To clean or not clean...

[harribobs]

brake fluid?

should i dilute it or use it straight through the power washer?

[Derek Robertson]

brake fluid?

Especially useful where paint has came into contact with metal. Honest!

[Guest Ian Bowbrick]

brake fluid?

Especially useful where paint has came into contact with metal. Honest!

Useful for when someone has painted a Memorial plaque albeit as a youngster

[Terry]

Archer,

In my part of Canada, the name used by First Nations people to describe each other is, you guessed it, Indians!

Perhaps it is one of those little things where it is OK for a person of that group to use the term but not an outsider. Like the magic "N" word is the USA, which can only be used by rappers.

[Archer]

Or, qu**r, which we may use if we are, but not if we aren't.

But actually political correctness is considerate and has good intentions and is helping people to enter the mainstream from the margins. So I like to try.

I was taught firmly as a tourist in Ottawa in 1997 to refer only to First Nations.

Anyway Pop's old gongs made fine stage props. He may have been a bit taken aback (from his cloud up above) - but it was better treatment than that administered by his batman in Tanganyika, who seems to have used sand and lemon juice on them. His Victory Medal is only F condition.

When we were lads we used brasso on our new acquisitions. Not so much any more, mind you. We're all too politically correct now.

William

[J T Gray]

So what would others do with my grandfather's medals? He cut a lump out of each ribbon to go on his Home Guard uniform, then "repaired" them with brass split-pin type paper clip through each one! (If you search for my old posts I did post a picture, but I don't have a copy to hand any more or I'd put it up again).

I know what I am doing with them - just interested to hear what others would do...

Adrian

[J T Gray]

Managed to retrieve the piccy from that post... Here they are - wrong order, I know, but I posted the picture originally to ask what the right order was!

Adrian

[Terry]

Today I received in the mail a pair to the Canadian Siberian Expeditionary Force, and when I looked at them I immediately thought of this thread.

They obviously had not been handled, at least by a collector, in many years. The ribbons were reversed (ie. victory ribbon on war medal and vice versa); the ribbon was not far from rotting away; and the war medal was black - the darkest I have run across in many a year!

Now - too clean or not to clean, that is the question!

[David_Bluestein]

    Now - too clean or not to clean, that is the question!

My vote is always NO!

There was a time I used to clean my medals, and found much to my horror that they all looked exactly the same. I still regret washing away years of character, and will never clean any medal in my possesion. (And that goes for ribbon too!).

The medals in my collection are steeped in generations of character and history, and it is clearly evident in their appearance.

For example, I have a lovely 1914-15 Trio to a 5th BN. CEF man who survived the war and proudly wore his trio for generations to come, until his death in 1980. The medals are as original as the day he mounted them in the early 1920’s. Swapped ribon and all!

There is NO way I would ever tamper with them. I will keep them exactly the same as he had them.

[Trevelyan]

In my opinion, in purely aesthetic terms leaving arguments aside, the medals pictured on the left (un-cleaned) are considerably more attractive. The medals on the right, although still nice, are definitely more generic and sterile in appearance.

Although I am one to clean medals if they are dirty, filthy or otherwise in a very poor state, anything short of this I leave alone. I have to say that I don't really buy the 'parade' argument, as we are not the recipients, and should not treat them as if they were awarded to us personally.

I do believe that the state in which they are found says a great deal about them. For example, groups that are without doubt 'mounted as worn' - i.e. mounted, cared for, worn and polished by the recipient says a good deal about the recipient. It may speak to his further service, or his opinion of his past service if a civilian. Someone who decides to take apart such a group to clean and court mount it because that is their fancy, is actually destroying a part of history - part of the story of the medals and the man. Likewise, if a group has never ever been worn (box of issue, mint etc...) this tells a different story about the medals history and the recipient, and mounting them, cleaning them, toying with them etc is likewise destroying a part of history.

I just cringe thinking that I may buy a nice group that has since been cleaned up, when only a few years back, I could have had it exactly as Major 'X' had worn it while on parade at say Rawalpindi some seventy odd years ago.

I am lucky enough to have been awarded a medal myself, and I know that I treat it differently (because its 'mine') than those in my collection. If I ever wear it, I know that I will keep it clean, sharp etc., and can do with it as I please. With those in my collection, my first objective is to maintain history, with my second being my own pleasure to do as I will. But that's just my opinion, and its not a huge issue for me.

