Prince's trench coat that he wore during the encores at the August 1983 show at First Avenue is up for auction.

More behind the link.

[Edited 10/17/21 11:47am]

I guess the Starfish & Coffee mugs didn't sell

I would've thought she'd hang onto this and treasure it, like Anna Garcia has done with the Pink Cashmere coat. The problem I have is, when she and others like Karen Krattinger do this it goes into private hands, and invariably we never see them again. Wouldn't it make sense to lend it to Paisley Park, or at least give them first dibs?

“Art should make us feel more clearly and more intelligently. It should give us coherent sensations that we otherwise would not have had. But the price of a work of art is now part of its function, its new job is to sit on the wall and get more expensive.

“Instead of being the common property of humankind the way a book is, art becomes the particular property of somebody who can afford it. Suppose that every worthwhile book in the world cost $1 million – imagine what a catastrophic effect on culture that would have.”

- Robert Hughes, Art Critic

rap said:

I would've thought she'd hang onto this and treasure it, like Anna Garcia has done with the Pink Cashmere coat. The problem I have is, when she and others like Karen Krattinger do this it goes into private hands, and invariably we never see them again. Wouldn't it make sense to lend it to Paisley Park, or at least give them first dibs?

I understand your point, but if the estate want them, then they'd have offered a realistic amount beforehand or win an auction on the open market. Anyone selling someting rare needs two things to make money. Firstly, the lack of availablility, secondly, at least two interested parties.

rap said:

I would've thought she'd hang onto this and treasure it, like Anna Garcia has done with the Pink Cashmere coat. The problem I have is, when she and others like Karen Krattinger do this it goes into private hands, and invariably we never see them again. Wouldn't it make sense to lend it to Paisley Park, or at least give them first dibs?

The difference with Anna is that he had that coat made for her. This coat was just something he wore at a concert. (I mean, thank God no one has the underwear.) Susannah inherited it by default or by whatever means.

These folks have every right to do with it what they wish. Just because someone buys it doesn't mean we'll never see it again. When Janet Jackson sold her stuff recently, regular folks bought it, but so did other museums and organizations that highlight memorabilia.

If she needs the money, why shouldn't she sell it?

purplethunder3121 said:

If she needs the money, why shouldn't she sell it?

Exactly! What good is it doing her, in a box or hanging in a closet?

People were angry when Mayte was selling items that she'd had in storage for almost 20 years. Those complainers never understand one (1) would THEY have kept their ex's clothing that long (2) in PAID STORAGE where (3) it's going to deteriorate?

As for "ending up in private hands where we'll never see it again" -- where has it been for the last 35+ years?

laytonian said:

purplethunder3121 said:

If she needs the money, why shouldn't she sell it?

Exactly! What good is it doing her, in a box or hanging in a closet?

People were angry when Mayte was selling items that she'd had in storage for almost 20 years. Those complainers never understand one (1) would THEY have kept their ex's clothing that long (2) in PAID STORAGE where (3) it's going to deteriorate?

As for "ending up in private hands where we'll never see it again" -- where has it been for the last 35+ years?

These items may have great sentimental value to the people who have them but when hard economic times hit, in the end, they are valuable assets that the owners may be forced to sell whether they want to or not.

She prolly needs the money to pay back that IOU she owes (Prince), now the Estate.

I don't know why folks have to get nasty about stuff. It's a fucking jacket, not his ashes.

Susannah, if she owns it, has every right to do with it what she wants. She could burn it for heat and it'd be no one's business.

Does she "need the money?" Well goddamn, don't we all??? Are these people not human beings? Do they not have families and themselves to support? Are they just supposed to hope that those copies of SOTT or The Family albums sell so they get some paltry royalty check to live on? Do you think that's how all former associates live?!

It'd be like blaming Prince for selling his music because he's "just trying to make money." Stupid ass argument.

laytonian said:

purplethunder3121 said:

If she needs the money, why shouldn't she sell it?

Exactly! What good is it doing her, in a box or hanging in a closet?

People were angry when Mayte was selling items that she'd had in storage for almost 20 years. Those complainers never understand one (1) would THEY have kept their ex's clothing that long (2) in PAID STORAGE where (3) it's going to deteriorate?

As for "ending up in private hands where we'll never see it again" -- where has it been for the last 35+ years?

The same place where it will be for another 35+ years, back into private hands.

rap said:

laytonian said:

Exactly! What good is it doing her, in a box or hanging in a closet?

People were angry when Mayte was selling items that she'd had in storage for almost 20 years. Those complainers never understand one (1) would THEY have kept their ex's clothing that long (2) in PAID STORAGE where (3) it's going to deteriorate?

