel in a full blown presentation, Saks Fifth Ave, across the street from Rockefeller Center, would surely be there to catch some attention. One favorite that I got to see at the very end of their existence was the venerable Cavanaugh windows on 57th Street.
With Broadway the rage, and photographers and window display in full gear, nothing could have prepared Newel for the beginning of the age of TV. At that time it is hard to imagine that all the production was LIVE; no second takes for dramas, and any theatrical production. It’s almost like the original You Tube. But the demand for supplying these live TV productions required sets on a weekly basis. This was pretty consistent and not at the whim of a Broadway audience. Today we have a great rental business, but on the scale of the 1950’s, no way.
TV Production in New York City has had its ups and downs over the last 40 years, but nothing like that time period. However it would be the resurgence of the movie industry in New York that would later fill the gap. Movies were infrequently shot in New York in the 1950s and studios like Astoria in Queens that were employed by the Army in World War II lost their usefulness.
The most unique aspect of Newel during that time was the uncanny problem of always having a sign in the window “taking inventory”. How does that invite a customer to come in? Maybe my grandfather was shrewder that I thought, using reverse psychology; I don’t think so. The rental business was too good to pass up and all he had to do was just buy, buy, buy, merchandise. Selling was more difficult; with the rental it went right back in the same space and if you sold, what do you do? (Just kidding) But Newel did sell.
When Newel did sell, it was to someone who knew how to get in. The doors to the store were never locked and always open, with wrought iron furniture placed on the sidewalk every day. If Cecil Beaton could just walk in, well I guess Babe Paley could do the same. He did sets for Broadway etc, her husband owned CBS, a pretty good TV client at the time. Funny too, they seemed to be in the same social world, both at the top of any list for taste and style. They got to buy and play at Newel.
Billy Baldwin and his coterie of tastemakers had the only combination that worked to get in. However, the neighborhood didn’t lack for good locals either. Around the corner was Jimmy Amster, of “Amster Yard” who I remember most for introducing me to Biedermeier in 1969. As a society designer, Jimmy who also designed Peacock Alley at the Waldorf Astoria, was a classic and appreciated everything. His residence at the Yard was memorable.
Of course there was Katherine Hepburn who came in frequently and so did Rita Hayworth too, and the truth be told, she scratched her leg on a table. This was Rita Hayworth, whose legs were insured by Lloyd’s of London for $1 million dollars. As I remember hearing it, my grandparents saw the business going down the tubes! Not to be, she laughed about it and said no big deal. The 1950s were different times, but still Newel
The Seminal Year of 2011
December 23rd, 2011 by admin
As this year draws to an end I can’t help but look back over the last decade, and realize how my business and its industry have evolved. Ten years ago we lived in an emerging internet world, and the start of the decline in the traditional decorative arts. A decade or so before, when the Japanese art speculation bubble burst, decorative arts were considered rock solid. Are period decorative arts really and finally getting rediscovered, and how will the industry make adjustments to continue to grow?
For me my first seminal experience in the industry was a decade ago, in 2001. It was the year I completed the purchase of my company, and the trauma of 9/11 happening within 2 weeks. Oh, and I forgot that the Sotheby’s/Christie’s Duopoly was running at full tilt, despite their Federal government convictions. This was a period that marked the greatest decline in dealers participating in the industry. The final nail in the coffin was the domination of the Mid-Century Modern style of minimalism, sparseness, and white walls which caught a tidal wave of public acceptance. However, the challenges of the last decade will make the next one more intriguing.
As a generally accepted requirement in the trade, to survive and be successful entails just one thing, and that is to sell. Some kind of turnover is better than none. The revenue model of the auctioneer is build strictly on turnover, with the caveat that you don’t have to own it to make money. That is a difficult concept for dealers who put their money in their inventory and then hope for the best. Also, auction liquidation and purchasing, even at Sotheby’s and Christie’s is not what it was years ago either.
With the shrinkage of dealers, those that have survived learned to live without having auctioneers as their source for merchandise. For dealers, the best opportunity to source inventory is structuring the consignment concept more to a seller’s needs with less capital required. All a consignment requires is control to sell and physically show the item. The more inventory one has, the greater the prospects to sell. This will be a necessary method for dealers to compete with the auctioneers for inventory in the future.