Regards,

Chris

[Archer]

As the retailer of the 'idle medals on parade' argument and one of the very few proponents of cleaning to have a chew on this old sausage, let me say a few more words:

Firstly, electronic postings often fail to reflect accurately the author's tone of voice. But, that said, I am taken aback by the dogmatic assertiveness of some of these postings - not necessarily yours, Chris - I'm speaking in general terms.

What seems often to be lacking is an understanding of the difference between descendants and collectors. Adrian knows what his grandfather did to his medal ribbons, and he leaves the ribbons as they are, because the change wrought by his grandfather adds to his knowledge of, and love for his grandfather.

If, God forbid, those medals one day came into the market, the defacement of the ribbons would be inexplicable to the collector who did not know the story, and leaving them in that state would (to me at any rate) make little sense because the motive of the recipient would be unknown and unknowable - in the absence of Adrian's story, leaving the ribbons in that state would add nothing explicable to the historical record.

But take it one step further. What seems often also to be lacking is a realisation that human history is full of strange twists and turns. Without photographic evidence or familial anecdote, Chris, you would never know exactly how Major 'X' had worn his medals while on parade at say Rawalpindi some seventy odd years ago.

Let me spin a tale loosely based on fact: Major X retired to Lamu on the east coast of Africa far away from England, and there found himself a young man who looked after his needs. He used to say to his boy that his medals were 'valuable' (a 1914-15 star trio and IGSM, bar Afghanistan NWF 1919.) One day the boy, tired of Major X, upped and killed him and stole the 'valuable' medals.

They reached the market twenty years later on tattered filthy ribbons, the silver medals covered in a dark patina, the bronze ones showing some signs of weathering. To leave them uncleaned would be to betray everything the awful old Major had believed about them. He, at least, did not leave them in their packets of issue or go on parade with idle medals. But the point is this - no one knows anything about this group's antecedents, and to leave them as they are "'cos that's how the recipient left them" would be the height of absurdity and poor historical scholarship.

This sausage is best chewed with a pinch of salt - and is not worth digging one's heels in over!

William

[Trevelyan]

William,

A few quick points...

- Some of my comments may have sounded terse, but that was not the intent - as a show of good will, I will insert a happy face here ! Seriously, its just argument for arguments sake, and I don't want to sound offended or angry.

- Now that that's covered...

- I think it would be fair to say that 'dogmatic assertiveness', if at work, is clearly on both sides of this issue.

- As I mentioned (and speaking for myself only of course), if I come across medals that are filthy, dirty, tattered etc...or in other words, were poorly cared for, then no doubt, make them presentable. There is however a huge gap between wretched condition, and as sparkingly clean as any modern replica. In the initial photo that began this thread, the original photos were clearly in good shape, just showing their age a bit, so I wouldn't clean them up to get that coveted generic look (not to pick on DCLI! To each his own).

- True, you can not tell if something is really 'mounted as worn', but when a group is custom swing mounted with a nice cushy little pin mounting and so on, all with aged ribbons and fabric (and musty smell!), there is a pretty good chance that it was not put together by a collector or a murdering thief, though I grant I cannot prove this - its just which option is most plausible. Also, I don't believe Major X would mention that his medals were worth much, as twenty years ago, WWI campaign medals were, well, just not worth much at all - but that's another story!

- I suppose my point is that unless a group is found neglected and in a very poor state, one is more likely to lose more by cleaning and (re-)mounting them than by leaving them alone. But who ever listened to me!

Regards,

Chris

[Archer]

Which just proves my point about electronic postings!

I wasn't having a go at you, Chris - and apologise that you understood me to be doing so!

Ah well - it seems the sausage is too big for us to chew alone.

But who's consistent?

- I clean most medals

- attempt to 'mount for display' whenever I can

- won't usually buy groups when I can't get clean ribbon for them ... and then

- leave some groups putatively "mounted as worn" when the mounting seems to say something about the authenticity of the group ... particularly where common medals are missing which a forger would not have been able to resist slipping in.

William

p.s. I'm listening, Chris!

[Terry]

I finally got a chance to scan that CSEF pair I mentioned earlier. Old ribbon, stitched together and rotting; little safety pins on each medal; ribbons reversed; and the war medal toned black.

[David_Bluestein]

Terry,

Beautiful!

David

[nshighlander]

Great stuff Terry.I`m looking for a pair also.One day.

