For people who love to collect things, including but not limited to Pokémon things, the greatest threat to their collections may not be things that expand them, but the people who have their eyes on the things that make up the collections. If those people really have their heart set on them, and the collectors consent to bequeath (give) their things to them, then there is no problem. The problem comes when they are forced to transfer their things without consent - in other words, have them be taken away by those other people. It's a difficult matter for me to discuss, but it has become relevant and therefore necessary to do so.
Ultimately, this matter comes down to ethics. One simply does not remove things from rightful possessors - here, items from collectors - without their consent and for whatever reason, noble or malicious (heaven forbid). At best - and that's an understatement - it is simply and plainly rude; a friend and I arrived at this conclusion while discussing the matter. At worst, it is tantamount to theft, and everyone knows what to do in case of theft. It also doesn't help if there is a background "what's yours is mine, what's mine is yours" mentality, and the people of concern take this mentality too far and forget ethics along the way.
A different friend of mine had been involved in this situation, though it did not involve Pokémon things, but instead things that are related to certain "robots"; I won't say what they are - most Japanese pop culture fans should recognize them. In this case, my friend lost a few things due to relatives underestimating their prices and forcefully transferring them to another. That is a serious breach of trust, and should already be grounds for excommunication; not to mention, there is a certain invoked rudeness, which was part of the discussion with that other friend that led to that specific conclusion. The situation has passed, but it is certain that the pain lingers.
The main reason why I brought up this topic is that the situation has in fact happened to a friend with Pokémon things. In fact, it so happens to involve a Vulpix doll, which suffered more or less the same fate, though without the price aspect. It was for this reason that the friend chose me for the safekeeping of a recently purchased Squirtle doll, as well as what prompted me to purchase a Vulpix doll as a "replacement" - the same exact dolls that I exhibited just yesterday. It is apparent that the two circumstances above show that the situation can and does occur, regardless of fandom and even with similar circumstances.
Provided the reasons for legitimacy, a collector has the right to assert ownership over the things that one collects, and then shift that ownership by consent and amicably to another person if so desired. Breach this protocol, and it becomes ethically wrong, not to mention potentially criminal. This is something all collectors and friends of (or those who connect with) collectors should be aware of, whether they collect Pokémon things or other things. The threat seems to be always present in any case and in some form, and it is definitely something to be averted as collections inevitably grow ever larger.
One year ago: Keeping Pokémon Cities Weird
Two years ago: Starting with the End in Mind
Three years ago: October (on the) Road
Four years ago: The Moves Pokémon Know and Use
Five years ago: Second Remakes?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Hi folks! Feel free to comment, but know that I'll be selecting only the most appropriate and relevant comments to appear. Think before you post.