[wwf_stamp]

Nguyên văn bởi wwf_stamp

Tôi vừa chat trên Facebook và có được bài viết phản hồi của anh Tạ Phi Long về thông tin cho rằng sách của anh khuyến khích cho những vật phẩm bưu chính giả. Nay đăng lên để cho các bác cùng tham khảo và góp ý.

Some of my friends alerted me to the negative comments about my book from a Vietnamese collector in the USA: First of all, I don’t care much about this matter as through the article, the critic just raised all of his concerns and doubts on the authenticity of some postal materials; This habit is commonly found in a collector who doesn’t understand much about Postal History, and who has also never owned the same type of Postal items in his collection. I kept silent and did not want to communicate due to several reasons:
1/ I can feel the criticisms in the words in the article. Readers of my book can see my email address together with my note: “any constructive ideas are always welcome” in the Preface on page 10- 11, so people can easily see the motivation of the critic by the way he posted his comments on a forum instead of sending an email to communicate with me (You can see the full version of the comments at this link:
http://www.vietstamp.net/forum/showt...t=11143&page=2.
And also the criticism that my book promoted for faked items at:
http://www.vietstamp.net/forum/showt...?t=9428&page=4).
2/The article itself shows the critic’s characteristics; he seemed to want to show off his understanding, because he thought that people would think highly of him if he could find errors from others. In reality, it’s not like that, it’s never been the case that if one can find an error of a doctor it means that he is better than the doctor. If one can find an error in a book, it does not mean that he has the ability to write a better book. The action of showing off oneself sometimes just creates contrary results, and makes the critic become a clown to others.
3/ The way he raised his comments and his concerns about the authenticity of some covers proved that he did not understand much about Postal History collecting, so his ideas and his way of collecting will be far different from mine; therefore it is not easy to come to an agreement. Whether he agrees with me or not, his article has shown his lower level of understanding and his weak background in this area of collecting to the whole world.
Now, this is my explanation, which directly discusses the article (at the link above):
To The Critic:
Concerning the ideas in your article, I believe, the advanced collectors will have difficulty accepting them. I should not waste my time for such rumors, but because many of my friends email me and want me to do something, I am forced to write this article to point out your mistakes and your misunderstandings.
When I wrote the book “Some Features of Postal History in the Period of Revolutionary South Vietnam”, I noted in the preface that I would welcome all comments because I know that they are very helpful for the next edition; Ofcourse, I prefer only logical ideas in the right place rather than rumors which may create unnecessary controversy; I also don’t like your way of conclusion, especially the conclusions that come from personal statement mistakes.
It is really funny that someone who did not understand what Postal History is made comments on a Postal History book; In this case you were just concerned about the authenticity of some covers, instead of the context and this was the biggest mistake in Postal History study. You should have known that I am a serious Postal History collector so I have never doubted the new covers or postal materials that I have seen for the first time. I would rather think about and study them to enrich the background or to find the new discovery rather than guessing about them by feeling ….
Do you know that Postal History philately always has new discoveries? and no one can possess all the correct information? Indeed, the important information was usually kept secret in the war and there is still a lot of information which has never been explored; therefore, as a Postal History collector, you must know and understand this. It is not important to prove the authenticity of one cover just because the postmark on the stamp is not tied to the cover, but it is more important that one understand what the author wanted to say and why he placed this cover in his book. A wise man would understand the honesty of the author in this case rather than criticize as if he would have made that “faked cover”. Is it a faked cover? In my opinion, only a stupid person would make such an ugly faked cover. Logically, if somebody made a faked item, he would never have made such a serious mistake that the postmark is not tied to the cover?!!! It would be easy work by photoshop to remove the outer postmark to the stamp to make a perfect cover in the book, but why didn’t I do that? Surely, I know the weak point of this cover but why did I still put it on my book? Collectors who understand what Postal History is will understand the answer. For me, I myself can judge its authenticity as I bought it very cheap together with other North Vietnam covers from the same sender and receiver. I will repeat my point of view that I don’t need to argue about real or unreal, all that I want is to share a discovery, to set up a foundation with the belief that may-be more of the same items will be discovered later in the future (I can compare this case to the case I wrote about the used stamp in photo#20 in my book, with 1 used stamp found, I could open a new discovery in philately to change the wrong thoughts of the authenticity of this stamp for many years). Now I am sure that I’m right as I heard a story about the Hanoi philatelic exhibition when I visited Hanoi last month. There were 2 covers with surcharged stamps from Quangtri province that appeared in one exhibit, but it was unbelievable that both of them were-missing on the last day when the exhibits were returned to the participants!!! Many meetings were held after that between the Vietnam Philately Association, the organizers and the collectors, and the last solution was the compensation of 2 million dong from the Vietnam Philately Association to the owner. This is the strangest story in Vietnam. I’m now asking some of my friends to find the photos of these two covers and still waiting to receive them. You can verify the story if you know any collectors who participated the exhibition last year.
Indeed, the cover #13 in my book is not in good condition like many other covers in the war time, you have the right to doubt it, but it is very funny to raise 3 concerns to show off the knowledge as you did in this case. You said in your 1st concern: “Official mail from North to South Vietnam was carried out by Ban Giao Bưu Trung Ương Cục Miền Nam. Mailing did neither need to use stamps, let alone a surcharged stamp in this case, nor postmarks”. I am very surprised with this statement! Have you seen my illustrated covers in my book with stamps or postmarks MN. Vietnam used in QuangTri province from page 64 to 67? I think they are evidence against your ignorant statement, and why was a surcharged stamp being used? You should read this chapter and understand that this is the normal postage in the liberated regions at that time. May-be you didn’t know where CamLo district is located, and you did not know either that in 1974 Camlo was the liberated district under the control of NLF,
(This cover has the letter inside to his wife as a medical apprentice in the North. The sender wrote in the letter that he was well serving in the liberated region…. you can also see the used overprint 10d with CAM LO postmark in photo#12), and again in the 3rd concern, you concluded:” stamps and postmarks were never needed. A stamped cover in this case is out of the reality”. I think that you should review the MN. Vietnam postmarks used in Quangtri province in my book from page 64 to 67 and also look at page 54 and 55 with 4 illustrated covers which are strong evidence against your conclusion. Your long statement about:” Ban Giao Bưu Trung Ương Cục Miền Nam, or Giao Liên…” in your three concerns was totally wrong when applied to QuangTri province (QuangTri is a province which was not influenced by Trung Ương Cục Miền Nam), especially in liberated districts, where the Post systems were established and connected with North Vietnam.
Moreover, do you know that you are quite wrong when you concluded that only “2 different ways NLF Sending and receiving directives, reports, information…” For my knowledge through the philatelic items and documents of the NLF in my collection, I have strong evidence of at least 5 different ways…And if the readers carefully noticed in my book, they could see 3 different mail routes of NLF already and all of them were with illustrated covers (For the difficulty of editing and censure in my first time of publishing a book in Vietnam, I’ve only selected parts of my NLF collection for the book and still omitted many covers, documents, and letters inside of the covers. I hope that they can be allowed in the next upate publication).
On page 59, cover #49 you said:” the label “Trung Tâm Bưu Giao Saigon.” was never a postal term for VNCH Post Office. It is a "Viet Cong" term! In March of 1975, Saigon was still firmly at the hands of VNCH Government, how come the "Viet Cong" term “Bưu Giao” appeared on its postal label?!” I’m really shocked and surprised with your question! Anyway, I saw most of the Vietcong terms are “GIAO BUU” and the label of South Vietnam used “BUU GIAO”; this is a different usage. In any case, this is a Vietnamese term so it is no wonder why people used it at that time. And in this case, you just explained the matter as the way you thought about it instead of studying to find out the reason …. This is obviously a wrong idea based on the knowledge accumulated through many books and materials that led you to this dubious conclusion. You can see the original photo of this cover to Bao Loc on March 28th below, your doubt on it proved that you never know the date when BaoLoc was liberated and you also never know that it is impossible to deliver a letter through the war zone (BaoLoc was liberated on March 28th).