Cheers

Dave

[N.S.Regt.]

Terry

Great toning on the war medal just the way I like them unmessed with.

Best regards

N.S.Regt.

[ramc195]

This is a sticky area between many of me fellow medal collectors, I clean and mount them to ther former glory but i can see the argument agains doing this.

If you had been a soilder on parade in the 1920s you would of cleaned you medals so that they were spotless as your uniform would be spotless as well

As for mounting them get a peice of card 98mm tall and cut a peice of ribbon about apx 110- 120 mm in length this will then cover the card and leave a bit for you to cover the top and bottom of the card.

Then mount your medal on anouther length of ribbon wich is longer than the height of the board and the medal once this is done then glue the back of the ribbon down then fold the front peice of the ribbon up so that the base of the medal sits just above the base of the card .

I have found that the best glue to use is copydex but becarefull not to apply to much glue outher wise you will get bleed through. The total length of medal ribbon you need to do the whole job is 9 inches.

If any body wants i will mount them for them at the cost of the materials and a £10.00 (for groups of 4 or more and £2.50 per single medals )

if you want a quote please e-mail me RAMC195@AOL.COM

any further questions please ask

[Guest shenkursk]

I must agree with David for several reasons beyond mere personal preference (I find years of patina aesthetically pleasing) -

- When studying museum science (before I became an unemployable military collectables dealer), the standard was drilled into us: Don't do anything to an artifact that cannot be easily reversed. Once the original ribbons are gone, they are gone forever. The next person to own the medals may not hold the same views about restoration.

- Speaking strictly as a capitalist, a 'restored' medal has a much more limited market than one left alone. The European market and US market often differ on these standards, but here in the USA a medal that has been re-ribboned is a much slower sale. We recently had a WWI USMC Distinguished Service Cross awarded to a Marine for action at Belleau Wood. Everyone who asked about it decided against it when I told them that I thought that it had been re-ribboned.

There has to be a happy middle ground, however. As mentioned previously in the thread, when a medal is so covered with grime (as opposed to lovely patina) that you cannot even read the soldier's name and unit on the rim... then it seems as though something must be done.

You just have to be careful not to end up with Abe Lincoln's Axe. (Preserved lovingly by his family - the handle broke back in 1870, so they replaced it, then a young cousin chipped the edge by chopping into rocky soil instead of a block, so they got a new head for it in 1880, but there it is - Abe Lincoln's axe.)

[Archer]

... [H]ere in the USA a medal that has been re-ribboned is a much slower sale. We recently had a WWI USMC Distinguished Service Cross awarded to a Marine for action at Belleau Wood. Everyone who asked about it decided against it when I told them that I thought that it had been re-ribboned.

I love Americans!

Years ago a dealer I know sold a medal to an American collector. The original ribbon was missing or tatty, so he sent the medal to the purchaser suspended from a length of new ribbon.

Back came the medal, with a note from the upset collector, to the effect that he did not collect re-ribboned medals.

The dealer went out onto the pavement in front of his premises and rubbed the clean ribbon vigourously against the curb stone, front and back.

Now dirty and worn, the ribbon was put back on the medal, and again despatched to the United States, where it was happily received and accepted by the collector.

William

[Guest shenkursk]

I'll have to remember that one - a great tale! (and no doubt true.) Maybe it is not too late for my Marine DSC after all.

It is really interesting to see the variation in what people collect and how they view history. Some customers want only relics with lots of age and patina, others would not think of accepting an item unless it looks as though it was brand new, right out of the crate.

The fetishes I simply never will understand are the guys who want all of their field equipment on any one particular mannequin to be from the same exact maker and date (though the chances of that happening at the Quartermaster in any army, any war are slight at best!) Uniforms that contain several different shades of color in the cloth are also guaranteed to make some heads explode... but as long as everyone is happy with their own collection the way they see it, that is what matters most, I suppose.

Sometimes it seems like we are not interested in studying, understanding, and collecting history, but instead are on a quest to bend history to fit our own personal vision of it.

[Archer]

True, very true!

[robbie]

I never before heard of a child playing a game called 'Cowboys and Native Americans'.

Yes, William very PC of you.

What a sight this must have been - bows, arrows, cap guns (or water pistols) and a set of GW medals thrown in for luck!

Robbie

[Archer]

Touche, Robbie, touche!!