[This is the second part of the transcript of a 60 Minutes (CBS News) segment originally broadcast on 17 December 2023 and rerun on 28 June 2026. As readers of Rick On Theater know, I have a strong interest in art in general, and in the preservation of art in particular.
[Other ROT posts on that subject include: “‘How High-Tech Replicas Can Help Save Our Cultural Heritage‘“ by Jeffrey Brown of PBS News Hour (28 May 2017); “Conserving Modern Art“ (11 December 2018); “‘Smithsonian and U.S. Army join forces to save works of art and culture threatened by war‘“ by Jeffrey Brown and Anne Azzi Davenport of PBS News Hour (15 September 2022); “Greenwood Pond: Double Site“ (22 February 2024); ”Two Restorations“ (4 November 2024); and “Replicating Classic Art Works“ (21 February 2026).]
“HOW CAMBODIAN
ARTIFACTS STOLEN FROM TEMPLES
(continued)
by Anderson
Cooper
[Cooper’s 60 Minutes report, with video, is posted on the CBS News website. I have split it into two parts for republication on ROT, with Part 1 posted on Wednesday. 8 July. As always, I recommend that ROTters go back and read the beginning of the transcript before turning to Part 2, below. (There’s a brief précis of Cambodian history in the afterword to Part 1.)]
Cambodia tracking down thousands of priceless looted antiquities
It’s taken a team of Cambodian investigators led by Brad Gordon, an American lawyer, more than 10 years to document the theft of thousands of ancient statues and relics by a British collector named Douglas Latchford. As we reported in 2023, they’ve managed to get some of what he stole back, but many of Cambodia’s greatest treasures are still out there, hidden away in the mansions of millionaires and billionaires, and hiding in plain sight, on display in some of the most prestigious museums around the world.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York has one of the most important collections of Cambodian antiquities in the world. But many of the finest pieces on display here in the Southeast Asian art wing . . . are stolen. Like this one. And this one . . . This as well – all passed through the hands of Douglas Latchford.
Latchford sold this one to the Met in the early 1990s . . . This one he donated.
Anderson Cooper: Do you think people visiting the Met, know that these were looted?
Brad Gordon: I think most people walk through the Met, they have no idea those are blood antiquities. They have no idea what– what the history is behind those pieces. They don’t know– the temples they came from. They don’t know the people who were killed to get them here.
Anderson Cooper: The dirt has been brushed off. There’s a little note that says where it came from. Should people believe what’s on that little note?
Brad Gordon: No. Absolutely not.
In 2023, we went with Brad Gordon to see where in Cambodia the Met and other museums’ collections really did come from.
Anderson Cooper: This is incredible.
This seven-story pyramid is more than 1,000 years old . . . and rises out of the jungle in Koh Ker in northeast Cambodia . . . It’s one of dozens of temples in what was once the capital of an ancient Khmer empire.
Anderson Cooper: –looters have been all over this site for– for decades.
Brad Gordon: Correct.
Anderson Cooper: Douglas Latchford loved the statuary . . .
Brad Gordon: In love with the beauty, in love with the artistic–
Anderson Cooper: The statues from here are–
Anderson Cooper: –have a distinctive style that he particularly loved?
Brad Gordon: Correct.
And perhaps the most famous statues in that distinctive style that Latchford stole from Koh Ker were nine stone warriors once arranged together in a battle scene. When we were there, seven had been returned to the National Museum in Phnom Penh, including this 500-pound sandstone sculpture — it’s the one Sotheby’s tried to sell in 2011. They’re back on their original pedestals, their ankles reunited with their feet, hacked off by looters.
Anderson Cooper: This was at Sotheby’s. This is at Christie’s.
Hab Touch: Norton Simon’s.
Anderson Cooper: Norton Simon Museum [Pasadena, California]–
Hab Touch [b. 1965] is the secretary of state in Cambodia’s Ministry of Culture. He is working with Brad Gordon to bring back the two Koh Ker statues who’s empty pedestals sit in the museum.
Anderson Cooper: So do you know what are supposed to be on–
Anderson Cooper: You know what are supposed to be here, and you know what’s–
Hab Touch: We know–
Anderson Cooper: –supposed to be here?
Hab Touch: Among nine sculpture, we have seven already. Only two missing.
One of those missing sculptures was discovered in the glossy pages of Architectural Digest in 2008 . . . this mythical army commander and a stunning number of other stolen works . . . were all together in the Palm Beach mansion of the late billionaire George Lindemann [1936-2018; businessman; CEO of a fossil fuel infrastructure and pipeline company] and his wife Frayda [b. 1939].
Anderson Cooper: The ancient treasures of Cambodia were sitting in the living room of an incredibly wealthy family in America, in Florida, on display, while people were having cocktails and–
Brad Gordon: The one thing that I’m always struck by is how many people witnessed it and have been silent and continue to be silent today.
The Lindemann’s spent an estimated $20 million building the collection with the help of Douglas Latchford . . . Frayda Lindemann didn’t respond to our request for an interview.
But in Koh Ker . . . we showed her home to two former looters.
Anderson Cooper: What do you think of this house?
It’s a beautiful house, he said, it looks like it belongs to a king.
The former looters pointed out another statue in the Lindemann’s living room they said they helped steal . . . this reclining figure of the Hindu God Vishnu. They said it was dug out of the ground from this exact spot in late 1995.
Anderson Cooper: You’re 100% sure this was taken from here by you and others in 1995?
Lida (translated): Yeah, I’m sure.
They also identified a number of other statues they say they stole that appear in books published by Douglas Latchford. They say they found this copper statue using a metal detector.
Anderson Cooper: This is Bodhisattva at Ease?
[In Buddhism, a bodhisattva is a person who has attained, or is striving towards, bodhi (meaning ‘awakening’ or ‘enlightenment’) or Buddhahood. In early Buddhism, the term Bodhisattva is used in texts to refer to Siddhartha Gautama or Gautama Buddha in his previous lives and as a young man in his last life, when he was working towards liberation (nirvana).]
Brad Gordon: Yeah.
They dug it out of the ground here in 1990. J.P. Labbat, former special agent with Homeland Security, found photos of the statue covered in dirt on Douglas Latchford’s computer. Latchford sold it to the Met in 1992. When we visited, it was still on display.
Anderson Cooper: You were able to get access to some of Latchford’s– emails?
J.P. Labatt: Yes. And in there– there are d– detailed– stories about the manner in which he obtained pieces, the fact that he was having them reassembled– and repaired, that dirt and– and crustaceans were being– cleaned off of them.
Anderson Cooper: They were freshly dug out of the ground?
J.P. Labatt: Fresh. The– these were fresh pieces that he would describe in his emails that needed a level of restoration before he could even attempt to sell them.
Douglas Latchford was indicted in 2019 but died [of complications of Parkinson’s disease in Bangkok at 89] before he could be put on trial. Federal prosecutors in New York however continued tracing his looted artifacts . . . they believe at least 18 of them have landed up at the Met.
Andrea Bayer: I am very involved in our work on provenance.
Andrea Bayer [b. 1957] is deputy director for Collections and Administration at The Met.
Anderson Cooper: The Met has said that they will return objects based upon rigorous evidentiary review. What rigorous evidentiary review was done before acquiring these pieces?
Andrea Bayer: Not enough.
Anderson Cooper: It seems like the Met had a don’t ask, don’t tell policy. They wanted to build up their collection. And nobody was really asking questions where it came from.
Andrea Bayer: For people, many people in the art world, there was a sense of protecting great objects that stood a chance of being destroyed. We no longer feel about it that way.
Under pressure 13 years ago, the Met did return two statues called Kneeling Attendants [10th century; stolen from Koh Ker during the civil war of the 1970s], which had been donated to them by Douglas Latchford.
Anderson Cooper: In 2013, when you returned the kneeling attendants, did you investigate the other items that Douglas Latchford had brought to this museum?
Andrea Bayer: I don’t know the answer to that question. I can only pick up the story several years later, when Doug– Douglas Latchford was indicted in 2019, when we immediately and proactively went to the U.S. Attorney’s Office and offered our full cooperation.
