buy real cialis online
Call by Arnetts for End to Allegations Harmful to the Quilters of Gee’s Bend

buy real cialis online – Mark Twain

One of three quilts belonging to Lucinda Pettway.
All photo edits by Patricia Cummings

buy real cialis online – (Wednesday, June 27, 2007) – Gregory H. Hawley, of White, Arnold, Andrews, & Dowd P.C. of Birmingham, and Gary L. Coulter of Coulter & Associates of Athens, Georgia, co-counsel to William Arnett, Paul Arnett and Matt Arnett, art collectors and promoters of the Quilts of Gee’s Bend, held a press conference today (June 27, 2007) to set the record straight on recent allegations concerning the Quilts of Gee’s Bend.

During the press conference, which took place at 1:00 p.m. at the main conference room of the Birmingham Bar Association, 2021 2nd Avenue North, Birmingham, Alabama, Mr. Coulter and Mr. Hawley discussed the most recent lawsuit and the quilt at issue in that lawsuit, which were on display.
We called this conference to set the record straight about three quilts that are at issue in a lawsuit filed last Thursday (June 21, 2007) and that were the subject of a recent story in the Mobile newspaper. Plaintiff’s lawsuit makes some remarkable claims. First, the plaintiff claims that the quilts were made by her great-grandmother, a quilter in Gee’s Bend. Second, she claims that two of the quilts are more than 100 years old. Third, she claims that the quilts are “priceless,” stated attorneys Coulter and Hawley.

Lucinda Pettway’s “Economy Quilt” valued at $100 – $250 by Julie Silber and dated 1950-1960. Called “Diamond in a Square” by Holly Anderson, and dated circa 1965.

Ten years ago, the Quilts of Gee’s Bend were a local craft that was unrecognized and largely unknown outside the Black Belt of Alabama. The story of Bill Arnett’s recognition of this local craft as significant art is well known. Through his efforts and the efforts of his son, Matt Arnett, these quilts have toured the nation and appeared in dozens of museums that have validated this as an important art form. Now that these quilts are well known – and some possess great value – it is important to protect the integrity of Gee’s Bend Quilts. To misrepresent the age of a Gee’s Bend Quilt, or the creator of a Gee’s Bend Quilt, is just as reprehensible as promoting a counterfeit as an original Picasso. Some of these allegations in these lawsuits undermine the good name and goodwill of the Quilts of Gee’s Bend, to the detriment of the quilt makers who earn a living through this art.

As Bill Arnett has said, buy real cialis online

Background

In early summer 2004, there were discussions regarding an exhibition and book about the legacy of Dinah Miller, a former Gee’s Bend resident, who, according to family history, came to Alabama from West Africa around 1859. Arlonzia Pettway, Dinah Miller’s great-granddaughter and one of the quilters of Gee’s Bend, asked Matt Arnett to accompany her to Mobile and Pritchard to visit some of her relatives who might have information to share. She also wanted Matt to look at quilts made by her relatives.

Arlonzia Pettway, Mary McCarthy, and Matt Arnett traveled to Mobile, and visited the home of Arlonzia’s sister, Lucastle Pettway. After looking at some quilt tops that she had made and meeting several other family members, the group traveled to the home of Lucastle’s daughter, Lucinda Pettway Franklin, who is the plaintiff in this lawsuit. Ms. Franklin showed the group several quilts, including one she claimed was made by her mother and two others that she claimed were made by her great-grandmother, Sally Miller. Matt Arnett inquired as to how she knew the origin of the two older quilts, and Ms. Franklin claimed an uncle had given her that information.

Although he believed the quilts to be from a time period after Ms. Miller’s death (July 11, 1943 – death certificate available upon request), Matt Arnett photographed the quilts and then he and Arlonzia asked if he could take the quilts to Atlanta for further study and to obtain conservation information. Ms. Franklin agreed to loan these quilts to Matt Arnett, and he took the quilts back with him to Atlanta, and they have been in his possession until today.

Upon returning to Atlanta, Matt Arnett compared the quilts with other quilts and determined that they were made in the 1950s or the early 1960s. Matt Arnett acknowledged that buy real cialis online

He had the quilts verified by experts in the field, who also concluded that the quilts were made in the 1950s or 1960s. Matt Arnett was uncomfortable returning the quilts through the mail, and he expressed this concern to Ms. Franklin, as well as his desire to deliver the quilts to her in person. On several occasions, Ms. Franklin told Matt Arnett she was in no rush for the return of the quilts and that all she asked was that he care for them and keep them safe, which he has done.

Based on his consultation with various experts, Matt Arnett knew that the quilts’ origins were not as Ms. Franklin believed them to be. Although Matt Arnett had attempted to convey this to Ms. Franklin several times over the telephone, his attempts had been without success. In April 2007, Matt Arnett and Ms. Franklin had an e-mail dialogue related to scheduling the return of the quilts. Unfortunately, last Thursday, on the same day Matt Arnett e-mailed Ms. Franklin to arrange a weekend meeting to return the quilts, Ms. Franklin filed her lawsuit.

As Matt Arnett stated, buy real cialis online

“Pinwheel (variant)” quilt appraised at current market value for $250 – $450, by Julie Silber, certified quilt appraiser. Date: 1950-1960. Holly Anderson dated the same quilt, circa 1965.

The quilts presented at the press conference today are the three quilts that were given to Matt Arnett by Lucinda Pettway Franklin at her home. One of them is clearly of recent vintage, but two are older. These are the two that Ms. Franklin was interested in having Mr. Arnett investigate and authenticate the date of creation.

The quilts depicted in the photographs were taken at the time that Ms. Franklin lent these quilts to Mr. Arnett. Ms. McCarthy (who was present at the press conference today) has verified that these are the three quilts that they collected from the plaintiff.

We have had these quilts appraised by certified appraisers from Georgia and California. The Georgia appraiser, Holly Anderson, appraised the two older quilts as created in 1965. Julie Silber, an appraiser in Albion, California, dated one of the quilts as made between 1950 and 1960, with a value of $250 – $450. Ms. Silber appraised the second quilt as made between 1950 and 1960, and valued at $100 to $250. (Copies of these appraisals are available upon request.)

According to these evaluations, these quilts clearly cannot be 100 years old. Moreover, because these quilts were estimated to have been created in the 1950s or 1960s – and contain fabrics made in the 1950s – it is impossible to believe that they were made by Ms. Franklin’s grandmother, who died in 1943.

Finally, these experts in the field of fabric and quilts indicate that these quilts are worth, at most several hundred dollars. They are not “priceless” as plaintiff claims, or worth “$100,000,” as was reported in one newspaper story.

Because Ms. Franklin’s claims may have the effect of undermining the integrity and goodwill of Gee’s Bend Quilts, a motion was filed today by the Arnetts’ attorneys for the federal court to appoint its own expert in the field of quilts and fabrics so that these sensational allegations can stop before further damage is done.

When public confidence in the integrity of this art is undermined, the ultimate losers are the women of Gee’s Bend who create these quilts. When the integrity is called into question, art galleries are less likely to represent the women and their quilts. Art museums are less inclined to promote tours of the quilts. Ultimately, the value of these art forms could decline and the demand for them will diminish. This is to the detriment of everyone involved with Gee’s Bend Quilts.

###

Press Release sent to Quilter’s Muse Publications:
by Dindy Yokel,
(305) 632-4455,

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 28th, 2007 at 12:18 am and is filed under , . You can follow any responses to this entry through the feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.