But now the new great threat to dealers is auctioneers turning into dealers. The new Christie’s Chairman Steven Murphy is quoted in the December 2011 edition of The Art Newspaper as stating “I expect it (private sales) will double and then double again…because it’s what our clients want.” Only the strongest and most creative dealers will survive that kind of intrusion in their method of doing business.
With an uncertain future, we at Newel are now looking forward to finding opportunities to grow the company. We have renovated our showroom and building to better display and creatively use the space while also preparing to showcase a new website and backend database. To complete both goals of a building renovation and implement state of the art technology should set us on a new and exciting path to seize new challenges and possibilities. Looking into the future, those accomplishments will hopefully feel seminal.
The (Diversified) Mega-Dealer
November 8th, 2011 by admin
I had some “old” dealer friends email me that I hadn’t written a blog in a while. I hate to make excuses, but there is a major project underway at Newel that took my focus away from writing (there were plenty of times I wished I could have written something). This industry is potentially far stronger than how it has evolved under the methods of deception and conflicts of interest perpetrated by the Sotheby’s/Christie’s auctioneer duopoly. Their business model is built on a real house of cards.
The only effective way to really change this industry from the auction centric thinking is to do what they do, but better. Basically, they live off of consignments and for practical purposes they are the choice of death, divorce, or taxes. They squeeze the consigner and stiff the buyer with a buyer’s premium. That, alone, should motivate buyers and sellers to look for a dealer.
The historical problems dealers have had are the abilities to warehouse, display, and finance inventory. None of the three is easy to do. Most antiques and art dealers also operate with a limited field of focus. Whether art is Modern, Impressionist, or Old Masters, few art dealers can claim to stock all three to buy and sell. With the decorative arts, the disparity in styles is even more pronounced. How many antiques dealers can mix French Art Deco and American Rustic or 18th Century English with Art Nouveau? But think what kind of dealer could offer both decorative and fine arts, together.
Space and drama in presentation is the name of the game. That is what art and antiques show attempt to do for dealers. Both the auctioneers and shows exhibit for no more than a week and then it’s all gone. Sold! Who knows?
The real trick for dealers is to capitalize on the consignment opportunities. Warehousing is a major issue, but if you’ve ever seen a Sotheby’s or Christie’s warehouse, it can be done. Turnover is a key element for profit, but not necessary storage overhead, which remains pretty fixed. The requirement for auction turnover has additional expenses of moving and manpower that are not required for a more static inventory. So where are those consignment opportunities? They abound.
Just mention Sotheby’s and Christie’s to anyone today, and they really don’t have much nice to say. It’s not that the individuals who work there are bad, they just don’t have any other option. They are all good Company people, but they don’t work for either the consignor or buyer. That is the best reason why dealers should succeed.
My idea of a Mega-Dealer is seen through by what we have accomplished in our newly renovated showroom. Seeing decorative antiques of all periods and style mixed with Contemporary artists of any form is exciting. Displaying a mixture all period art forms can be done anywhere. You just need professional managers (dealers) to run an operation that works better with buyers and sellers.
The New York Times vs 1st Dibs
September 12th, 2011 by admin
So much for the New York Times being an elitist paper, as Steven Kurutz writes of buying antiques on 1st Dib for an article in last Thursday’s Home section. The writer reveals his ignorance of values with the excuse of having a beer budget. Excuse me, but good luck finding a Picasso on Craig’s List. Understanding how a marketplace works would be a good start and having a site where dealers post prices is a lot better than auctions, where you have to be duped into finding where the price to buy starts.
I find that articles like Kurutz’s have a negative point of view about pricing for these objects. The fact that he must acknowledge 1st Dibs is an admission of his lack of resources to find these “expensive” items. The public in general feeds off this public humiliation of dealers and their pricing, but what are the alternative sources that he offers; eBay, Craig’s List, VandM? Sorry, but Mid-century is already cheap, available, and been recycled to death. He should be able to do better with a very predictable “in” period of decorating.
Let us see what Mr. Kurutz can do about finding good 17th, 18th, and 19th Century items cheaply, and where. Perhaps this assignment is a bit more difficult and the market more sophisticated for his amateur skills. Buying good fine and decorative arts is not a game for someone lacking knowledge and a passion. There are differences in every originally designed and created object that cannot be defined only by a price. The pleasure of ownership is measured by rarity and a perceived value that is affordable. Not everyone can buy a Mercedes, but a lot more appreciate its status and comforts. That 3 bedroom coop with a terrace on Park Avenue won’t come cheap.