As for "ending up in private hands where we'll never see it again" -- where has it been for the last 35+ years?

The same place where it will be for another 35+ years, back into private hands.

And what has anyone missed from it being in her closet for 38 years? Y'all didn't think once about that damn jacket until now.

Private hands isn't a default. As I stated earlier, often times people buy these things for display otherwise. Other museums, restaurants, entertainment chains, etc. Even Debbie Reynolds bought a lot of old costumes at auction for the purpose of preserving them.

rap said:

“Art should make us feel more clearly and more intelligently. It should give us coherent sensations that we otherwise would not have had. But the price of a work of art is now part of its function, its new job is to sit on the wall and get more expensive.

“Instead of being the common property of humankind the way a book is, art becomes the particular property of somebody who can afford it. Suppose that every worthwhile book in the world cost $1 million – imagine what a catastrophic effect on culture that would have.”

- Robert Hughes, Art Critic

-

This is the way it is and was and always shall be since human kind invented a means of payment.

And before that, goods were protected through power, force, domination, oppression, etc.

Because of some form of wealth, people wil always want to distance and distinguish themselves from others.

Nothing new here.

-

rap said:

I would've thought she'd hang onto this and treasure it, like Anna Garcia has done with the Pink Cashmere coat. The problem I have is, when she and others like Karen Krattinger do this it goes into private hands, and invariably we never see them again. Wouldn't it make sense to lend it to Paisley Park, or at least give them first dibs?

-

If one considders this coat as art, then art has/can become a currency.

Art collectors like to keep or trade their goodies. Often creating a situation to make the price rise.

Simple as that.

Who says Anna Garcia never sold anything concerning Prince ?

She can do it without attaching her name to it. It would not gain more money for that matter, since is she is much more unknow outside our fandom.

In Susannah's case - (she has all the right to sell whatever she likes by the way) - it is smart to attach her name to the piece. She is know as an important girlfriend and protegé in Prince life and early known stardom outside of our small pruple cirlces.

It'll only rightfully raise the value of the piece - (and that is often what art is also about).

Just like quite important art by renown artists bought by David Bowie for instance,

is now worth much more because of this particular reason.

-

The world auction creates ways to rotate (art)objects of value to increase its value through added values ​​such as stories, previous owners, history, etc.

Art thus becomes a means of payment, a means of value, an investment, and above all a means of distancing oneself from others.

-

Vannormal said:

Y'all realize, also, that you can bid on the jacket, right? If you (a private buyer) wants to preserve it or something, buy it.

dualboot said:

Vannormal said:

-

If one considders this coat as art, then art has/can become a currency.

Art collectors like to keep or trade their goodies. Often creating a situation to make the price rise.

Simple as that.

Who says Anna Garcia never sold anything concerning Prince ?

She can do it without attaching her name to it. It would not gain more money for that matter, since is she is much more unknow outside our fandom.

In Susannah's case - (she has all the right to sell whatever she likes by the way) - it is smart to attach her name to the piece. She is know as an important girlfriend and protegé in Prince life and early known stardom outside of our small pruple cirlces.

It'll only rightfully raise the value of the piece - (and that is often what art is also about).

Just like quite important art by renown artists bought by David Bowie for instance,

is now worth much more because of this particular reason.

-

The world auction creates ways to rotate (art)objects of value to increase its value through added values ​​such as stories, previous owners, history, etc.

Art thus becomes a means of payment, a means of value, an investment, and above all a means of distancing oneself from others.

-

It also add providence to the items.

-

(Can be) true!

But not always.

-

dualboot said:

Vannormal said:

-

If one considders this coat as art, then art has/can become a currency.

Art collectors like to keep or trade their goodies. Often creating a situation to make the price rise.

Simple as that.

Who says Anna Garcia never sold anything concerning Prince ?

She can do it without attaching her name to it. It would not gain more money for that matter, since is she is much more unknow outside our fandom.

In Susannah's case - (she has all the right to sell whatever she likes by the way) - it is smart to attach her name to the piece. She is know as an important girlfriend and protegé in Prince life and early known stardom outside of our small pruple cirlces.

It'll only rightfully raise the value of the piece - (and that is often what art is also about).

Just like quite important art by renown artists bought by David Bowie for instance,

is now worth much more because of this particular reason.

-

The world auction creates ways to rotate (art)objects of value to increase its value through added values ​​such as stories, previous owners, history, etc.

Art thus becomes a means of payment, a means of value, an investment, and above all a means of distancing oneself from others.

-

It also add providence to the items.

Uh, provenance...not providence.

purplethunder3121 said:

purplethunder3121 said:

dualboot said:

Vannormal said: It also add providence to the items.

Uh, provenance...not providence.

-

Absolutely !

-