[Rockhounds] Texas collectors MR supplement

[Tim Jokela Jr.]

“In any field of collecting, there is simply no substitute for seeing a lot 
of specimens to broaden one’s knowledge base. "

-Editors, Min.Rec, V40, #1, p3, justifying the Texas Collectors Supplement
--------------------------------------

What exactly can one learn from images of  37 tourmalines, 27 
rhodochrosites, and 24 beryls in one supplement? I'd suggest that seeing yet 
another 10cm aquamarine from Pakistan doesn't teach us much of anything.

A quick & dirty photo count:

rhodochrosite - 27
tourmaline group - 37
beryl - 24
wulfenite - 16
azurite - 8
pyromorphite - 16
(I didn't count fluorite, calcite, gold, topaz, or quartz, they're all 
probably double digits or close to it.)

This is the supplement's failure. It offers little or no broadening of 
knowledge. It's a pointless vanity piece for wealthy collectors to show what 
they've got and to advertise that they're rich. That stuff gets old real 
fast, what a waste of money. There's no shortage of glossy supplements and 
coffee table books showing us common pretty minerals... Min Rec alone has 
produced quite a number of them, eg. Ikons, Freilich, Weill, Masterpieces, 
Houston, Carnegie, Smale, and the Romero collection. (Though the latter at 
least has the merit of being dedicated to the minerals from one region.)

I wouldn't call the Texas supplement a complete failure though. The 
educational pseudomorph sets shown on p.171 are a brilliant idea. Heierman's 
dedication to Al2O3 is remarkable. Mauthner's stuff is more advanced, with 
yummy whiteites and other goodies. The rest is pretty much all the top ten 
pretties, that with very few exceptions meet a certain dollar benchmark, 
from the ever-so-classic top localities, eg. Pederneira, Chamonix, Sweet 
Home, Tsumeb, Elmwood, Hotazel, blah, blah, blah, how boring.

Min Rec can do better! An example would be V.40#1, that came with the Texas 
supplement. Lots of the usual suspects but also some amazing surprises, from 
the rhodonite on the cover to insanely good rarities like vayrynenite, 
valentinite (!!!!!!), rammelsbergite, botallackite, a mind-blowing 
covellite, incredible graphite, senegalite, a wild Michigan shigaite... now 
that's good stuff. Thank heavens for Thomas Moore, he appreciates the less 
flashy but immensely more important stuff. That 4cm valentinite haunts my 
dreams.

Sandra - thanks for your input, it's nice to hear where you're coming from. 
Your accusations of stereotyping are nonsense, and as for "negative 
emotions", well, perhaps I've run out of patience with Min Rec's lust for 
glossy and pointless supplements. Will the next supplement simply show 
shelves with great wads of hundred dollar bills artfully arranged on custom 
lucite bases? The vast majority of mineral collectors will never spend over 
$1,000 on a specimen, yet it is the tiny percentage of wealthy collectors 
that dominate the press. It's a strange world. To be frank, I don't know 
what's more depressing: that your husband is openly hostile to the hobby you 
love, or that you saved for half a year to join the big boys club.

Cheers,

Tim Jokela Jr
tjokela at execulink.com




-----Original Message-----
From: rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com 
[mailto:rockhounds-bounces at lists.drizzle.com] On Behalf Of Sandra B. Gee
Sent: woensdag 4 februari 2009 18:20
To: Rockhounds at drizzle.com: A mailing list for rock and gem collectors
Subject: Re: [Rockhounds] Texas collectors MR supplement