With all these items, the sticker price is what someone posts as an offering selling price. You negotiate for a car or home, what is so different about fine and decorative arts? The public’s fear of pricing is exacerbated by articles like what Mr. Kurutz has written. Yet he fails to take aim at the other great resource for merchandise, the auctions. Maybe he should experience the thrill of trying to buy a good piece in that venue. Maybe he will experience a good buy, only to be saddled with a hefty buyer’s premium.
Finally the future for my industry won’t hinge on getting the best possible deal or buying cheaper than on 1st Dibs. The need for a public not to fear owning these items is the tendency I wish to see. Understanding and appreciation of the object is the paramount goal of any industry’s ability to succeed. Apple has done that brilliantly. Dumbing down to cheaper considerations is a formula for never attaining a higher goal. Perhaps Mr. Kurutz had it right when he said “If you don’t mind wiping out your 401(k), you might be able to furnish one room, maybe two.” I can think of no better place to put part of my retirement funds and enjoy the benefits, long term!
(2) The New Economy; Decorative Arts as Assets
August 13th, 2011 by admin
I enjoyed the study of macro economics in college, but real life experiences tend to clarify how much you really don’t know (and my oversight of micro economics). It sounds a bit like being in the decorative arts business most of your life. I always believed these objects would develop an economic asset model with a bid/ ask marketplace for valuation, trade, and liquidation. If you build it, will they come?
As a dealer in the decorative arts, the changes that have transpired in how the industry operates are a story of the fall of great dealers and collectors over the last centuries, to the auctions. It happened pretty clearly with implementation of the buyer’s premium and an inherent conflict of interest was introduced and ultimately imposed on the trade and public. It finally took a conviction by the government to slap the hands on the Sotheby’s/Christie’s duopoly’s conflict of interest. Along with deceptions like a secret reserve, these distortions affect the real valuation of these items.
Auctions are just rigged distress sales because there is no true marketplace. The irony is that the strongest growth coming from the Sotheby’s/Christie’s duopoly is their private treaty/faux dealer way of doing business. But it shows that they understand the evolving nature of our industry and are accepting dealer functions, and having skin in the game can be profitable. The economic model for dealers requires a consumer who pays and takes possession. The economic model for openly trading would allow dealers to negotiate pricing, terms, and transport; all services to the consumer. The problem is where are the consumers for these fine works of art and how will dealers survive?
We are all consumers and it should take one to know one. My vision on this ‘science” of economics is blurred at best! Why is the general public so apprehensive about these items when they are accessible and reasonably buyable? Where is the invisible hand of Adam Smith? Aside from currents of taste and style, unfortunately there is no true marketplace available for pricing and negotiation.
The 1st Dibs method is a proven successful challenger to the auction format. It allows a more natural process without conflict of interest, but it is severely lacking in the competition for higher priced and more discriminating quality inventory. This should be the area ripest for marketplace opportunities and potential profits as a dealer. The decorative arts need a place where valuation and sale are made convenient and available.
Aside from the logistical inefficiencies of the present decorative arts market, in the end it comes down to a confidence that investing money in this form of asset will be safe and productive both aesthetically and financially. The value received from a good period table, chair, or any well designed item should be tangible. Measuring a return on investment like any form of an asset, be it a common stock, real estate, or a set of 18th Century English chairs requires expectations based on a mix of knowledge and emotional decision making. All forms of assets inherently fluctuate in value over time; the decorative arts fit that categorization as much as any and warrant capital as an asset investment too.
The New Economy; Decorative Arts as Investments
August 6th, 2011 by admin
With the latest round of stock market gyrations from the Great Recession aftermath, where can you put your money? With assets measured in stability, the home investment was always considered rock solid. Now, is it US 10 year bonds yielding 2.5%? The idea of investing in decorative art items doesn’t sound like an impossible asset to use as a hedge to all the other options.
