Washington Post Artifacts Essay

It was a nice morning when I have decided to take a trip to one of the national museums in Washington DC - The National Museum of American History. It was a great experience to discover something new, and to get some knowledge and a new information about the history of the United States of America. The museum has a collection of historical writing records science, industry and culture objects. The American History museum is very large, and it has three floors .Also, the museum focus on science and transportation and connections between technology and daily life in the early of the history to present.

Museums have long served a purpose as cultural staples. For every museum, big and small, careful consideration is used in selecting its contents. When securing new items for a museum, it is most important to consider public appeal, educational value, and cost-effectiveness.

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.

History museums across the country are experiencing a decrease in attendance. In a study from 2012, only 24 percent of Americans older than 18 had visited a historic site in that year, 13 percent lower than 1982 (Marsico and Tiedemann). Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 have an attendance rate of only 20.5 percent in 2012 (Marsico and Tiedemann), The lack of early education and interest has led to this decrease in attendance. Americans only have one idealized version of the history and seek no other validation or explanation for it. Yet even with the decreases, every year the government continues funding the preservation of historical

To begin, one reason why the museums shouldn’t return the artifacts is because whoever found the artifact has the artifact in their history not the person who owns the land. “Such as when Ponce de León’s ships landed on Florida's east coast near present-day St. Augustine. He claimed this beautiful land for Spain, so Spain has now has Florida in their history” Further, another reason why the museums shouldn’t return the artifacts is because if the countries that want them back want them so bad then why don’t they just pay the countries

From what I learned from the past assigned readings and class discussions, one of the difficult decisions that museums have to make is do they return their objects/artifacts back to their original countries or cultural group. This issue is an ethical dilemma because, would it be the museum to legally keep the objects because of their belief that they can protect and use these items (Warren 1999: 1-20). Or, would it be ethical for the museum to return the items that were previously removed from their country or place of origin. Based on my lecture notes and discussion for this week’s class, one of the ways which many countries and cultural groups are able to acquire back their objects/artifacts legally is through the process of restitution and

Would you like it if someone came to your house and stole your valuable belongings? i. I know I wouldn 't, and I 'm sure none of you would either. 2. So why should any country 's artifact - a valuable belonging of theirs, be put up for display in another country 's museum?

The money that museums get can be used to support the upkeep of these items, letting them live longer and create a reliable income

Is it ethically right for museums to be able to take cultural artifacts from their country of origin? Antiquites should be to their country of origin because in cultures such as Native American tribes described in “Passage 1: Returning Antiquities to Their Countries of Origin in paragraph 4 written by Joyce Mortimer” some of their artifacts are now on display in museums for anyone to see, even though these objects were to be kept private and for religious ceremonies, not for the public eye to see. By museums taking away these objects from such tribes, they now lose a crucial part of their culture which really depicts their qualities and beliefs.

My museum visit was such an amazing experience because it was the first time I ever went to such a significant place. The museum I went to was called Via Dolorosa, The Museum of Biblical Art which is located a little outside of Downtown Dallas. As you get to the museum, the whole building is made of Greek architecture with the amazing pieces of the sculpture garden. Then, the same white texture is flowed through the inside of the building with a beautiful white marble and a smooth touch within the sculptures just like a classical period. There is paintings and sculptures of Michelangelo, John Singer Sargent, Marc Chagall and other amazing artists.

Museums are the most used in preserving history and culture. Artifacts can be stored there while allowing the public a chance to view the artifacts. During the time that the artifacts are there, historians continue research on their finds to better understand items’ past. However, the process can stop due to illegal selling and trading in the black market.The black market allows collectors to buy artifacts from sellers who steal them from museums and excavation. In countries that have corrupt governments,, the amount of items stolen are higher . From the NPR podcast, thieves are becoming huge threats to Iraqi museums, not to mention during the ongoing war there. Some artifacts are destroyed, but their mostly stolen which leaves unanswered questions

There are opportunities though, and they are good opportunities. I was able to identify three that they should pay attention to and really hit hard on. In today’s economy, people aren’t wanting to spend a lot of money. The recession is making people be a lot more conscious about money. Good news, the museum is free. If marketed properly, this could be a huge way to gain new visitors. Plus, art museums have sophisticated connotations that make people feel smart when they go to them. What better way to spend the day than to go somewhere that is free and feel sophisticated? Another opportunity is that new exhibits could attract younger demographics, pending on the exhibit. This could be tricky though because they want to attract everyone, but older crowds are interested in things that younger generations aren’t. They have to be able to balance the attractions so everyone can relate to it and want to view it.

To understand the past, we have to understand the artefacts of the past. Artefacts show us another kind of history, another way of approaching the past. Not only do they frame the way we act in the world, they also influence the way we think about the world. So when one questions the ownership of these artefacts, they also question the history behind it. Because the history of art is, in large part, a history of theft, questions over its ownership are bound to ensue. So, how do we decide who owns art and subsequently history? Prevailing post- colonial ideology characterises museums as imperial despoilers and their possession of artefacts a dispossession of the cultural identity from the colonised, robbing the motif behind acquired objects. The idea that an ancient work of art is removed from its original setting, of which it forms an aesthetic and historical part, it loses most of its value and becomes a mere item of archaeology. However, arguments against this idea regard the notion of cultural property a pure myth as such artefacts are deemed inessential and irrelevant to the identity of recently emerged and artificially created nations. Instead the concept of internationalism and the ideas of shared history are propagated to defend the retention of artefacts in mostly western museums. Both sides present valid arguments for and against the repatriation of historical artefacts. It becomes apparent that the reality of

Exploratorium field trip changed my stereotype of museums. In the past, museums do not exist as the representation of recreational places. For example, art museums are always reserved and high-class places where are not comfortable to just step in within casual style. On the other hand, history museums usually leave an impression of depth and seriousness since what I see are left by ancestors. Although both of them are the advanced resource for study, they are not locations to ease the tension.

Mexico City, Mexico is a big hit with tourists, from its hotels, to attractions and straight to its food. Museums are a main attraction in Mexico City, it can actually be considered one of the places with the most museums, though people argue that London takes that spot. Despite it having the most museums or not, Mexico City has, as stated in the text of the article, a "museum-related controversy". There are plenty of different museums that people can choose from, museums like Museo Franz Mayer, which displays furniture, art, and other items from the 16th through 19th century and there are also museums like Museo Nacional de Antropología that are about pre-Hispanic civilization, including Aztecs. The museums in this