A Tale of Two Ivories

8/10/2019 A Tale of Two Ivories

1/3

B

FineArtConnoisseur.com | January/February 2015

BEH IND THE S C ENE S

A Tale of Two IvoriesBY MENACHEM WECKER

GH

One would be hard-pressed to findtwo objects as different as the Clois-

ters Cross and George Washingtons falseteeth. The cross, which is on view at theMetropolitan Museum of Arts Cloisters

branch in upper Manhattan, dates to the12th century and features biblical scenes.The dentures were crafted 600 years laterand are kept at Washingtons Mount Ver-non estate in northern Virginia. Popular

misconceptions abound about the firstpresidents teeth being made of wood; infact, they consist of cow, horse, and humanteeth, as well as elephant and walrus ivory.The last happens to be the same materialused in the cross.

Prized throughout history as a mate-rial that allows simultaneously for intricate,compressed detail and beautiful luminos-ity, ivory can be found in countless artistic

and historical treasures. A work such as theearly-18th-century Fall of the Rebel Angelsatthe Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art in KansasCity can be so dazzling that one might evenforget ivorys base origins. But thats becom-ing increasingly unlikely as a chorus of voicesseeks an all-out ban on this material.

At first blush, the case against ivoryappears a slam dunk. The photographs and

videos of rhinoceroses, elephants, and hip-popotamuses with severed tusks writhing

in pain, or worse, are horrifically mesmerizing. And there are the statis-tics cited frequently in online campaigns and news articles: one elephantis killed for its tusks every 15 minutes. Africa has lost 64 percent of itselephants in the past decade, and if no drastic changes are implemented,these large mammals could be extinct on that continent by 2025.

In the 1940s, there may have been as many as 3 million to 5 millionAfrican elephants; today, the World Wide Fund for Nature puts that num-

ber at between 470,000 and 700,000. (A broader Great Elephant Censusis due out in mid-2015.) In the court of public opinion, individual animals,such as the Kenyan elephant beside whose carcass Chinese former basket-

ball player Yao Ming stood (while filming a documentary about poach-ing), are powerful microcosms for the larger herds and their threatenedfutures. Wildlife trafficking is now a multi-billion-dollar business allied

with the same global criminal networks that run drugs, take hostages, andfinance illegal arms sales and terrorism. Fresh ivory is carved into objects

for household decoration and ritual use, andis also crushed into powder form as an aph-rodisiac. The largest market for these items isin East Asia, particularly China.

DIFFERING VIEWSThen there are the people on both sides

of a U.S. government policy announcedin February 2014 that is aimed at depress-ing the global ivory market. (These people

are also divided over a New York state law,passed in August, that prohibits the sale ofitems that are more than 20 percent ivoryand less than 100 years old.) To truly under-stand what is at stake, its important to meetElizabeth Chitwood and Scott Defrin, whoare on opposite ends of the spectrum.

A church music director based inGainesville, Florida, Chitwood is founder ofthe blog and awareness campaign Elephan-

topia, which drew 11,000 signatures for apetition to the Pope asking him to say no tousing ivory in religious art. It later partnered

with the Houston Zoo and Whole Foods ona march for elephants. Elephants have always

been Chitwoods favorites, and she stillremembers feeling dwarfed as a 6-year-oldstanding near one at the local zoo.

Living in South Africa in 2009 ledChitwood to research poaching. She learnedof its ties to terrorism, its dangers for both

poacher and ranger, and the elephants role as Africas keystone species,upon which many trees and animals depend. Without the elephants,Chitwood says, who knows what the African continent would look like?An Africa without elephants, to channel the novelist Gay Talese, is likePicasso without paint, or a Ferrari without fuel only worse.

