| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper%25" |
|---|
A Tempest in a Teapot |
| | The Symbolic Function |
|
<
< | Marion True, the former Getty curator, was charged for conspiracy in violation of the cultural patrimony laws for allegedly helping a Sicilian antiquities smuggling ring illegally export the Aphrodite statute out of Italy. This paper argues that the Italian government has supplemented the purpose of fact finding in criminal trials by transforming True's trial into a symbol of a cultural crusade against smuggled antiquities for two reasons. First, True's trial functions as an iconic message to cultural institutions that the Italian government is shifting the emphasis of anti-smuggling enforcement from the Mafioso looters in Sicily to American museum professionals. Second, it serves to hurry American museums to repatriate the suspicious antiquities in their collections. True's trial represents a historical culmination of two forces: unsuccessful enforcement efforts within Italy and a resurging nationalist fervor to reclaim her patrimony illegally abroad. |
>
> | Marion True, the former Getty curator, was charged for conspiracy in violation of the cultural patrimony laws for allegedly helping a Sicilian antiquities smuggling ring illegally export the Aphrodite statute out of Italy. This paper argues that the Italian government has supplemented the purpose of fact finding in criminal trials by transforming True's trial into a symbol of a cultural crusade against smuggled antiquities for two reasons. First, True's trial functions as an iconic message to cultural institutions that the Italian government is shifting the emphasis of anti-smuggling enforcement from the Mafioso looters in Sicily to American museum professionals.
- You would be more believable using the oracular tone employed here if you would accept Italian linguistic reality, in which "Mafioso" is a singular masculine noun (plural "Mafiosi"), and "Mafia" is both a feminine collective noun and an adjective.
Second, it serves to hurry American museums to repatriate the suspicious antiquities in their collections. True's trial represents a historical culmination of two forces: unsuccessful enforcement efforts within Italy and a resurging nationalist fervor to reclaim her patrimony illegally abroad. |
| | Shifting the Burden from Italian Criminals… |
| | This trial emblematizes Italy’s shift to discrediting the antiquity buyers after fifty years of non-enforcement beyond the Italian frontier. Night looters hand it to the smugglers, who pass Italian customs and give it to the dealer in Switzerland, who sells it to an American buyer, who clears it with American customs. Far from smuggling the artifacts, the foreign buyer bears the legal impact of enforcing cultural patrimony laws in Italy. As the only one prosecuting the buyer, True’s trial masquerades under the promise of her factual guilt its other purpose of dispiriting looters and enforcing Italian laws at home. An American has transformed into utilitarian food for Italian legal enforcement. |
|
>
> |
- This makes no sense whatever. If the prosecutors' allegations are founded, Marion True is to Italy what Robert Vesco or Marc Rich were to the United States: a fugitive offender. The common law prohibition on criminal adjudication in absentia is not a human right, it's an artifact of common law history, now doing at least as much harm as good owing to the courts' fervent embrace in the last fifteen years of "kidnapping in" as a basis for jurisdiction to adjudicate. What issue of "masquerading" can there be when a government chooses, for whatever mixture of reasons, to prosecute offenses committed within its jurisdiction? Even if True had merely conspired with illegal exporters without ever leaving Los Angeles there would be sufficient basis for criminal prosecution in our law.
|
| | A Martyr for Another Country's Cause
Powerful Symbol for Repatriation
True’s trial signifies a radical diplomatic effort to bring antiquities home. While Italy pursued since 1988 the antiquities drained by smugglers in Mediterranean languor, True’s indictment in 2006 has shown, faute de mieux, more success. Since then, at least four cultural institutions in America hurriedly agreed to return allegedly looted antiquities, even more than the blemished. |
|
>
> |
- This would quite rightly be considered demonstrative of policy success by any prosecutor in the world. Pressure is plainly being applied to the right places when the aims of the State with respect to non-resident parties who are difficult to regulate are being spontaneously achieved. Are we supposed to feel that this is a problem regardless of whether True is factually guilty?
|
| | Italy’s successful efforts to get publicity for a criminal trial against an American corrupt its legitimacy. Less than a disinterested state prosecuting a foreigner, Italy has embroiled True in an issue of nationalist politics. The government has summarily spoken of her ‘obvious guilt’ without having tried her or offering proof. If fact finding were the only purpose, the Italian government would have indicted far more museum directors to discover the extent of their involvement in the underworld, a possibility as likely as hers. Symbolism mystifies our perception of the ‘real world’ to empower what is otherwise powerless. Its main purpose is to turn the content-free case of True’s trial, whose facts we read little in the newspaper, into a powerfully symbolic cause célèbre inspiring a new alacrity among museums to negotiate with the Italian government.
A War Offensive |
| | The significance of a symbolic trial concerns the role of the state to abuse its power by assailing individual rights for a greater national good. The Soviet show trials under Stalin define the word itself in our modern lexicon. The Bolshevik state, including the Trotskyites, perceived these trials as progress in the march of history. They functioned less as a factual inquiry than as a historical event to solidify the death and resurrection of the collectivist soul of communist Russia. To a far lesser degree, True’s trial also represents a historical event to achieve the goal of repatriation after domestic failures to contain the cultural items. Whether True is innocent or guilty, Italy is successfully fulfilling its destiny. (997 Words) |
|
<
< | It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. |
| | -- By JesseCreed - 09 Feb 2008 |
|
<
< | |
| |
|
|
<
< | You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" on the next line:
# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, JesseCreed |
| | |
|
<
< | Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of that line. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated list |
| | \ No newline at end of file |
|
>
> |
- I don't understand at all the legal analysis in this essay, most particularly the conclusion on the subject of show trials. Italian policy-makers can quite rightly assume that any social objective requiring control over Mafia activity in Sicily or the southern regions of the mainland cannot be achieved on the ground. The decision to control fences and thieves by pressuring buyers is perfectly legitimate: the Dutch police do it with respect to bicycle thieves in Amsterdam, and there's nothing to prevent the Italians or the Turks from taking the same step in the art market. Either a particular defendant has, for example, conspired with thieves and their fences in the process of buying for museums, or she has not. If she has, what tenderness of spirit on our part would justify claiming that such a step is a "show trial"? What does it show beyond a determination to undertake what works in the achievement of a legitimate national purpose? The essay assumes by huffing and puffing and acting all knowledgeable and cosmopolitan that it can somehow cause these questions not to be asked. But if you want to hold up the exculpatory side of the question, you've got to meet the real problems.
|
| | \ No newline at end of file |