Art Repatriation

Cultural artifacts should not be returned to the region of Origin. Evidence is shown in the passage, “Returning Antiquities to Their Countries of Origin” paragraph 1, “Museums acquire works to display from many different

National cultural-property legislation often replaced a system of partage where the excavation team and host nation shared artefacts and which today have formed the basis of the collections in the world’s finest museums (Cuno 2012:37-38). These laws have not proven to be effective because of a lack of enforcement (Patron 2008:485) and nations which might attempt to recover items often have other more pressing issues to tackle (such as rebuilding government and internal law-and-order). Geraldine Norman (1995:143) makes the valid point that bad laws are made to be broken but she argued that all national cultural-property legislation is destined to fail because it runs counter to human nature and she even suggested that “finders keepers” is the best legal approach. I cannot agree with Norman but I do believe that while source nations do not attempt to recover artefacts or prosecute internationally and market-nations have ‘flexible’ positions on ownership it will be impossible to prevent source nations from supplying the demand. Can international legislation specifically intended to protect cultural heritage help where national laws fail?

Museums are filled with unique,historical artifacts that are precious to our history throughout the world. These “traveling exhibits” give people around the world an opportunity to see how our ancestors lived in many different regions of the world. Many artifacts are far away from their country of origin 7.In the articles “Bring Them Home”and “Museums Preserve the Cultures of the World,” people argue that museums should return certain artifacts to its original country, while others believes it’s only right to keep them considering the originating country rightfully sold those artifacts.In my opinion, countries should bring some artifacts back to their originating country.

These issues with museums and other institutions has led many tribes to not only protest these collections and demand the most sacred items back, but to also develop their own institution that not only tell the real story of their people from a non scientific point of view, but also show the proper resect for the sacred and religious artifacts. Religious sights and objects are a piece of many different groups culture, many of which require a certain level of respect. Within the United States Native American groups are reclaiming these objects for their own

Many people speculate on ancient artifacts with an eye towards its aesthetic value of contemporary etic perspective. While most people are not professional anthropologists who would try to be an anachronistic spectators of a so-called “unknown ancient society”, the interesting historical and cultural aspects are embedded within every art piece throughout the ancient world. The ancient near east nations were characteristic in their own values just like any contemporary society, and they are worth the discussion through various aspects such as cultural, ideological, and historical.

To restore or not, is the ultimate question. When you take a piece of art like Adam it is destroyed Out of a sheer freak accident what do you do. Someone argue that responsibility to previous any artist to restore the statue is close to the metro station as possible. Other than saying that it is a responsibility to put the statue back together in the best representation of the artist original intent possible. Yet others like me believe that the sculpture or piece of art should be put back together and it's broken for form. This maintains the history of the piece it's distraction by accident or on purpose to be at war or a structural failing of the platform is that you sitting on, it's part of the history and culture that goes in to the art. Some may argue that's not the intent of the artist but it is what the art itself has experienced it is how it is it shows the journey Of the

Painting is a way in which humans can express themselves. Consequently, it can reflect a countries’ values and those of its citizens. During the Second World War, before the Germans destroyed many European cities, they looted their cultural places–libraries, museums and palaces. When the Nazis stole thousands of paintings, they also took part of a nation's history and culture. Currently, we can still see the consequences of these actions. These missing masterpieces remain hidden from the public eye, being traded on the black market; consequently, future generations miss significant knowledge.

There are many reasons art should be preserved. Art should be saved from destruction of all kinds, from the regular wear and tear of time, from falling, or even terrorist groups like ISIS. Why should we preserve dumb artifacts our great great great great great great great great…. Grandpa made though? What is the point? There are many many arguments that you could make as to why we shouldn’t spend valuable money on preserving art, but there are counter arguments to everyone.

As with many advances in industry and technology, we can thank war for increasing the interest in research for art conservation. After the Great War, the British Museum unpacked its collections after wartime storage in the Underground railway tunnels. Many items had unexpectedly deteriorated in a relatively short time; iron had rusted, bronze developed green corrosion, pottery and stone objects were covered in growth of salt crystals. The museum then decided to set up a permanent scientific research laboratory to further its understanding of the causes of deterioration of materials and learning methods of treating its effects. Conservation of art is now a full-time

The trade in art, fine art, antiques and antiquities is not portrayed as a violent crime or illicit market and generally does not come off as a threat to international security. However, because of the large, increasing demand for antiquities, politically unstable source nations rich with cultural artifacts are exploited, prompting illicit activity in the clandestine art world, which is becoming an increasing concern. Terrorist organizations profit from the large financial volume of such low risk, high profit illicit activities and engage in cultural erosion that leaves the source nations weak in cultural identity. This in turn, allows terrorist groups the advantage of pursuing and shaping ideological notions in such volatile nations. The illicit, clandestine art market is also a unique market in which to create backdoor channels to organized crime, weapon trafficking and narcotic smuggling trade routes.

On March 1, 2001, two of the worlds most important pieces of Buddhist art were destroyed. Currently, there is a similar site facing the same fate. The destruction of Buddhist art is often linked to the destruction of cultural heritage. Because art is the best window we have into the origins and growth of a culture, it is important to preserve this source of history. With the destruction of each piece of art, we loose a part of our past as a human race, whether it be your own culture or not. The issues facing Buddhist art should matter to us all as it is not only a problem the religion has faced before, but a very urgent situation that required immediate action.

While reparation and restitution are similar, they vary in audience. Restitution is the act of giving art or cultural treasures back to their original owner. Repatriation, applying to a group of people rather than an individual, is the act returning of cultural treasures to their country of origin or culture (UNESCO). Sometimes restitution goes against repatriation. This occurs when the legal owners of cultural treasures desire to own, or have access to it, whereas the country of origin wants to keep the work. Repatriation is viewed on a case by case basis, whereas restitution is almost always a moral necessity. Often times the owners will win the art back, then display it in galleries. This allows for the public to continue to appreciate the art. Both of these aspects of the art world are important, as they affect international affairs.

The ownership of art in 2017 is typically brought up in discussions regarding works of art with seven to eight-digit price tags, owned by individuals with a net worth that can be described using nine to ten digits. However, popular opinion would probably agree that the person who has the single greatest appreciation for art is the art historian. Popular opinion would also be quick to agree that the art historian does not value a work of art in accordance with the market’s appraisal of a given piece. The art historian’s origin is grounded in academia – rather than profit margins or financial ownership.

The conceptual basis of this thesis is cultural heritage, therefore a critical analysis of the ideology associated with the terms, culture and heritage, is fundamental to understanding their development throughout time and within international legal instruments. The first chapter of this

In an era of globalization governed by financial targets and money return, cultural heritage being an important humanity asset becomes victim of oppressive and destroying actions meant to institute economic and social progress. Cultural destructiveness and ignorance are observed in Banksy’s graffiti of a worker jet blasting over prehistoric art from a city wall. As progress along with mass and cyber media tend to gain territory and people’s sympathy, we must be responsible to safeguard the cultural legacy which is the basis of humanity.