And then there is Defrin, who, since 1992, has owned the New YorkCity-based European Decorative Arts Company, which specializes in 17th- to19th-century ivory objects. When Defrin, whose father began collecting inthe 1970s, discusses the efforts by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and theNew York state government to ban ivory, he compares their attempts to con-

trol who sees what art with another regimes intense interest in censorship.They dont want to recognize that ivory has been used by mankind

for thousands of years, he says, and that its a highly venerated materialthey have just decided should not exist anymore. They want to wipe it awayfrom human history. I think we saw that happen with a man named Adolf

The Cloisters Cross

British, 12th century,

Walrus ivory,22 5/8 x 14 1/4 in.

Metropolitan Museum

of Art, New York City,

Cloisters Collection,

63.12

Reprinted with permission from:

800.610.5771 or International 011-561.655.8778.

CLICK TO SUBSCRIBE
http://../Library/Caches/Adobe%20InDesign/Version%208.0/en_US/InDesign%20ClipboardScrap1.pdfhttp://../Library/Caches/Adobe%20InDesign/Version%208.0/en_US/InDesign%20ClipboardScrap1.pdf


2/3


Hitler in the 1930s, when he decided what art theGermans were supposed to see. If presented witha world without antique ivories 20 years down theroad, people would look back in horror as we

would today if Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis hadnthelped save New York Citys Grand Central Termi-nal. How can you go ahead and destroy all of thatimportant material? Defrin asks.

Destroying ivories whether one views

them as baby or bathwater is precisely whatis being proposed. On November 14, 2013, Fishand Wildlife destroyed an estimated six tons ofelephant ivory in an ivory crush. An officialagency Instagram album contains striking imagesof piles upon piles of ivory figurines and jewelryultimately reduced to small pieces. The overalleffect is of smashed crackers or seashells. Thealbum also includes photos of event speakers,from government officials and conservators to

C-list star power: Kristin Davis, Kristin Bauer,and Joely Fisher.

BACK AT HEADQUARTERSThe sprawling offices where the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service operates in Falls Church, Virginia, ispart of the Skyline Mall; an Olive Garden, DSW, andBurlington Coat Factory loom across the street. The nearest subway stationis a 20-minute bus ride away from the office, which was recently relocated tosave money, according to Gavin Shire, the chief of public affairs.

Craig Hoover, chief of the services wildlife trade and conservationbranch, acknowledges that a lot of misinformation has surrounded Fishand Wildlifes February announcement. We announced early that theseare the actions we are going to take, but the interpretation was that wetook those actions, says Hoover, who resembles a young Dick Van Dyke,

with the intense gaze of John Malkovich.The general consensus of all of the stakeholders who have checked

in with Fish and Wildlife following the early announcement has beensupport of the legislations goal of protecting elephants, Hoover says.The challenge is sorting out those things that are actually impactingelephants in the wild, and those things that are not.

Fish and Wildlifes national strategy contains a three-prongedsuite of actions, Hoover explains. Directors Order No. 210 narrowsthe exceptions to the existing 1989 ivory import moratorium under theAfrican Elephant Conservation Act; the strategy places a heavier burdenon sellers to demonstrate that ivories came into the country prior to aspecies being listed in Section I of CITES, or arrived with a pre-conven-tion certificate; and the service is proposing changes to the special ruleunder the Endangered Species Act. (CITES stands for Convention onInternational Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.)

Fish and Wildlife has amended some parts of the Directors Order

in response to concerns voiced by the public, Hoover says. For example,there was an exception for ivory items that came into the United Statesfor non-commercial purposes through customs-designated ports before1976, but the service received feedback that some of those ports werentdesignated until 1983.

Changes that may loom on the horizon,Hoover adds, may modify the special rule underthe Endangered Species Act, which allows the U.S.government to propose special prohibitions oncea species is listed as endangered. It allows us to

be a little bit more creative, essentially, Hooversays, noting that it would allow the public andimpacted entities to respond. Its a way that

we are involving the public, so that we take theactions that are appropriate for the species andmay accommodate some activities that dont really

jeopardize elephants in the wild.Asked to hazard a guess at the scope of the

illegal ivory trade, which also involves fakes mas-querading as genuine antiques, Hoover says it ishard to quantify. But Victor Gordon, a dealer inPhiladelphia from whom Fish and Wildlife seizedmore than a ton of ivories recently, was not an

anomaly, he says. None of the pieces the govern-ment has smashed to date have been antiques,

but what seems to some to be the indiscriminate,umbrella nature of the national legislation is caus-ing much concern in the art market.

A FIELD SUDDENLY FROZENA total ban on trading objects of ar t-historical importance even

those made over 100 years ago, including pieces made as early as theMiddle Ages is very regrettable, and, in our opinion, will not have an

impact upon the current, illegal, and unfortunate poaching of the Afri-can elephant, says Ben Janssens, who until recently chaired the board ofThe European Fine Art Fair in Maastricht and still directs his own galleryof Asian art in London.

The Fish and Wildlife regulations, according to Janssens, appeardrastic and to offer no flexibility where genuine antique ivory objectsare concerned. There will be, he predicts, substantial consequences forthe antiques trade, which will impact heavily upon our cultural heritageof both Western and Eastern art.

Martin Levy, the director of H. Blairman and Sons in London, agrees.Shippers are advising against sending ivory to the U.S., and serious deal-

ers, auction houses, and collectors are heeding this advice, he says. Asthings stand, the trade in a whole range of works of art made of, or includ-ing, ivory will be driven from the States. Will this not lead to a loss in taxesfrom corporate profits and sales, as well as from less tangible sources suchas hotels, restaurants, and airlines, as would-be collectors are driven away?

Defrin, the dealer, doesnt expect his New York state license to sell ivoryto be renewed when it expires next year, so he says he is done with NewYork. For the most part, most of my customers are from out of state anyway.

Levy understands why huge concerns surround the plight of theAfrican elephant. Its extinction would be tragic and must be averted, he

says, but he worries about a law of unintended consequences in banningculturally important ivory artifacts. The elephant will not be protected

by stigmatizing works of art, he says. I feel confident that, with a degreeof common sense and humility on both sides, a sensible and pragmaticsolution can be reached: one that stamps out the illicit trade in illegally

David Heschler (Ulm, Germany, 1611-1667)

Christ Bound to a Column

c. 1650-60, Ivory, 7 3/4 x 2 1/2 in. (not including

the wooden base)

Courtesy of Scott Defrin, European Decorative ArtsCompany, New York City


3/3


slaughtered ivory, while allowing the world to continue learning from worksof art created in earlier periods and when different standards prevailed.

What Eike Schmidt, the curator of decorative arts and sculpture at theMinneapolis Institute of Arts, finds particularly absurd is that the momentin the 19th century when people starting aggressively hunting elephants

was the same one when artists ceased using ivory. (He notes an exception:some 20 or 30 years in which Belgian Art Nouveau used ivory.) Its beenmore than 200 years since it was used for artistic purposes, he says. Whatis being made now is fake in wood or plastic. Its pseudo-tribal carvings

made by some sweatshop, probably in China or Hong Kong.Many U.S. museum curators and registrars have recently found

that ivory masterworks they want to borrow from, or lend to, foreigninstitutions will not clear U.S. customs since they dont have the rightdocumentation. Naturally, all parties are fearful that their objects will

be confiscated by U.S. agents and destroyed. Similar problems are fac-ing administrators working in the field of classical music, where manyitems such as woodwinds and violin bows contain small ivory parts thatmay not be thoroughly documented, even if they are centuries old. And

believe it or not, many gun dealers are equally vexed, since antique fire-

arms often contain ivory inlays.Under the current legislation on interstate trade, a Pennsylvanianative who, say, inherits a collection of ivories from a deceased relative anddrives it to New York to get it appraised, could lose it all if pulled over forspeeding and found to be lacking a CITES permit. The policeman has nochoice but to confiscate it, Schmidt says. And it will be destroyed.

When it came time to secure the Fish and Wildlife permits neededby the major New York auction house where Sarah Hassan once worked,it was such a headache, she recalls. Horror stories of other salerooms

being raided were recounted by her firms in-house legal counsel in orderto get the staff s attention: Theyll come and clean you out, and fine the

hell out of you, Hassan says of Fish and Wildlifes strong-arm exten-sion. The laws implications have seemed to change weekly, and havehit some colleagues harder than others, particularly the Japanese depart-ment, Hassan notes. She and her fellow specialists agreed that elephantsneed protection, but they failed to see a connection between old ivoriesand todays elephants. When youre selling Mrs. Smiths tea set fromArizona and shes 89 years old, you shouldnt have to threaten her withgoing to jail, Hassan notes. These are family heirlooms. A lot of peopledont have dated records going back.

THE PROGNOSISWhen Michael McCullough, a partner at the New York law firm

Pearlstein & McCullough, which serves the domestic and international artmarkets, reads through the legislation attempting to ban the ivory trade, hesees quite a few problems. New Yorks ivory law cannot burden interstate

commerce, even if it is applied purely intrastate. It is also expressly pre-empted by the Endangered Species Act, according to McCullough, aformer associate counsel at Sothebys.

Auctions are intended, McCullough says, to attract the most buy-ers in order to generate the highest bids. This purpose would clearly befrustrated if a New York auctioneer were forced to hold different auc-tions for different lots for New York bidders and non-New York bidders,he explains. The result would be lower hammer prices and more unsoldlots. That would clearly burden interstate commerce.

It is also, he says, unclear how a gallery or private dealer could avoidhurting its sales if required to segregate its marketing and sales efforts

between New York and out-of-state buyers. McCullough concludes,therefore, that New Yorks bill cannot govern Internet sales, which arenecessarily global and national in scope, and the legislation can onlylegally apply to non-commercial sales and family transfers where all ofthe parties and the ivory are in-state.

In the short term, the legislation is hurting the decorative artsmarket, McCullough says, but he doesnt expect it to last: The Obamaadministrations actions will likely be overturned by legislation in 2015,

because several very powerful groups, including the National RifleAssociation, are seeking legislation. (Since he commented, the newlystrengthened Republican majority in both houses of Congress will prob-ably side with the NRA, and they are probably reluctant to ally with theClinton Foundation, which has been a vocal proponent of the new law.)Moreover, McCullough notes, the New York Ivory Law will likely bestruck down in federal court in 2015, because the law is preempted bythe Endangered Species Act.

Moving forward, the broader question that will require careful atten-tion, says Schmidt, of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, is whether othercountries will just copy and paste this regulation, or whether it will be

a largely U.S.-led effort. Hoover, of the Fish and Wildlife office, pointsto major buy-in from China, Thailand, Hong Kong, and elsewhere, andtheir commitment can be measured in tons of ivories crushed in thosecountries, which he says were responses to the U.S. ivory crush.

Schmidt hopes that whatever happens on the global scale, it wontoversimplify the nature of the problem. For me personally, because I dolove nature and I care a lot about that, my key point is that there is thisfalse notion of saying, You have to decide between the animal and theart, he says. You do not have to do that. n

MENACHEM WECKER holds an M.A. in art history from George Washington Uni-versity, and writes for the Washington Post, National Catholic Reporter, Jewish Daily

Forward, and Houston Chronicle. Based in Washington, D.C., he co-authored the book

Consider No Evil: Two Faith Traditions and the Problem of Academic Freedom in

Religious Higher Education(2014).

On November 14, 2013, representatives of many countries, conservationists, and

journalists gathered to watch an estimated six tons of confiscated ivory items get

crushed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Photo: Gavin Shire, USFWS

Only fragments remained after the crush.

Photo: Gavin Shire, USFWS

Documents

A Tale of Two Ivories