Abstract
Trafficking natural objects and trafficking cultural objects have been treated separately both in regulatory policy and in criminological discussion. The former is generally taken to be ‘wildlife crime’ while the latter has come to be considered under the auspices of a debate on ‘illicit art and antiquities’. In this article we study the narrative discourse of high-end collectors of orchids and antiquities. The illicit parts of these global trades are subject to this analytical divide between wildlife trafficking and art trafficking, and this has resulted in quite different regulatory structures for each of these markets. However, the trafficking routines, the types and levels of harm involved, and the supply–demand dynamics in the trafficking of orchids and antiquities are actually quite similar, and in this study we find those structural similarities reflected in substantial common ground in the way collectors talk about their role in each market. Collectors of rare and precious orchids and antiquities valorize their participation in markets that are known to be in quite considerable degree illicit, appealing to ‘higher loyalties’ such as preservation, appreciation of aesthetic beauty and cultural edification. These higher loyalties, along with other techniques of neutralization, deplete the force of law as a guide to appropriate action. We propose that the appeal to higher loyalties is difficult to categorize as a technique of neutralization in this study as it appears to be a motivational explanation for the collectors involved. The other classic techniques of neutralization are deflective, guilt and critique reducing narrative mechanisms, while higher loyalties drives illicit behaviour in collecting markets for orchids and antiquities in ways that go significantly beyond the normal definition of neutralization.
Highlights
Keep and display rare and precious ‘collectibles’? How do they talk about this social practice; and how do they explain why they do it even when it breaks the law? In this study we look for answers to these questions around legally transgressive motive, from the perspectives of collectors of two different rare and precious commodities: orchids and antiquities
The personal and social processes of cultural edification within the moral economy of collecting orchids and antiquities are explained by collectors through the use of narrative tools that seem to suggest a common pool of justificatory reference
We suggest that despite significant differences in how they are governed in law and researched in criminology, orchid and antiquities trafficking and collecting can be identified as having striking similarities on basic sociological levels including motivation, patterns of activity, practical ethics, geographical reach and social and cultural structures supporting economic supply and demand
Summary
Motives and neutralizationsCollectors lust after a contraband orchid for the same reasons connoisseurs seek a forbidden manmade masterpiece, according to prosecutor Hochman: ‘For its beauty, its rarity, its endangeredness.’ (Orrick, 1995)Why do people buy, keep and display rare and precious ‘collectibles’? How do they talk about this social practice; and how do they explain why they do it even when it breaks the law? In this study we look for answers to these questions around legally transgressive motive, from the perspectives of collectors of two different rare and precious commodities: orchids and antiquities.The essence of our argument is that the moral economy of collecting in these markets valorizes the practice with reference to ideals of self-realization and public service, seeing both personal and social benefits where the law sees crime. The personal and social processes of cultural edification within the moral economy of collecting orchids and antiquities are explained by collectors through the use of narrative tools that seem to suggest a common pool of justificatory reference.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have