On page 59, cover #50 you said: ‘the Cover with a hand-written note” and explained as you thought that “any person can write anything at any time on any cover!”. I think this idea should have come from an inexperienced collector. You should understand that most Postal History collectors can easily recognize the value of a cover sent on these days, whether it has a label or not. Most of them have enough background to understand the value of the date and other elements on the cover, and in my opinion, it is normal that such a cover could not be delivered in this case (You can see the original photo of this cover to Hue on March 30th below and can you answer my question: how could it be delivered when Hue had liberated 4 days before?). If I can find a cover, which was delivered to the receiver at that time and place, I would ready to pay many times higher prices than these normal covers for my research ( it might have happened and nobody could be sure what things happened in the war), so you should change your way of thinking and understand that only the cover that could be delivered is really the gem (rare item) in Postal History instead of the regular cover with RETURN TO SENDER label (it is easier to make the arrival postmark in this case, if people made a fake.)

On page 60, cover #51 you continued criticizing:” Mail sent from Saigon to Tuy Hoa with the return label from the Post office. Again, the label with “VC” term of “Trung Tâm Bưu Giao Saigon” applied on March 3, 1975, almost two months before the fall of Saigon” Is it your pure fabrication? Or is your purchased book a variety? It is clear that you made up the story and changed the date in order to criticize me in this case (the detail in my book is March 30th 1975). You said that:” the cover is so clean and so fresh without any trace of neither stamps nor postmarks”. How do you know that the cover is without stamps and postmark? You really did not know anything when saying that…. I had already sent many emails to most customers to explain about this matter after their purchasing my book. You did not know the story just because you bought my book through a middleman, who I did not know. You should know that in Vietnam, it is illegal to publish a book with the South Vietnam stamps: all the South Vietnam covers with stamps must be censored and erased before it is allowed to be published. This problem also happened with my book, and you may notice that even some South Vietnam stamps with the overprint CHMNVN issued after 1975 were not-allowed to be illustrated as pictures in my book (page 49). (You can see the original covers below).

All the story and the original photos above could prove that you just said things in the way you thought and this led you from one imagination to another!!! And again when you said: “Beside, whoever did this proved to be too amateurish in applying the label right over the address of the recipient; something has never happened in any Post Office in this world”. I’m sure that you would not have stated that if you had known that your statement would show your weak background in philately to the whole world? I think that most Collectors who possessed these covers could understand the reason why you said that: you did not understand these covers because you have never possessed them. Do you know that the label was never totally affixed on the cover? Just only part of one side or just the label’s corner was affixed on it, so it is easy to lift it up to see the address of the destination (see the photos below). It also proved that you did not have the knowledge of collecting Postal used covers when you said: “Beside, whoever did this proved to be too amateurish in applying the label right over the address of the recipient, something has never happened in any Post Office in this world” Are you sure of your conclusion now? Or did you just said what you thought?… I have one cover of this type from the period of Indochina, and also some covers in different countries with RETURN TO SENDER label like this which is enough for you to learn that many Post offices did this (see the photos below). In this case you should understand that it is no longer important that the address of the receiver be seen when the cover is return to the sender. It is very logical that the Post office could affix the label anywhere on the cover except the address of the sender (necessary for returning).

On page 61, cover #53 you said:” Internal mail sent to Saigon on April 30th 1975. Again, the cover is so clean and so fresh without sender’s address. An envelope can be postmarked any time once you happen to have the device in your possession! And a type-writer will do the rest.” Again, I’m very surprised with your imagination, it is clear that you said everything as you thought without the knowledge of a Postal History philatelist!!!
The only comment that you are right about in your article is the number of stamps on the sheet set Michel #06-08 in my book. This is really my mistake of carelessness though I sold many sheets of those stamps in recent years. Anyway, thanks for your discovery of this mistake.
In the last paragraph before the conclusion, you said that you were in doubt about the propaganda marks from different new postal staffs of different provinces “1.5.1975 Giải Phóng Vĩnh Long,” “1.5.1975 Giải Phóng Vũng Liêm,” “1.5.1975 Giải Phóng Sóc Trăng,” “1.5.1975 Giải Phóng Trà Ôn...” I don’t need to explain more about them, but if you followed the items sold from many sources on Ebay in the recent years, you would not have stated this. And your questions:” Are they authentic? Who knows?” Most advanced collectors in Vietnam and overseas can understand their authenticity, and can answer your questions anytime. Just only you who have never possessed or seen them before had such questions!!! Whenever you have these questions in mind, many collectors can question your knowledge about the topic.

Though you wrote a clever conclusion at the end of the article; however, I don’t think you deserved to evaluate my book, due to your weak background in Postal History Philately as well as your regret of the high payment for the book. Please be advised that my second publication, Military Mails of Vietminh Period 1945- 1955, will also be expensive and nobody forced you to buy… Finally, What did you mean with the statement in your note sent to the Director of SICP, when you wrote:” Lately, I was tired of having to read the Society Journal where a book that promotes faked items being commended.” You never knew that with your imagination, you had wrongly criticized the genuine items as the faked ones. You may be good at traditional philately, but your background is far from a Postal History collector, moreover, your knowledge about History is too poor, you should not have shown off yourself to let the whole world know about this. I like your comments posted on the forum as long as it can be, so that more collectors can read and see about yours and finally, whether you agree with me or not, it’s never important to me because time will be the best answer.