Taking more artifacts from the wreck

[Maureen Zottoli]

Ing,
It's funny in a way, but you were the one who in several posts states that we just need facts not emotionalism in research and yet it appears that a mighty sensitive spot has been broke open and salt poured in generously here.

I want to be clear here, there are many who are very moved by what you state regarding socks, boxer shorts and a lifetime's worth of grief to those who knew the 24 year old who died. I very much agree with you. And it is upsetting when settlements are made that insensitive people move in to claim or pilfer through private things. I hate that too. And I too do not give a damn about whether or not the salvors have any legal right to these private things, because I too have allowed these people of long ago to get under my skin and it is personal now...it isn't just business. The Godfather was wrong.

But the facts and not the emotions of the issue are (as someone I can't remember who it was now) still remain, if what they said is true: given that there was a settlement the source of the settlement would have taken over ownership of the ship and its contents. But, is that true?

Legally, they didn't take possession....so, didn't they too give up their rights by not going after their property? So, when the items are recovered, shouldn't they be handed over to the original owners....or is it finder keepers losers weepers sort of thing. (On 295 running just south of DC, if you leave your car unattended on the road to seek road service, you will be lucky to find your chasis in the morning let alone your vehicle. But the residents hold to the finders keepers attitude.)

That seems a totally cold way of handling it. But that seems the way of this world anymore.

I have no idea anymore what is right and what is wrong Ing. All I know is that in my heart, it hurts. It hurts to see folks gutting her. And yet it was totally errie and yet fascinating to stand before an item, even a watch that was a part of all of this.

I respect you Ing and your view. And I know you don;t give a damn whether I do or not, I just thought that I would say that.
Maureen.
Please note:When you pass on, if I am still here I will see to it that none of the guys goes through your private things.

 

[Randy Bryan Bigham]

All,

Ing is absolutely right about the need for MORE research and LESS digging about in the mud for trinkets. A tea cup is a tea cup is a tea cup. That it came off the Titanic may be a better pedigree than your average teacup can ever dream of acquiring but it doesn't make it the Holy Grail. So much focus is cast on salvagable items but afterall how much can tableware or even waterlogged personal belongings tell us that is not trivial or, as Ing has said, "ghoulish?" Very little.

So why do we want to see these things? Morbid curiosity. It's human, yes, but we can resist the temptation I think and move on.

Which is what I hope RMST, Inc will do. And I also hope we enthusiasts can move from gawking in the aisles at artifact shows to taking on a little research of our own. You don't have to be a published author or a professional investigator. And you don't have to be rich or have gobs of time on your hands. And it's an opportunity to be really involved in the story of the Titanic.

We can't all survey the ocean floor or caress the articles retrieved but we can all spin a reel of microfilm or leaf through pages or make notes from old records. We all have our special points of interest or favorite people in the Titanic story. Pick one to do a little bit of independent research on and you'll be surprised what you find and how much! Just ask Phillip Gowan if it's rewarding work. Ask George Behe, or Inger Sheil, or Shelley Dziedzic.

Libraries and archives and photo agencies are the real gold mines of Titanic history, not the muck of a North Atlantic sea bed.

 

[Maureen Zottoli]

Randy,
What you say is true about the "libraries and archives and photo agencies are the real gold mines of the Titanic history". But a lot of it takes travel or teamwork due to the specific nature of the locations of the data, but perhaps some of us could help others to do their research.

At the National Geographic Society here in DC they have a staff that gather up books and clippingsfor the writer/editors of the magazines and books when they are about to do a book or article. I used to do this when I was in college. This was the best experience in the world. It taught me what research is all about and how valuable even a small news article can be.

The folks at NGS basically have the same sort of philosophy that I believe that George Behe has towards books and research and that is research it to death, validate and verify your facts and then waive the common stuff and write about the stuff that folks do not know.

Ing, I am not a titanic author or researcher by any means, but I would be happy to help you out here in the DC area with things that I can find or do. To sift through the pile of papers to find the really important stuff so that you can find it easily. I have no idea how I can help, but I am offering to do so for you.
Maureen.

 

[Inger Sheil]

Maureen - I have never posted on the need to divorce emotion from research. I do not advocate such a course, and never have. In matters of empirical data or interpretation I believe researchers should not let their emotional involvement cloud their objectivity, but some of the most powerful work and words come from individuals who are passionate about their subject. What I posted about earlier was respecting the intentions of others, and of the inherant fallacy of trying to ascribe a blanket set of views to those who perished in the wreck or those related to them.

Incidently, I know something about isolation from sources. I come from Australia, after all. And it was to overcome the tyranny of distance I relocated to London. But before I arrived here I used the tools available to me - local libraries, microfiche/film, the Internet (thank God for the internet) and correspondence. I also routinely make the effort to assist those researchers who want to access London sources - I spent several hours yesterday at the FRC doing lookups for other people.

Randy, I share your views on the salvage efforts wholeheartedly. You expressed it beautifully. What is being done in the North Atlantic is more akin to treasure or souvenir hunting - not research. If only a fraction of that money and effort were expended on real academic research...

I make no apologies for this being a sore spot. I will not condone the salvage efforts - not even with silence.

 

[Maureen Zottoli]

Ing,
Didn't ask you to be silent nor did I expect that you would be. I also was not asking you to divorce yourself from the emotions and was clearly stating that I could understand where you were coming from because I too share the same feelings. I am sorry if I came acorss that way.

My past year has been distraught with feelings and legal issues that one hopes that no one on this planet will have to face alone. But bottom line despite my gut moral beliefs on issues, the legalities came into it and won out. And I and many other people lost. Victims lost. All because of some stupid loop hole.

Condone what happened? No way. But it did happen and I can not do anything about it. I tried for 11 long years and I lost this one. And so about 2 months ago I decided that the authorities in place must accept accountability in this for what has happened. I accept my beliefs, but as Tina Turner says I just don't want to fight anymore.

I support you in your beliefs regarding salvage and I know you came from Australia and I also know that you do research for folks, as do I. I offered to help you out Ing here in the DC area and I meant it. There are no strings to that offer and it still stands. I respect you and your opinion Ing, as a person and as a scholar.

Maureen.

 

[John M. Feeney]

Hi, all!

I usually avoid this subject entirely, as I really have almost no opinion whatsoever about the salvage controversy. But I too wanted to thank Shelley for a very thoughtful commentary on this issue which sincerely addressed the one aspect of the debate I find most compelling. And that is the reverence -- or lack thereof -- displayed by the salvors.

Shelley's testament to the genuine concern and integrity of the original team was indeed quite moving. Obviously no mere crass commercialism -- the desire to make a fast buck and laugh all the way to the bank -- was involved. Whether the current situation has degenerated, I cannot say. I would certainly agree with Inger that we don't need any more teacups or silverware or socks -- maybe.

But oh, the thought of that telegraph, or the binnacle upon which sat poised the wheel that turned those last few fateful seconds! The davits that held so little hope for so many! That indeed is quite a different matter. Some things go far beyond mere words on paper or even recorded sound. Beyond the merely visual, as Shelley may have alluded to, is the incontestable presence that some objects bear. The more "new age" among us would refer to this as psyschometry -- the transmission of fact or feelings by inanimate objects. To stand before the actual painting by Van Gogh, or kneel in the medieval chapel reconstructed at the Philadelphia Museum of Art is quite a different experience altogether. It embodies, along with the intellectual, a spiritual side that nearly defies description. It is -- as Shelley said -- a sort of time travel.

Strangely, it is this very thing that prohibits in me any desire to attend these Titanic exhibitions. My thoughts are that to touch the davit, or binnacle, or telegraph would raise in me an overwhelming sense of grief and sadness. Ballard alluded to this on finding the wreck, and it's my belief that this alone would have prevented him entertaining any notions of salvage. He felt the very spirit of the ship and dared not defile that.

But, disinterments do occur, and whether they are laudable or damnable depends entirely on the individual's perspective concerning the motives and legitimacy of the involved parties. An unearthing to investigate a delayed suspicion of homicide is clearly not the same thing as body snatching. And it has been said quite aptly that the only difference between an archaeologist and a grave robber is time!

If others wish -- or feel the need -- to stand in the presence of the great ship, I certainly would not deny them that. The Titanic's salvors are not displaying naked Pharoahs stripped of their human dignity. They are displaying *objects* which may indeed give a real sense of the tragedy of it all to those who attend.

Sincerely,
John Feeney

 

[Shelley Dziedzic]

Mulling over the very thought-provoking exchanges we have had in the last 48 hours, it occurs to me that I have forgotten a final point on the issue of bringing yet MORE things up from the wrecksite. Part of the agreement Judge Clarke insisted upon in the awarding of sole salvor privilege (now that's a wonderful word) to Titanic Ventures (now RMS TITANCIC) was that the team HAD to CONTINUE actively recovering, and restoring for exhibit items from the wrecksite. In other words- bluntly put- the vultures are HOVERING- and we knew who they were then- just waiting for Tulloch and the French to abandon the wreck- please read Clarke's ruling on the awarding of Sole Salvor Rights handed down in Norfolk. Someday soon I will write a good word about Mr. Tulloch- somebody ought to. But bottom line for those having reservations concerning the recovery effort- what is the lesser of two evils- A good man with a humanitarian vision and the BEST dive team and equipment on the planet- or a bunch of yahoos in a dinghy whooping it up with a net? If I had to be lowered on a rope to get a teacup to protect the wreck from vultures- let me get my wetsuit. You see the dilemma? The funding became horrific to keep diving to keep others with a less noble plan away. Just thought you should know that- this is not my personal opinion- I was there when it all went down. Hence the coal sales and other things some felt uneasy about. My concern now as I watch nervously on the sideline is what next? Are the new people going to keep the promise- I'll tell you one thing- Judge Clarke is one savvy Southern Gentleman and nobody pulls one over on him. Just thought you might want to know. BTW, this is as feisty as I ever get!/s.

 

[Shelley Dziedzic]

Forgot to mention- if you think Ballard was anti-salvage-just read his original remarks to Congress- the Navy would not fund recovery- he was raring to go. There's a great deal more to know about Dr. B. His exploration center just opened in Mystic at the aquarium. I give him HIGH marks for bringing the excitement of undersea discovery to children and higher marks for stimulating young minds. He was a very lucky man to be a the right spot at the right hour- it could just as equally have been the French team on that run that night. Ballard did not DISCOVER anything out there- he was on the boat which had the "mowing the lawn" duty when the boilers were spotted by a little-known man whom you NEVER hear of- Bob was sent for and you know the rest. You will probably think I am a mad Francophile-but I was sorry that the Surroit and those French guys didn't get some hero-welcome. I have met Ballard on three occasions-someday I will write a few words about that. Hope this doesn't sound too crabby- what irritated me about him was how quickly he changed course when the opportunity for HIM to salvage was untenable. Always dangerous setting up mere mortals on pedestals./s.

 

[Kritina Johnston]

Confession from an exhibition attendee:

The reasons why anyone attends one of these exhibitions are varied.

For the majority it's about curiosity, for the rest it is harder to explain. I can tell you in my case it wasn't simple morbid curiosity that lead me to shell out 14 dollars and go to an exhibition taking place in a bloody casino! (That alone was tacky, the choice of venue). I can't really say what DID compel me to go against my beliefs and go in there, although I did not look at everything (I stayed away from the personal objects, though there were not that many in this particular exhibition). I went more for items from the ship in general (one of the first-class dinner plates was no different than a plate I saw in a bridal magazine years ago, and I still wonder if that was a genuine plate on display).

Maybe I was seeking a connection with the people, but I did not want to get to close at the same time because I was afraid to be completely overwhelmed by what happened to them. I already carry the sadness around, so maybe I was trying to make peace with the tragedy. Those objects in the glass cases are the closest I'll ever come to the people; I'll never be able to touch a letter written home by James Moody, for example. For some of us, looking through the official records isn't enough. It's a desperate undefinable something that drives us to these exhibitions, even though we never wanted anything from down there to be brought to the surface.

If I've said too much...well, so be it.

 

[Inger Sheil]

I don't accept the 'lesser of two evils' argument, and I will not tone down my opposition in order to accept a compromise. I don't care about the personalities involved. I will not compromise, and I will not become inured to the salvage effort, gradually accepting their ever more intrusive operations.

Maureen - I wasn't attacking you personally (or anyone else for this matter - one of the men I most respect in the Titanic field, something of a mentor to me, is aggresively pro-sal. We have had words on this issue, but I still think the world of him.). It is indeed a sore spot, and at least partly for reasons I don't care to discuss on a public messageboard.

