Dean, You can either argue your side, or lay it to rest, but it's not possible to do both. Mike On 5/8/2012 8:58 PM, Dean May wrote: > This is really political and heavily one sided. It is only beautifully put > if you agree with the faulty premises, which some on this list to not. Most > of the same arguments could be made against eating meat. Can we lay it to > rest now? > > Dean > > Dean W May (812) 235-5272 voice and text > > PianoRebuilders.com (888) DEAN-MAY > > Terre Haute IN 47802 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf > Of Joseph Giandalone > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 9:46 PM > To: pianotech at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [pianotech] Ivory Laws > > > Mark, > > You put this beautifully, and I couldn't agree with you more completely ! > > It always was, at all times in History, WRONG to slaughter these creatures > so that their two front teeth could contribute to minor amusements for > humans. And this is the kind of hubris and arrogance that is destroying our > planet. Ivory is a fetish, and I've called it so in the past (and been > roundly ridiculed in this forum for advocating the "waste" of what ivory has > already been "harvested" - and for ignoring the wonderful laws that provide > for the sale of confiscated poached ivory and use the proceeds to extend > protections against such poaching. HAH.) > > The consistent way to advocate for protection of the source animals from > poaching is to reject the fatuous idea that Real Ivory makes a piano in any > way more desirable as an instrument. Or that the Ivory Trade was EVER > anything but a brutish, disgraceful exercise for all concerned in every > segment of it. Seriously: do some reading up on it if you dare; it was, in > its heyday, a massive disgrace to the human race. > > Nobody ever asked the elephants if it was OK with them to take their 2 front > teeth and brutally murder them in the bargain. Remember folks: these are > among the most intelligent animals on earth; they are very family-oriented, > and they mourn their dead. I'd like to say to some of the folks on the > "other side" of this issue: a leather-crafting friend of mine tells me that > the human scrotum makes a very fine wallet . . . any of you gents mind if we > help ourselves to a little raw material ?? > > Joseph Giandalone > Conway, MA > > > On May 4, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Mark Dierauf wrote: > >> Paul - >> >> Of course I realize that you are not advocating the slaughter of elephants > to provide new material for covering piano keys (or any other reason). But > we as piano techs often (virtually always, in my experience) praise this > material for various reasons, and that is the problem. As long as ivory is > prized for whatever reason there will be a market for it and these animals > will be pushed ever closer to extinction. You say near the end of your post > that we should not do anything that encourages the killing of elephants. I > believe that whenever we talk about "a beautiful set of ivories" we are > doing just that, even though that is certainly not our intention. Like it or > not, we are part of the problem. >> I used to think that confiscated poached ivory could be sold and the > proceeds used to fund anti-poaching efforts. That was tried, and it only > served to further increase the value of tusks in a part of the world where > money is scarce and life is cheap. More and more I think that it all belongs > in museums only, and that we as a society can either choose to be > inconvenienced by regulation or watch passively as these (and other) animals > disappear forever. Before you (not you specifically, Paul, but anyone > reading this) take issue with my use of the word "inconvenienced" in > speaking of regulations that can often seem heavy-handed, I would refer you > back to my original post - "Tell that to the elephants". >> Respectfully, >> >> - Mark >> >> On 5/4/2012 8:32 AM, paul bruesch wrote: >>> Whoa. That photo is repulsive and uncalled for. I am absolutely NOT > suggesting that we should continue to "produce" new ivory. This thread is > about selling a piano with key covers made from animals that have long since > been "harvested". The gist of it is that no one who owns a piano in > California can sell it if it happens to have ivory key covers. Instead, they > need to have those ivory covers removed and replaced with plastic. Do you > know what plastic production looks like? Ulimately, it may not be quite as > hideous as your graphic photo of the slaughtered elephant, but it ain't > pretty either. Who gains anything besides the technician recovering the > keys? >>> I completely agree with the current US ban. We absolutely should not do > anything that encourages further killing of these enormous, beautiful > beasts. >>> I think this post should remove any doubt as to my viewpoint in this > matter. I will not respond to it any more. >>> Note that the use of double-quotes in the first paragraph is to denote > the use of popular euphemisms typically used to soften the tone of this sort > of practice. >>> Paul Bruesch >>> Stillwater, MN
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC