Groups?

[medals73]

Once groups are broken, history is destroyed. So sad that some take such a glib attitude toward such desecration of history.

[EricFG]

To what post do you refer to, Sir? If it is mine I will assure you that recently, in my attempt to aquire the items that currently interest me, I declined a "name your price" offer for a group of documents of which only one item was of interst to me solely for the fact that I would not want to break up any sort of "group". "Glib" forsooth. :thumbsdown

[Nack]

Eh, I've only got a couple ODM groups, and nothing like what our naval friend used to have piled up. I wouldn't break them apart, but I'm not going to research them either -- seems a bit expensive, and thus a hinderance to my collecting. I don't think complete groups should be broken, but if something is missing already, the "crime" seems less severe...

[Norm Braddock]

The fact of the matter is that some hero went through hell to win those awards. It is an insult to his/her memory to break up their groupings for the sake of profit. Shame, shame, shame to do so!

[Lapa]

Nack,

...I don't think complete groups should be broken, but if something is missing already, the "crime" seems less severe...

I don't think that it is a matter of severity, but a case of the crime having already been committed, unfortunately.

Norm,

The fact of the matter is that some hero went through hell to win those awards. It is an insult to his/her memory to break up their groupings for the sake of profit. Shame, shame, shame to do so!

No argument about people having gone through hell here. Most of the groups were, and are still today, being broken up by sellers in the former Soviet Union. The concept of "group completeness", or even of a "group" never really registered on any scale here. Sad, but that is a fact.

I own ONE specific award to a HSU (and let me tell you this, it is one MAJOR award ). That is all that I was offered. What was I supposed to do according to current "political correctness"? Was I supposed to say "Sorry but this is only one piece, forget about it, I won't take it"? Well, as much as I understand the interest of keeping original things together, I sure did not pass on that one - hint: 469 were ever awarded - if I did, someone else would have bought it in the blink of an eye. And for argument sake, I do know who the recipient was, I do know what other OMDs that person received, I even know where he is buried (I've been there). Not too much history lost in this case, it seems.

Now, let me open up a can of worms here What the hell is "a complete group"? Is it strictly what research from the archives uncovered, eg government awards? Or is it more? And if so, how much more? For example, in the former SU, various diplomas and badges were awarded to recognize various levels of achievement. So, where do we draw the line? Sounds like we are running after the end of the rainbow here...

Marc

[Nack]

Nack,

I don't think that it is a matter of severity, but a case of the crime having already been committed, unfortunately.

So true.

And, yes, what is a "complete" group?

Ultimately, on this issue people will fall on one side of the coin or the other. We'll all just have to get along

[Eryk]

If I’m buying then it’s not a complete group unless it has all awards and documents the recipient ever received, including (but of course not limited to!) grade reports going back to elementary school, family ration cards, transportation passes, etc.

If I ever sell then a photocopy of the cover of one of his unnumbered medal docs make a complete group. (Without any other proof that it was actually his medal of course!)

(I’m joking!)

Point is that “complete” is not, and never will be, an agreed upon term.

Personally I look for award books (a minefield in their own right) and at least one numbered award that’s listed there. That’s a group – though obviously not necessarily “complete.” That allows research to be done more easily. One can (usually) compare signatures with any research returned, making fraud less likely (or at least more easily spotted). It indicates that at least two distinct artifacts that were historically together are still together, i.e., “grouped.”

But that’s just personal preference, and IMO a minority preference. Most people who collect things collect just that – things. Any story associated with it is secondary if considered at all.

[Norm Braddock]

I have very likely contributed to this desecration by purchasing the singles that I own. It is very likely that these were once part of larger groups.

I can't go back in time and remediate what was done. I look at it that now that this has happened, at least I can give the item a good home with the respect that it deserves.

Having said this, I would NEVER purchase a group then hack it into pieces to sell individually. Do as you pls out there-I couldnt give a damn. I have a conscience and will respect the heros behind the awards.

What stinks also is those who decide to make groupings out of items from several heros and then pass them off as having been awarded to one person.:thumbsdown

Marc, it would be real kind and considerate if you would give me that award.:thumbsup Seriously, it would be cool to see a pic of it.