As I write this post, I have Netflix’s original series King of Collectibles: The Goldin Touch paused on my television. The reason why I am watching this show is because it is associated with an issue I am interested in investigating-the issue of private collections and auction companies in the acquisition of historical artifacts. For those that do not know, the King of Collectibles is a reality show dedicated to following the business dealings and exploits of a leading auction house, Goldin Auctions. The reality series shows viewers the auction house’s acquisition of rare collectibles ranging from sports memorabilia to pokemon cards to anything that is rare and worth thousands to millions of dollars. It is often unbelievable what Goldin’s employees come across and even more unbelievable just how much nameless millionaire buyers will pay to acquire what are without a doubt one of a kind historical items. 

In season two of the reality series, Ken Goldin, the founder and CEO of Goldin Auctions, knows that his company is the leader in the selling and acquisition of sports memorabilia but has professed that it is not enough. Goldin also wants his company to be a leader in the acquisition and selling of historical documents and artifacts. Goldin recently hired a new “chief authenticator”, John Reznikoff, to demonstrate the authentication of historical documents, art, technology and other items that appear in the series. Now, this is where the show kind of loses me as a general viewer and turns me into a student of ethics, history and the digital public humanities. 

The King of Collectibles is far from the first reality series to exemplify the purchase and selling of historical items; other shows like American Pickers, and Pawnstars have made it a central part of their business model and storylines. But, Goldin has a more specific clientele that is encompassed by mostly unnamed millionaires. The idea of acquiring and selling historical artifacts to this type of clientele who will then most likely keep the items stocked in a personal collection for no one else to see for years to come makes me want to borrow one of Indiana Jones’ most famous lines, “It belongs in a museum!” 

 I myself am a collector and come from a family of collectors and partake in the purchase of affordable antiques at small family owned shops or booths in outlets in historic downtowns. I am also not venturing to seek out items owned by Thomas Jefferson or Malcolm X. I feel like historical items that contribute to a nation’s history or even to world history should be accessible to the greater public. This doesn’t mean that it has to be on view at a museum but it can be available digitally for people to see and utilize for research, education or their own interest. On the other hand, maybe if I did have a million dollars I would spend it on something of grand importance in the hopes of preserving it. Perhaps that could be the true goal of these private collectors instead of the items serving solely as a purchase to hide money laundering? 

I feel as though this subject matter only brings up more questions related to ethics, historical preservation and shared historical authority. In his reality series, Goldin does not seem to be someone who is entirely without morals but he could be playing it up for the cameras. That said, I would be curious to see if his company is developing a policy on the acquisition of historical artifacts and their own standards related to the type of client they would wish to purchase the items.