Please drop me a private line - I feel more comfortable discussing some issues in email. And yes, I am interested in your offer of Washington research (reciprocal offer for London and the UK goes as well, btw).
[email protected]

Ing

 

[Shelley Dziedzic]

Inger- you missed my point- nobody can make you accept anything if you will not consider any other factors involved. We all have free will to choose.By lesser of two evils I simply mean that the artifacts are up, there is not one thing either one of us can do to change that fact whether or not we agree or agree to disagree and at that time (notice I was referring to the ORIGINAL team) the men who had the right to salvage had a decent intent and a conscience and peerless technology. I will not condemn or praise these new people because I do not know enough about them to paint 'em all with the badguys brush. It's too easy to do that without doing all the homework. What I posted above is simply fact, not my opinion- I will look up the Congressional Record reference.quoting Ballard's salvage statement. This thing will be settled in a court as it once was. Nothing the average gal on the street(that would be me) can do but hope at the very least the original terms of the salvor award will be adhered to. Perhaps it's not too scientific, but I am afraid for me at least personalities are worth taking a hard look at- and performance and track record when I make up my mind to believe in an endeavor and put my faith in an individual.

 

[Inger Sheil]

Shelley -

Many thanks for assuming that I am NOT already aware of the 'facts' in this case. I don't agree with you, ergo I must be ignorant or misinformed.

I haven't missed your point - you've ignored mine. Which is that I'm not concede one bloody iota on this issue. You can distinguish betwen the original team and the current team if you like - I don't care. I'm opposed to the salvage efforts of both. I am not going to compromise and 'accept' the fact that items have been salvaged. I won't retreat or give up one inch - I will continue to condemn it, whether they raise every bloody rivet and teacup there is.

And what do Ballard's opinions have to do with my own?

I reiterate - I don't give a damn about personalities. I don't care if 'X' is a nice guy and 'Y' is not. I'm certain that there are people on the salvage expeditions who are either friendly, charming, or fully committed to their work and who honestly believe what they are doing is a noble and righteous thing. I've already acknowledged that there are those who are in this for honest motives.

That does not change the fact that I disagree with what they are doing. It does not change the fact that I believe that this procedure is intrusive. Subjective opinion? Bloody oath it is. But that's what this argument boils down to - either you believe it is right or you don't.

So no - you can't make me 'accept' anything - whatever other factors you think I should consider in order to change my mind so I accept your point of view on this matter.

 

[Maureen Zottoli]

Okay....translation time...what does "Bloody oath" mean....have mercy on a poor deprived american.
Maureen.

 

[John M. Feeney]

Shelley wrote:

"Forgot to mention- if you think Ballard was anti-salvage-just read his original remarks to Congress- the Navy would not fund recovery- he was raring to go."
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Um. I believe -- though I couldn't swear to it -- that this one may actually have been directed at me, Inger.

If so, thanks for clarifying that, Shelley. I may have been a bit too willing to accept a bit of revisionist propaganda there. I'd been under the *impression*, at least, that Ballard was always quite against any salvage, and this latest is quite a revelation! Thanks once again for enlightening me. As I said, it's an area I haven't really explored, so I'm always open to new information.

Sincerely,
John Feeney

 

[Shelley Dziedzic]

Wow- this is the badlands. This is my last posting on this thread.
1. No salvos are aimed at anyone.
2. Nobody's intelligence was being insulted.
3. I ALSO do not approve of the current salvage expeditions for reasons I have already stated.
4. I did take part in an active way in the preliminary endeavors becaused I believed that if the items were coming UP, the resources ,archives, special talents and abilities of people who truly DO care about these things ought to be available to whoever was going to do the salvage. I still believe it was the right decision.
5. Every one is entitled to an opinion and has the right to accept or refute anybody else's.
6.This is not about changing minds, forcing anything down anybody's throat.
7. I was not talking about "charming" people involved- I was speaking of a man with integrity, high standards both scientifically and morally and a mission which filled my criteria for worthiness if the job was going to be done.
8. I was not comparing Ballard's opinion to your own- I was offering an interesting aspect of an anti-salvage high-profile authority which is NOT widely known because it transpired in 1985 and was not highly publicized . It was a real eyeopener to me when I read it.
9. This is a place to offer information, hopefully meet and exchange ideas, be helpful perhaps in sharing what we may know-sometimes obscure things which may not readily be accessible to everybody everywhere.
10. The reference to Ballard's testimony (just as a matter of interest to anybody) can be found in the 1985 Congressional Record HR3272 Titanic Memorial Act, October 29, 1985 Testimony before the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Panel #1 Guest #4.. Be glad to paraphrase the content if any one wants it.
No offense intended-none taken.