Read the article below and weigh in with your opinion about this ongoing controversy.
Lord Elgin Savior or Vandal?
Also remember to bring $ and permission slips for Cloisters trip.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Artist Birthday of the Week
April 24 1904 Willem de Kooning
About Me
- Suzanne Altman
- Bronxville, NY, United States
- I live in Rockland County with my husband Roy, my daughter Lauren, my border collie Baxter and cat Samantha. I love teaching at Bronxville; especially Art History!
21 comments:
While the controversy behind the issue is apparent, I believe that the marble works obtained by Lord Elgin should remain in the British museum. When Elgin removed the works, the settings around the Parthenon were much more occupied and were considered a "shanty town." Elgin's actions would be more scandalous had the Parthenon been considered the archeological marvel it is perceived as today. Also, had these statues remained in Greece, they could easily have been destroyed, as the local population was using the Parthenon as a quarry, grinding statues down for cement. Finally, though the statues are not British, most artwork displayed in museums does not actually originate from the country it rests in. For example, one of the Met's most prized pieces is the blue hippopotamus from Egypt, and though it is obvious that the work is not from the United States, its place in the museum is never disputed.
I believe that the marble works should be returned to Greece. If the government of Greece wants the marble works back then they should have them. Lord Elgin did do the right thing by removing marble works from the Parthenon because otherwise those marble works would no longer be around. I agree with Mina's comment about how most artwork displayed in museums does not actually originate from the country it rest in. However, I disagree with the fact that if the blue hippoptamus was wanted back in Egypt by the government, then the Met should agree to it and send it back, because it is not originally theirs and artwork is best seen in the location that it was created in.
Lord Elgin's swift actions in dealing with the Parthenon statues clearly saved them from further destruction. The Parthenon had been neglected and abused by the locals for years, having been previously used as a gunpowder storage. Citizens and tourists alike had chipped away at the ruins, in their efforts to obtain free souvenirs and building materials. Lord Elgin rightfully removed the delicate statues from the "shanty town" that they were held in. Although the political strength of Greece has dramatically improved since Elgin's time, the nation forfeited the statues when they began to neglect them. The artworks are the rightful property of England now. If Elgin had confiscated the statues from a relatively prosperous, stable state, then his action would have been wrong. However, the stability of Greece at the time was turbulent and the statues were in immense danger. Elgin proved to be a savior to the artworks, those who neglected and damaged the Parthenon in the first place were the vandals.
Lord Elgin saved the marble statues of the Parthenon. When the works were removed from Greece they were transported to a more stable and safe environment. I agree with Mina's comment about the metropolitan museum of art's collection of Egyptian art specifically the blue hippo. And were as Steven may believe that the country from which the art originated should be in control of where the piece is being held, I disagree entirely. I believe that art should be on displayed in stable and safe environments, unlike modern day Egypt, and Greece at the time of Lord Elgins removal of the marble pieces, located at the Parthonon. By moving the Marble statues lord Elgin, saved them from destruction.
When Lord Elgin took the statures he did a great act by saving the marble statues of the Parthenon. By removing the statues from Greece they were transported to a much safer environemnt. I believe that the statues should be displayed in Britain because throughout Greece's history the partheon and other treasures was constantly under threat so above all i belive the statues should be kept in a safer environemnt. Therefore, the statues should be allowed to stay in Britain because many museums around the world obtain artwork that is not from their country and often times its place is never disputed.
Though both sides have valid points, the works that were removed by Elgin should be returned to their home. Whether Elgin did consciously or not, he did save those statues from a tragic fate. While I do believe that this art should be open to viewing by all and should "belong" to all at the same time I believe that this can be done while the pieces reside in Athens. It would truly be spectacular if many of the misplaced artifacts from the Parthenon were brought back to Greece and put on display. Let us not forget that Lord Elgin did take advantage of a desperate situation. He stole the pieces and made a personal profit of the items.
I think that while at the time Lord Elgin was saving the artifacts by bringing them to England and having them preserved in a museum they should be sent back to Greece. If Greece now has ways of taking care of the artifacts that they didn't have when Lord Elgin brought them to England, then they should be returned to Greece. I think that if the country where the work of art originated wants the artwork back, then it should be returned.
The Elgin Marbles lead to much controversy over who is the rightful owner, however, I believe that the sculptures should be returned to Greece. Although Lord Elgin legally removed them from destruction when Athens was a "seedy shanty town," the city has since improved and now has the means to properly care for the items. On the other hand, should the Greeks recieve the marbles back, it will set a huge precedent for other works of art. Other countries will begin to reclaim things from the British Museum, Met, Louvre, and various other places. Although these museums are great because you can see a wide variety of art from many cultures,I think that art truly belongs to the place it originated, therefore the Elgin Marbles should be brought to Greece to be displayed in the recnetly opened Acropolis Museum.
The Elgin Marbles should not be returned to Greece becuase it would trigger other nations to ask for their artifacts back. Greece has cleaned up since Elgin discovered them, but the British Musuem has the facilities to house the marbles.
I believe that the works obtained by Lord Elgin should remain in Britain. Whatever Elgin's motives, there is no doubt at all that he saved the sculptures from worse damage. He was genuinely concerned to rescue these works of art. Monuments such as the Parthenon belong to the whole world; not just their original dwelling. For all we know, the artist could have intended for these works to be seen all over the world. The Parthenon was not a national monument when those sculptures were
removed. The works are also integral to the whole idea of the Universal Museum and the way museums over the last two centuries have come to display and interpret human culture.
Because the statues were originally from Greece, and created by Greeks, they should be given back to Greece. I agree with Mina and Steven by saying that by Elgin removing the works, he potentially saved them. IF he had not taken the statues and displayed them where they were untouched, they probably would have been destroyed. However they definitely should be returned back to Greece because today the conditions are much safer for these statues; People aren't using them to make cement anymore.
The statues removed from the Parthenon by Lord Elgin should remain in the British Museum. When the statues were removed, the Parthenon was not a safe location for such priceless objects, due to centuries of continued use as a religious center and years as a quarry or a shanty town. By removing the statues, Lord Elgin was ensuring that they could be preserved for future generations. With concern to their location now, they should remain in the British Museum because, even with the advancements made in Greece, the British Museum still has the best capacity to house the statues. The British Museum is an expert in how best to preserve artifacts, an issue which could be the top priority in any discussion. Even if the statues were to return, they would be unable to be kept in the Parthenon, thus nearly destroying the idea that the artwork must be viewed where it was originally intended to be. By now, the statues are firmly a part of the British Museum and there is little that can be done to alter what has already occurred. However, a justified argument could be made that all future discoveries in any country, as long as it has the capacity to care for the finds, should remain in nation in which they were created.
I believe that the marble sculptures should be returned to Greece. Greece was where the sculptures were originally built. These sculptures were built at around the fifth century BCE and thanks to Lord Elgin the marble works were not completely destroyed. Although Lord Elgin did save the pieces of art, Greece made them in the first place. Greece deserves to have control over their own art. Greece is known for their magnificent sculptures and the marble works that were taken from the Parthenon are meant to be where they had been for most of Greece's history.
The marble works obtained by Lord Elgin should stay in the British museum. At the time which they were obtained, the Parthenon was not considered the archeological masterpiece it is today. If the marble works had remained in Greece there is a chance that they would have been destroyed or recycled for other uses. In addition, it does not matter that the statues are not of British origin as most works of art in today's world do not lie in their countries of origin.
I think that by taking the statues and metopes that were previously located in the Greek Parthenon, Lord Elgin did the right thing. By extracting the several works he rescued them from further damage because along the years there has been evidence to suggest that it would have not been safe while staying within the Parthenon. I think this because the Parthenon has a history has a history of being used for storage, religious worship, and monumental purposes. Within all of this use the statues that were removed would have been damaged over the years, as opposed to being looked after in the British Museum. And even though the article did say that in the removal of the works damage was done, the movement of the statues serves people better in a museum where it is preserved and held for adoration.
I believe the artifacts should be sent back to Greece. While Lord Elgin was right in moving the artifacts in the first place, times have changed. In the early 19th century, the local people were using the Parthenon as a "quarry" and grinding statues down for cement. Lord Elgin saved the marble works from destruction and should be hailed for his actions. Yet the artifacts should be returned to Greece in this day and age. Unlike in the early 19th century, Greece is a functioning society that recognizes the value of art. It is obvious that Greece will be able to preserve and maintain these artifacts, and therefore the art should be returned to its rightful owners.
Although Lord Elgin saved the marble statues by bringing them to Britain so they wouldn't be destroyed; I believe that returning the works to it's origin, Greece, would resolve this ongoing controversy. Over the years Greece has improved and it is now more suitable and safe than when Elgin took the statues. If the country in which the artifact was created wants the piece back, then they have every right to receive it.
I think that Eligin saved the statue by taking it from the Parthenon. At the time the Parthenon was not viewed as it is today. If Eligin did not remove the statue from the Parthenon it might have been destroyed. I think it is important to keep the marbles where they are because they might be safer in the British museum. Also by returning the marble statues to Greece it might spark other countries to demand other art works of theirs back.
I believe that the statues that Lord Elgin obtained from Greece should stay in the British Museum. Though it is not entirely known the exact reason for his taking the statues, it was indeed a good move, for they would not be in nearly as good shape as they are today. There is no doubt that Greece, today, could properly maintain the statues, but the marble sculptures can never go on the building as they once did. That said, they serve just as important and equal role in the British Museum as they would in a Greek one. Being located in the British Museum would give the statues the oppertunity to be observed next to other ancient works of art. I agree that the Greek Government has the right to want artwork that originated there back, but in my opinion, i think it should stay in Britian. It also helps with the idea of a worldwide museum. The Parthenon is, itself, an amazing building with an impressive history, and does not need the help of some of the original artworks to show that. The marble sculptures may not be intended to be "gifts" from Greece, but we are all certainly thankful to be able to have them and share them amongst the world.
Lord Elgin undoubtedly saved the marble statues of the Pantheon from further destruction. Without the help of Lord Elgin, the marble works had the ability of being destroyed if they remained in Greece. Some say that Lord Elgin rescued the art because he was genuinely concerned for it. Even though, the art was created in Greece, over the past two hundred years, the art has remained in Britain. Since the art has been in Britain for so long, it is historically rooted there as well as in Greece. The marble works should stay put in Britain despite the fact that they were created in Greece since museums all over the world contain art from all types of different places where it did not originate from.
In my opinion, the whole controversy is in a gray area. The Parthenon is a part of the Greek history and culture but what about everyone else? Some believe that Parthenon belongs to the whole world. Also, a part of me believes it was okay for London to have the artifacts because they preserved them. The article said they were in horrible shape before Lord Elgin got his hands on them. On the other hand, I did not think it was okay for the British to convert the Parthenon into a Christian church.
My final stance on the controversy is that London should be able to borrow the Greek artifacts but only temporarily for it is Greek art. (Plus, in this situation, more people can visit the artifacts).
Post a Comment