Anderson Cooper: Well, I can pick up the story actually in 2013, because a spokesman for the Met, said that “No special effort was gonna be made to check the provenances of any other Douglas Latchford donated work.” Why wouldn’t the Met want to look into everything else that Douglas Latchford had brought to this museum?
Andrea Bayer: I can’t speculate about why that didn’t happen.
Anderson Cooper: But no one investigated all the other items that Douglas Latchford gave?
Andrea Bayer: Not to my knowledge.
The Met is not the only major museum with looted Cambodian artifacts, but its collection is one of the largest in the world. In 2023, the museum announced it would create a research team to examine the provenance or acquisition history of all its collections.
Anderson Cooper: It’s taken 10 years since Douglas Latchford was shown to have given stolen property to the Met, for the Met to set up this provenance team. Why has it taken 10 years?
Andrea Bayer: It was a slow process, I’ll grant you that. It was a slow process, but– I think that the fact that we are– fully engaged now, fully cooperative now is– is our only answer to this really. it’s a moment of reckoning, and we’re ready to do what it takes now– to right whatever the wrong is.
Anderson Cooper: Four years ago, when Douglas Latchford was indicted by prosecutors, did you set up a team to check the provenance of every Latchford work–
Andrea Bayer: Yes. We started, absolutely we started to dig in right then and there. It’s not easy. I mean the fact that we don’t have much information has to do with the fact that it’s very hard to find the information–
Anderson Cooper: But there’s enough information for federal prosecutors- to charge Douglas Latchford with stealing and looting and trafficking in smuggled items. How much more evidence do you need? You haven’t–
Andrea Bayer: We need–
Anderson Cooper: –returned any of the– any Douglas Latchford-related items since he’s been indicted, and that was four years ago.
Andrea Bayer: But we are on the verge of– of– of returning a number of them.
Anderson Cooper: All of them?
Andrea Bayer: That I can’t say.
Four months after that interview, just two days before we went to air in 2023, prosecutors announced the Met would return 13 antiquities that came through Douglas Latchford.
But the Met has not returned this statue, which was specifically cited in the indictment of Latchford, or this one, which Latchford sold to the Met in 1992.
Cambodia’s Culture Minister called the Met’s announcement a “first step” and says she looks “forward to the return of many more of our treasures.”
Anderson Cooper: Shouldn’t museums have thought twice about buying things that were coming out of Cambodia in– during the genocide and civil war and decades of strife?
J.P. Labatt: And this question that you raise is really– the– the crux of– of what we’re wrestling with.
J.P. Labatt: You– acquired pieces from a known smuggler who– used a team of looters that the government has interviewed and taken statements from. They have emails which refute the information in your own provenance at the museum. You have items in the museum which were named in the indictment of Latchford that are still there. And so these pieces should go back.
Anderson Cooper: There’s no question.
J.P. Labatt: It’s the right thing to do.
In 2023, the Lindemann family, whose collection was showcased in Architectural Digest, struck a deal with federal authorities . . . voluntarily agreeing to return 33 stolen treasures. In a statement to the New York Times, the Lindemann’s said: “Having purchased these items from dealers that we assumed were reputable, we were saddened to learn how they made their way to the market in the United States.”
Anderson Cooper: Why did the Lindemanns agree to return their collection to Cambodia?
J.P. Labatt: The pieces were dirty. I– I think they finally came around to the– the fact that– Latchford was dirty, their collection was– was all looted pieces. It was obvious. And– and so they– they– decided to surrender them.
We got a peek at what was the Lindemann collection shortly after the deal was done. It was sitting in a warehouse in upstate New York. A nation’s living gods and ancestors waiting for a ride home.
Brad Gordon: This is like a whole wing of a museum.
A wing of a museum that only the Lindemann’s and their friends had access to.
Anderson Cooper: If the Lindemann’s hadn’t published these in Architectural Digest back in 2008?
Brad Gordon: I think there’s a good chance we maybe never would have found it.
Brad Gordon: We always say, the gods want to come home. We feel like the gods have spoken today. They want to come home.