It’s a funny thought that I actually don’t like to push decorative art objects as “investments” because I don’t like to speculate as much as know what I’m buying. I can teach someone about an item but if they have a different idea of value, how can I fill the gap. Perhaps this item warrants consideration as an asset with a valuation. Like real estate, whether the same property or one that is similar, the time line seems to change with the price. The stock price of GE is a moving target. But the decorative arts have other measures for value. They don’t only appear on a financial statement and they have a form and physical qualities; what’s that worth?
The present economic environment has cause for any investor to look for a safe haven for their money. We are in a world where diversification is a necessity. The alternatives are US and foreign debt, stocks or gold verses real estate and art. The last two are in their own class because they are very tangible and can be functional and unique. However being of a physical nature, art and real estate lack the medium of an exchange for public trading. And the trading is not as easy as picking up the phone and calling a broker to execute a sale of stock to raise some cash.
As an investment, the safety of any asset is imputed in the price. Holding an investment without any return is better than losing the whole investment. My point is that we have a true asset class of decorative arts that is poised for discovery as a viable and preferable asset that has a consistent return of function and or aesthetics to its owner. While contemporary art has experienced a mammoth speculative and taste trend, traditional forms of art haven’t. The decorative arts, (short of dumbing down to inexpensive vintage 20th Century items), has certainly suffered to a greater degree.
Nostalgia for a time of good value, stability, and pleasure from the investment of your money sounds like a throwback to the Eisenhower era. We should only realize how good it was for most people. While that was a different time with different values, the collecting of fine art and decorative arts was widespread and attracted a wider age group. Even young people had respect for older items and knew some items were “special”. Where did this disconnect happen?
Somehow, my generation lost touch with the thrill of owning objects that now seems mundane compared to “trophy” items like cars, jewelry, technology, and name brand products. Buying at Sotheby’s or Christie’s has some of those characteristics. The decorative arts need a venue to make them appealing and approachable to the luxury market consumer, but not with the rigged auction format. Perhaps buying it at Newel will be that mark of distinction.
Daring to Decorate With the Decorative Arts
July 1st, 2011 by admin
Elle Décor Magazine has been setting the new standard of success in the shelter magazine competition. Their editorial style has attracted a hip and stylish following of readers and the work of designers who accommodate that sensibility. The void of classical furniture and period decorative arts that are pre-1940s is startling. Whatever happened to creative, dramatic interiors embellished with these interesting, functional, and well crafted items?
If you want to understand why today’s decorators feature these stark, white walled and glass residences, go look at an old Architectural Digest from the 1970s. What kind of stodgy, very old fashion rooms were featured? The wall paper (heaven forbid) and boring brown wood furniture would put anyone to sleep. Oh yea, there was some spectacular art on the walls, like today. In looking at the style of living that Billy Baldwin or Eleanor McMillen Brown created, it almost seems like something out of the 19th Century. Minimalism was a fine art form and not a generally accepted style of living.
But to those pioneers of today’s professional interior designer, an understanding and respect for the decorative arts was a priority. Just as collecting and living with these items was a hobby of the rich (Havemeyer, Frick, Hearst, Yves Saint Laurent, etc), the focus of today’s wealthy individuals is centered on trophy art. However, the decorative arts require more sophistication and knowledge than the ease of selecting a Damian Hurst or Renoir. Spending $45,000.00 on a Joan Miró print is easy; buying an 18th Century Italian painted console is a bit more daunting. It shouldn’t have to be this way.
As sure as the sun rises in the East, interior design will reflect the trends and influences of how society evolves. What we think of as the latest and greatest can in no time seem ephemeral. The needs of the affluent set the benchmark for the success of luxury items. Minimalism in the living environment of today’s affluent consumer doesn’t seem like something that should be a permanent standard of living. When it does break out, the followers of post 1940’s designs might feel like how dealers of pre 1940’s decorative arts have been doing for the last 10 years. Connoisseurship, knowledge, and taste aren’t dead yet. The heart beat might be faint, but it can be rejuvenated.
For me to be optimistic about the future of all the decorative styles would require a strong stomach in the present economic environment of my industry. The dealers and auctioneers, who ply this market and still are surviving, struggle with financial hurdles that any good turnover of inventory would solve. Shelter magazines abet the situation with predicable photos of rooms with a view but little or nothing in the room. All things considered, I’d rather look at interesting items than little or nothing at all. It doesn’t seem like a stretch of the imagination to envision an alternative to minimalism.