Thread: Escher/Thurry questions

Absolutely, but it's really six of one, half dozen of the other. Talent comes via practice for most, if not all, of us I think.

Originally Posted by Gamma

Absolutely, but it's really six of one, half dozen of the other. Talent comes via practice for most, if not all, of us I think.

And I can add, being used to use your hands and fingers sure helps, I'm sure my 27 years of playing guitar quite actively helps a lot, at least it gave me a head start for fine motor skills and feel.

Originally Posted by Gamma

my y/g (no label thuri, but probably an Escher)

No label, yet 'probably' an Escher. Really? Please elaborate. The conjecture seems baseless and, moreover, adding it is out of tune with the gist of what you write (and with which I heartily agree).

Originally Posted by zib

if it's Escher, it's good.

Yes. The point is, if the vintage Thuringian is not Escher, it's mostly just as good.

Originally Posted by Oldengaerde

No label, yet 'probably' an Escher. Really? Please elaborate. The conjecture seems baseless and, moreover, adding it is out of tune with the gist of what you write (and with which I heartily agree).

Generally speaking, I try to ask a few questions before I toss words like conjecture and baseless around in the same sentence.
But - that's just me.

The 'probably' comment is based on my belief that when I bought it, the seller wasn't fibbing. Given the scenario and the price - there really is no reason to not believe him (no pressure, low cost).
I honestly don't care what it's heritage is to be honest. All I had to do was touch it for a few seconds and I was good to go.
I say 'probably' because I can not say with authority that it is without a doubt an Escher unless there's a label stuck to the stone.

Originally Posted by Gamma

Throwing money at a problem never guaranteed a solution...

If we had more people in Washington DC with that philosophy we'd be way better off.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

If we had more people in Washington DC with that philosophy we'd be way better off.

Amen, Jimmy!

Originally Posted by Gamma

Generally speaking, I try to ask a few questions before I toss words like conjecture and baseless around in the same sentence. But - that's just me.

Why is it that members can make the rashest of claims, yet those who question them need to tiptoe? And can after writing that hardly get away without adding disclaimers as "not that I mean to say that Gamma's claim is amongst the rashest, nor do I doubt his motifs or good faith" just to make sure no feelings are hurt? Come on, we're grown-ups and we should be able to discuss our hobby openly and critically. We're hitting balls, and we're hitting them hard. But it's the balls we hit, not the players.

Back to the matter at hand:

Originally Posted by Gamma

The 'probably' comment is based on my belief that when I bought it, the seller wasn't fibbing. Given the scenario and the price - there really is no reason to not believe him (no pressure, low cost).
I honestly don't care what it's heritage is to be honest. All I had to do was touch it for a few seconds and I was good to go. I say 'probably' because I can not say with authority that it is without a doubt an Escher unless there's a label stuck to the stone.

So if I understand correctly, the 'probably an Escher' claim is based on good faith in what a seller told you. Then I maintain: the conjecture seems baseless. After all, on what grounds could a seller possibly base that claim if there is no Escher label? Had he had anything to substantiate the claim, wouldn't he have done so? And since when is 'low cost' circumstantial evidence of Escher provenance?

We just cannot and should not declare "Escher!" on the basis of hear-say, claims by anonymous third parties and the like. It is not enough that they're good people. It's about what their claim's based on. And it's not enough to add disclaimers as 'not 100% sure', 'probably' or even 'possibly' - no base is no base. If we have no objective proof we shouldn't state it at all.

And again, as long as the interest is in honing rather than collecting, there's absolutely no need for preoccupation with Escher labels. The whole point is that non-Escher vintage Thuringians — be they originally unlabelled, Escher-labelled or labelled by any other brand — are no worse than Eschers. That's what I read in your post too, and what I liked about it. It is as you emphasized here:

Originally Posted by Gamma

I honestly don't care what it's heritage is to be honest. All I had to do was touch it for a few seconds and I was good to go.

You have a prime vintage Thuringian that works like a charm. That's all that counts. We can't call it an Escher, and we don't care.

Lets keep it cool guys. We're all members and they are still just rocks.

You"re using the term conjecture incorrectly. There is no hypothesis or inference here.
This claim - that I believe to be true - is not conjecture, nor is it baseless.
Your opinion may differ, but that's irrelevant. Demanding that I need to explain something so insignificat to the nth degree is a tired old tactic and I won't be baited into a defensive position so easily.
As cleverly stated - they're just rocks.








The seller bought it with a label, before the Internet or netheekery existed.

Originally Posted by Gamma

... The seller bought it with a label, before the Internet or netheekery existed.

Okay, I broke Google trying find the meaning of "netheekery". Please explain.