As one of the biggest crates was being opened . . . waiting eagerly was Muikong Taing and Thyda Long . . . two members of Brad Gordon’s investigative team. This would be their first look at the mythical army commander taken from Koh Ker . . . they were likely the first Cambodians to set eyes on it since Douglas Latchford stole it more than 50 years ago.
Thyda Long: He’s here.
Anderson Cooper: There’s a look in his eyes and on his face.
Thyda Long: It’s much bigger than I expected it to be.
Anderson Cooper: His presence is extraordinary.
Thyda Long: I did not expect to feel this way.
Even the commander seemed to be smiling.
Then it was time to see the rarest piece in the Lindemann’s collection. The Cambodian team knelt in reverence as the Hindu god Vishnu [10th century; looted from the Prasat Krachap temple in Koh Ker] was uncrated. Despite all the fuss, he appeared unperturbed . . . reclining in a cosmic slumber. When this statue arrived in Cambodia, it was welcomed as one of the most important ever returned.
Earlier this month, the Met returned two more artifacts to Cambodia following a seizure by the Manhattan DA’s Antiquities Trafficking Unit. The Cambodian government is still demanding the repatriation of 30 others in the Met’s possession.
Produced by Michael H. Gavshon and Nadim Roberts. Associate producer, Eliza Costas. Broadcast associate, Grace Conley. Edited by Patrick Lee.
[With respect to restoration of the ancient artifacts in the Cambodian temples about which Anderson Cooper reports above, looting, aside from its desecration, is an act of vandalism—the willful and malicious damaging of the sculptures.
[In my coverage of art conservation and preservation on ROT, there are other forms of damage and potential damage against which art conservators and restorers must struggle. I want to offer a look at another kind of conservation and restoration with which I had personal experience.
[Back in 2007, there was an exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution’s Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden in Washington, D.C., on the conservation and preservation of experimental and innovative art that doesn’t age well or lend itself easily to cleaning.
[As artists were experimenting with new media and techniques, they never considered how those elements would change over time. This created sometimes immense challenges for museums and conservators, as well as private owners with fewer resources, long after the artists had probably died.
[Some years earlier, in 1985, the Hirshhorn had mounted another exhibit in which works modern artists from the museum’s own collection that had undergone conservation treatment were shown. The conserved pieces were accompanied by photographs depicting what they’d looked like before the treatment.
[A later Hirshhorn display, in 2003-2004, was “intended to address the interaction of principle, practice, materials, techniques and ideas, which characterizes the preservation and care of contemporary and modern art.”
[I had a serious problem of this nature with a painting from 1958 that began to deteriorate because of the innovative technique the artist used to create it. The fate of my little Abstract Expressionist painting, Intermezzo by Norman Carton (1908-80), is a simple, but perfect example of this issue.
[The 18-inch-by-16-inch, heavily impastoed, multi-colored work in oil on canvas, a 14th-birthday gift for me from my parents, is one of the most cherished pieces I have and, except when I went to college and the army, I took it with me every time I moved.
[In the 1980s, the painting began to deteriorate. The oil paint—Carton made the painting before new pigments like acrylics were invented—had just begun to dry on the inside of the thick gobs the artist had applied to the canvas with a palette knife. Who knew it would take three decades for oil paint to dry inside large clumps?
[As the paint dried, the globs shrank and pulled away from the canvas, not only threatening to come off, but causing cracks and flakes (called “cleavage,” “flaking,” “blistering,” or “scaling”) in the primer (known as “ground”) and flatter areas of paint on the canvas. I knew that if I didn’t do something, I’d lose the painting.
[I was frantic. I even went so far as to write to the administration of New York’s New School for Social Research (now just The New School), where Carton had exhibited and taught, because on the third floor of the old main building, the school displayed a larger Carton canvas in the same style as my small one. I asked if they had encountered the same problem and, if so, what they did about it, but I never received an answer.
[At the time, my father was a docent at the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery, so I asked him to use his contacts at the museum to find a conservator who might be able to save Intermezzo and he did. In 1987, I ended up paying five times the painting’s 1960 purchase price—but a quarter of its estimated value at the time—to stabilize it to prevent further deterioration. To this day, I don’t regret the expenditure for a New York second.]
No comments:
Post a Comment