It is helpful that Wendell gets an idea of what subscribers to Mineralogical 
Record want to see covered in future issues.  It is an interesting idea 
about having a pictorial essay on the best self collected specimens or the 
best rarest speices collection.  In the same way, I think that is how Min 
Rec came up with the Texas Collectors Supplement.
According to the Notes From The Editor in the Jan/Feb 2009 issue, it was 
input from some of the mineral societies in Texas that got the idea for the 
Texas Collectors Supplement started.
A reason for the supplement directly from the Notes From The Editor,
“In any field of collecting, there is simply no substitute for seeing a lot 
of specimens to broaden one’s knowledge base.  A book like this is the 
equivalent of a series of non-competitve displays, the next best thing to 
visiting each of the private collectors and seeing some of their favorite 
specimens in person.”
I am one of the collectors featured in the Texas Collectors Supplement.
Of the 29 collectors, there is
---a CPA (Gus Eifler),
---a physician (myself),
---a math professor (Will Heierman),
---a psychologist (Jim Houran),
---a school administrator (Shelly Houran),
---a museum curator (Mark Mauthner),
---a sixth grade science teacher (Jeff Starr) and
---an attorney (Rob Thacker).
Although the overwhelming majority of the collectors are in the oil and gas 
business, not all of us in the supplement can be described as “the idle rich 
of Texas”.   I first heard ideas about this supplement being batted around 
Spring of 2008.   Maybe I look like the idle rich because I spent the latter 
half of last year saving up money to help fund my share of the supplement.
I have a spouse who has been openly hostile to my mineral collecting. 
Realistically, I won’t have the opportunity to have a lot of other mineral 
collectors coming by to see my small modest collection.  Since I am a visual 
learner, I do benefit from seeing other collectors’ collections to learn 
what constitutes a fine mineral specimen.  In this process, I’ve also gotten 
a better idea of what I do and don’t want to collect.
It is unfortunate that there has been some stereotyping and negative 
emotions evoked from the supplement.  It would be my guess that to have a 
supplement focusing on the  best self collected specimens or the best rarest 
speices collection would create a similar response.  After all, how do you 
choose the criteria for best rarest specimen or best self collected specimen 
collection?
The reason I am on this list is that I do enjoy collecting minerals.  I 
choose to read the opinions of others that I don’t agree with and still 
remain with a group that has been very helpful for me in pursing my interest 
in minerals.
Sandra Burkhead Gee, M.D.



> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tim Jokela Jr."
> <tjokela at execulink.com>
> To: "Rockhounds at drizzle.com: A mailing list for rock
> and gem collectors"
> <rockhounds at lists.drizzle.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 11:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [Rockhounds] Texas collectors MR supplement
>
>
> > Well I'll be damned, I'm not the only one!
> >
> > I suspect it's completely funded by the wealthy
> Texas collectors
> > themselves, so not much point complaining to WW.
> >
> > If MR did put funds or time into it... oy. Who needs
> more mindless rock
> > porn? Somebody add up the beryl, rhodo, and tourmaline
> photos, how boring,
> > same old stuff. Perhaps two specimens in there of
> interest to the real
> > collector. I'd far rather have a full-color
> supplement on what's new from
> > Mont Saint-Hilaire, or Laurium, or Kola.
> >
> > NEWSFLASH TO MIN REC: if you've seen one 10k
> Pakistani aqua, you've seen
> > them all.
> >
> > While it's lovely to know what the idle rich of
> Texas are up to, a vanity
> > mag is of no use to me whatsoever, and will be in my
> club's next auction.
> >
> > Why MR is going down this path, I do not know. One
> suspects the editor is
> > getting far too cozy with his arrogant millionaire
> buddies.
> >
> > Tim Jokela Jr
> > tjokela at execulink.com
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Alan Goldstein"
> <deepskyspy at insightbb.com>
> > To: "Rockhounds List"
> <rockhounds at lists.drizzle.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 4:07 PM
> > Subject: [Rockhounds] Texas collectors MR supplement
> >
> >
> > I would like to hear comments from the list regarding
> the free Texas
> > mineral collectors freebie included with the current
> issue of
> > Mineralogical Record. It contains some pretty photos
> (a lot of Sweet Home
> > rhodochrosites and tourmaline crystals) along with a
> two paragraph bio
> > from each of the 29 collectors (or couples). There are
> some nice fluorite
> > specimens (one of my favorite species) scattered among
> them.
> >
> > While I like a bunch of pretty pictures as much as the
> next collector, I
> > would rather see those folks with deep pockets fund
> something more
> > educational or historically significant. How about a
> supplement of the
> > best self-collected specimens and the stories behind
> their discovery?
> >
> > Alan G.
> >