I admit it. I love the Antiques Roadshow, not least, I admit, because Fiona Bruce is really hot!
I also love the show for the wealth of information I can occasionally glean re my passion - antiquarian books and are historical documents - but today (December 28th, 2015) they included a segment that bordered on the irresponsible.
One of the items featured was a wonderfully carved champagne flute, circa 1850. It was controversial only because said item was carved from ivory. This resulted in a brief follow-up segment on the ethics of owning ivory items, given the plight of Africa's elephants.
Opinions were sought from two experts. One, Mr. Will Travers of the Born Free Foundation, the other Dr. Marjorie Trusted, Senior Curator of the Victoria & Albert Museum, custodians of perhaps the world's largest collection of ivory artifacts.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Travers waxed on about his feelings, stating that when he looks at works in ivory all he sees is dead elephants. Not content with this Sixth Sense-esque sharing moment, he also went into detail about the heartbreaking sight and smell of the many dead elephants he’d stood beside in the wild.
Dr. Trusted, on the other hand, spoke of the great wealth of ivory artifacts extant and their artistic as well as historical significance.
Now let me be clear. I am absolutely against the killing of elephants for their tusks. However, that anyone could possibly be so driven by their emotions as to believe the destruction of historical artifacts can in any way contribute to elephant protection is beyond me.
No doubt some people; those blessed with the intellectual acuity of the inanimate objects the'd sacrifice to their zealotry for instance, will dash out and burn that old hair brush great granny left them. But I will be very surprised if so much as a single pachyderm arises, phoenix-like, from the ashes of their vandalism.
However, in doing so they will undoubtedly contribute to the increasing rarity of ivory items held in private hands.
As we all know, the rarer the item, the greater its value invariably becomes. Ivory will always be in demand, simply because it is rare, because it carves beautifully and because it does not degrade as many other natural materials are apt to.
The rarer these vandals make historical relics with their self-indulgent reactionary symbolism, the more value those who admire such objects will place on those that remain.
Thus the greater the motivation among suppliers and poachers eager to get their cut of a limited resource that's value, both monetary and as symbol of status, has been pushed through the roof by abolitionists.
The community has turned its back on many forms of contraband over the years and the State destroys thousands of tonnes of it annually, yet never to my knowledge has the production of anything ever been arrested by this process.
To the contrary, whether it is illegal guns, meth or even gin, destroying supplies simply drives up the cost of that which slips through the net.
The trade in rhino horn is a case in point. It is illegal, except among those cultures and individuals that believe it promotes virility.
Not only do most people know it does no such thing, but even though there are comparatively inexpensive drugs that really do deliver the desired result, enough folks still think rhino horn is superior that rhinos are even more endangered than elephants.
Surely having formulated a substance that delivers on its promises and having made it available at a mere fraction of the cost of more traditional 'tonics', rhino numbers should be exploding across Africa?
The fact that people such as you and I wouldn’t dream of having any rhino products in the home makes no contribution whatsoever to the preservation of rhino in the wild, nor will it, for as long as some people are wedded to their belief that rhino horn works.
It requires a level of naive stupidity that defies description to believe any cultural shift can be embraced by a percentage of the world’s population sufficient to end all interest in rhino horn and thus stop the trade in its tracks.
Just one or two traders with enough cash up-front and an eye to the future would be sufficient to wipe out the worlds remaining rhinos in very short order.
The same can be said of ivory.
Ivory collectors do not generally trade in the classifieds. They trade within their own very exclusive networks and like dealers in illegal drugs and arms, they rarely hang out shingles inviting the public to nip inside and peruse their stock.
Elephants numbers are sufficiently diminished that the commitment of just a couple of well connected dealers is all that's required to wipe out the elephant. Such people do not deal in second-hand trinkets or museum pieces. They want sell large pieces that exude prestige to a select clientele.
Meanwhile, around the world, simpletons emote a warm fuzzy balm around their oh-so delicate sensibilities, by advocating the destruction of incredibly beautiful artworks and crafts left to us by our forebears, and through us, to generations to come.
Some zealots even believe the ivory of mammoths, the bulk of which died of natural causes between 140,000 and 60,000 years ago, should also go to the flames.
This is nothing more than shallow emotional symbolism.
Ivory, like gold, is all but useless for practical purposes. Its value lies in its beauty and more particularly, its rarity.
It is an idea and despite the best efforts of the Church and various miscellaneous dictatorships throughout history, no idea has ever been destroyed by burning rare and beautiful works of art, be they as spectacular as the ornately craved hilt of an ancient samurai sword, or as diminutive as granddad's old pipe.
Anyway, I'll get outaya way now...
Follow the Hunters' Stand on Twitter @Hunters_Stand
If you'd like to share this post the link to cut & paste is http://thehunterstand.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/the-cult-of-ivory-immolation.html
For those wishing to leave comments either anonymously or under their own names (go-orn, I dares ya!), please select the 'Name/URL' option from the drop down menu beneath the comments section at the bottom of this page. You do not need to enter a URL.
If you would like to receive notifications when new posts are uploaded to the Hunters' Stand, send your name and email address to thehunterstand@gmail.com This service will not include notification of new comments. All information provided will be treated with the utmost confidentiality and discretion.
Did you watch the same Antiques Roadshow that I did? Nobody is suggesting destroying works of art. As Will Travers says, it's a personal choice to keep or to destroy, just don't sell it to ignite the trade. As for Dr Trusted, she needs to get out more if she can't understand that tusks are still being poached for carving in China.
ReplyDeleteI watched the show yes, but whether you did is clearly open to question. Not only did I watch it, I also recorded it, hence I can provide the following direct quote by your hero Mr Travers, made while he pointed at the subject 170 year old ivory champagne flute:
Delete“I do respect the intricate carving and the historical provenance of the item, but from a conservation perspective, right now across Africa, elephants are haemorrhaging and I think it’s time to take really bold and extreme measures”.
Clearly he was not pointing at the champagne flute suggesting it should be ‘boldly’ and ‘extremely’ preserved for posterity and in fact since the item in question was in private hands, his intention is clear. He believes the owner should destroy it.
He went on to state that unless a person has proof their ivory items were produced prior to 1947, they should be destroyed and that he has a hair brush passed down to him, which pre-dates 1947, which he would probably destroy too, despite the fact it was clearly produced prior to 1947.
He did not suggest that museum exhibits should be destroyed, but the vast majority of extant historical ivory works are not yet in museums, and he unquestionably encouraged people to destroy those items. Yes, that’s what we want. Capricious, self-indulgent and uneducated people deciding what is a legacy worth preserving and what is not.
Tell you what, there are a lot of Australian aboriginal artifacts in private collections. Let’s encourage uneducated white folks to destroy all that too. Maybe it’ll help stem the theft of rock and other art in the field.
As for you, I wonder why you would ask me if I’d seen the same program, clearly intimating that I was misrepresenting your hero, when in fact you have intentionally misrepresented the statements of Ms. Trusted?
At no time did she say anything that might even vaguely suggest she did not believe ivory poached today was not being carved for the market of today. In fact, she stated that it was twice during the segment and condemned it twice.
Perhaps if you spent less time worshiping at the shrine of Mr Travers and more time listening to what people actually say and considering the implications of actions rather than simply indulging your need to feel superior while advocating the destruction of legacies by ignorant luddites, you might not appear so one-eyes and foolish.
Good day to you, madam.