Course Key Points

Myles and I have teamed up to make a video summation of the course. Here are some of the key points we came up with to talk about and summarize this course. This blog includes links to some of the literature and news we've been following this semester, as well as brief summations for some of the issues we've been discussing.

Intro/The Situation: In the 4th century BCE, Perikles, the elected governor of Athens, led a campaign to erect a monument to commemorate the Greek victory over the Persian Empire. Perikles united all of the Greek city-states in the funding of the Acropolis: a new city built upon the wreckage of the old. Included in the Acropolis were many buildings of note, the most important for this class being a temple to Athena Parthenos. Many years, and many wars later, the temple continued to stand, though albeit in a semi-ruinous state. Amidst yet another war, Thomas Bruce (Earl of Elgin) was able to acquire portions of the sculptures that ornamented the Parthenon and over the course of the next several years, send them to London, England to stand as a commemoration of European cultural heritage. 26 years after the Parthenon (or Elgin) Marbles were first displayed in London, Greece was able to declare its independence from the Turkish Empire. Nearly 200 years later, the marbles continue to remain in the British Museum of London, though a long fought battle to return them to Athens continues to rage. The British Side: From the British perspective, the marbles are on exhibition as part of a cultural display that is incumbent for international cultural history. The Acropolis and the Elgin Marbles were in a state of disrepair when they were liberated from Greece, and the British Museum intends to keep caring for the objects. These are pieces that were legally obtained from those in power in Greece at the time, and they belong in an international rather than a strictly national context. Even though there is now a new museum in Athens to properly care for and store the marbles, their return would not mean they would not decorate the original Parthenon. What is the point of returning something if it is not going back exactly where it came from? The British side of the argument can be found here. The Greek Side: From the Greek perspective, the Parthenon Marbles were stolen from their home and need to be returned. They were originally a part of the Parthenon and they are now disfigured, amputated objects outside of their intended location. The Greeks did not willingly give up the artifacts; the Greek people were under foreign rule and did not have agency to let Lord Elgin take the pieces from the Acropolis. Greece has proved with its new Acropolis Museum that it has the power to take care of the marbles, and they want their history and heritage back. The Greek side of the debate can be found at: New Acropolis Museum, as well as here. Global Effects of the Debate: Some of the possible repercussions of the debate include a panic that if the Parthenon Marbles return to Greece then it will set a precedent for every piece of art belonging to another culture to be returned to that culture. However, the Greek nation has made it clear that they don’t want all of their artifacts back, they just want these particular pieces because of the significance of their cultural heritage. The United States has responded to their disagreement, stating that they need to work something out because their enmity is causing problems not only inter-culturally, but also globally. Their inability to reconcile has made international trade agreements unnecessarily difficult, and the longer the debate rages the more each side refuses compromise. A few years ago there was public discussion held in London about the fate of the Parthenon Marbles, the outcome of which was that the majority of the audience agreed that sending the marbles back was the right thing to do. The Greek government is trying to get the United Nations to take a stand in the debate, and they have enlisted the help of a British law firm who is encouraging legal action. Some fear that taking a legal stance will not only move the deliberations away from relatively civil negotiation to outright war, but that a legal, official battle will cement the fate of the marbles forever, with no chance of rebuttal. Korean Comfort Women: In front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul, South Korea, a statue sits erected in remembrance of the thousands of women sexually trafficked by Japanese soldiers during WWII. The statue sits day and night, staring at the Japanese Embassy as if saying “We will never forget. We will never forgive.” Japanese officials have asked that the statue be moved to a more neutral location; however, South Korean officials maintain the right to keep the statue wherever on their land they wish to do so. Recently, a Korean scholar who received her education in Japan, and continues to live and teach there, published a book documenting some of the opposing side of this debate. Her main argument is that though there were terrible occurrences, there were also beneficial ones. The backlash from this is palpable, and many have labeled the author a traitor. In mid-December of last year, an agreement was made granting the living survivors a little over 8 million dollars in reparations. Though this debate is far from over. The survivors that have come forward have largely been left out of the debates, and many agree that throwing money at a problem doesn’t make it go away. Iconoclasm: Iconoclasm is the destruction of art or icons. During WWII, Hitler ordered the seizure of millions of pieces of art, including those he was able to “legally” obtain from the Jews he forcefully displaced, and those that his regime was able to politically seize. In the late stages of the war, when it was no longer a case of if they would lose, but rather when, Hitler essentially ordered that if he couldn’t have the pieces he collected than no one would. At the time of his death multiple orders of iconoclasm were carried out in his name, erasing priceless pieces from the collective memory for good. Not only that, there has been a recent trend in art conservation that notes the growth in the disappearance of priceless pieces of art. Though multiple nations are involved in and dedicated to ensuring that artworks flagged as stolen aren’t leaving the country, efforts haven’t been very successful. Currently in the Middle East ISIS is playing a large part in the destruction of religious pieces of art and culture. Cultural Heritage/Cultural Property/Intellectual Property: Cultural heritage is actually a very tricky subject, particularly in this debate. Greece claims that the Parthenon Marbles are heralds of their own cultural heritage, while Britain claims that the Elgin Marbles are representative of a world culture. This debate occupies a very central position in yet another global debate about the repatriation of artwork, and who owns pieces of cultural history. Art collectors claim that they own it, after all they paid for it. Ancestors of the tribes and cultures where artifacts come from often agree that they should own it. Others believe that cultural history is global history, particularly in “melting pot” cultures where many share both similar and differing backgrounds.

Further information: