Art repatriation paper
FAS-201
Art repatriation paper Art recovery and art repatriation is very important in some aspects of maintaining a culture or a family’s significance in history. For the first article titled “Works by Masters”, there is a clear reason as to why people would want the art returned to whomever it traced back to. However, I can fully understand the German government’s concerns of the complexity of how to go about the process. Because of the time period that the art was recovered from and its involvement with the Nazi’s at the time, families would be more than deserving of any piece of art that actually belonged to them; figuring out what goes to who would be somewhat of copious task. Not only is this art important to families it is also important to the culture that was previously believed to have been wiped away. You could also argue that the current owner of the art had a legitimate way of acquiring the pieces from his father who was an art dealer and was responsible for doing a job.
As for the second article “the bruised statues of war”, it has much less of a family significance and more of a countries pride significance. I think it was impressive how the National Archeology Museum was able to hide and keep intact a lot of these pieces of art that would otherwise have been destroyed, raided, and or sold to a black market. Not only did they preserve very relevant and expensive pieces of art, the pieces were also able to be recovered and still enjoyed today. This museum played an essential role in literally preserving a piece of history.
Art repatriation paper Art recovery and art repatriation is very important in some aspects of maintaining a culture or a family’s significance in history. For the first article titled “Works by Masters”, there is a clear reason as to why people would want the art returned to whomever it traced back to. However, I can fully understand the German government’s concerns of the complexity of how to go about the process. Because of the time period that the art was recovered from and its involvement with the Nazi’s at the time, families would be more than deserving of any piece of art that actually belonged to them; figuring out what goes to who would be somewhat of copious task. Not only is this art important to families it is also important to the culture that was previously believed to have been wiped away. You could also argue that the current owner of the art had a legitimate way of acquiring the pieces from his father who was an art dealer and was responsible for doing a job.
As for the second article “the bruised statues of war”, it has much less of a family significance and more of a countries pride significance. I think it was impressive how the National Archeology Museum was able to hide and keep intact a lot of these pieces of art that would otherwise have been destroyed, raided, and or sold to a black market. Not only did they preserve very relevant and expensive pieces of art, the pieces were also able to be recovered and still enjoyed today. This museum played an essential role in literally preserving a piece of history.