Something I think everyone can have an opinion on.

Art, who should own it? Example, Chinese art taken from the country in times of weakness or war, what have you. Now, China wants these works back. So, should they get them? Same thing is happening with Egypt and Greece. Should art belong to the culture that created it?

Okay, second question. Should Ownership of art be an individual thing or just museums? There are these great works of art that individuals own, and guess what, they can say you or I can't see them. Is that cool?

Third, copying. I know, scary. Should the original piece be on display or should a really good copy be made, so that the original can be kept safe? I remember not too long ago their was an art show that showcases great copies, something of an art in of itself.

Last question, should the owner be allowed to restore the piece? Some believe that the work should be cleaned and restored, others believe you mess with the history of the piece if you do anything like that and thus destroy it's originality. What if we lose them if we don't restore?

Okay, I am done, discuss amongest yourselves.

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Bebops, Id reckon George should own it all. By living and dead artists. If George owned it all and viewings were free, I might sign up.

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Reply to the quote I've put in bold - Not during the Cultural Revolution, they didn't. So much artwork was destroyed in the insanity because of its history or because it was considered bourgeois.

That doesn't mean that art is safe anywhere (one country is not necessarily less likely to become embroiled in conflict than another), but it seems that art is treated differently in different types of conflict. The Nazis looted lots of art for their personal gain, but destroyed little. Uprisings of the "common people" see more destruction of art as a symbol of wealth.

As for who should have it? I don't know. My only opinion is that it should be shared & seen, not put in some collector's vault for only him to see & enjoy, as happens all too often.

In an ideal world art should belong to the culture that created it, or their descendants such as in Mayan artifacts.

In an ideal world that art should be freely accessible to all people of the world.

In an ideal world art should have no monetary value beyond the price paid to the artist.

In an ideal world "ownership" should be by the people via non-profit making national trusts charged with the care and public display of the artworks in it's possession.

Museums around the world should display copies of art from other cultures - would anyone notice or even care if the Elgin Marbles were copies? The genuine articles could from time to time be displayed on world or regional tours much as they are today.

Unfortunately we, I say we as in the global we, have assigned monetary value to pieces of art such that they are no longer art but investment. The genie is out of the bottle, I don't see how we can get it back in.

As for who should have it? I don't know. My only opinion is that it should be shared & seen, not put in some collector's vault for only him to see & enjoy, as happens all too often.

All too many of the world's finest pieces of art are locked away from view purely based on the amount of money paid for them. Sad.

But as above, if there are good copies of the works available should we care? Beats the sh1t out of me.

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Reply to the quote I've put in bold - Not during the Cultural Revolution, they didn't. So much artwork was destroyed in the insanity because of its history or because it was considered bourgeois.

That doesn't mean that art is safe anywhere (one country is not necessarily less likely to become embroiled in conflict than another), but it seems that art is treated differently in different types of conflict. The Nazis looted lots of art for their personal gain, but destroyed little. Uprisings of the "common people" see more destruction of art as a symbol of wealth.

Jet is absolutely right. Countless numbers of art and artifacts were destroyed by the Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution.

The saving grace for Chinese history at the time was the National Museum in Taipei. Worth a visit.

As for cultural artifacts and museums, well, yes it makes a nice idea to return them to their original countries but hardly practical as most of these countries are incapable of taking care of the ones they still have. Egypt springs to mind.

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Reply to the quote I've put in bold - Not during the Cultural Revolution, they didn't. So much artwork was destroyed in the insanity because of its history or because it was considered bourgeois.

That doesn't mean that art is safe anywhere (one country is not necessarily less likely to become embroiled in conflict than another), but it seems that art is treated differently in different types of conflict. The Nazis looted lots of art for their personal gain, but destroyed little. Uprisings of the "common people" see more destruction of art as a symbol of wealth.

As for who should have it? I don't know. My only opinion is that it should be shared & seen, not put in some collector's vault for only him to see & enjoy, as happens all too often.

I was speaking of now, of course. Also, you would be surprised what escaped the Cultural Revoultion. While I am not one to say that lesser known art is of lesser value, I must say that what was destroyed was not the "big" stuff. Little things in private collections, mostly and what was western. The Forbidden City as well as other historical sites that contained art were pretty much left alone.

The art was destroyed more than anything because of who might have owned it or what it's influence was pulled from. The CCP made great use of art as propaganda and even some older was viewed as acceptable depending on what it protrayed.

While I agree that art should be see, what about the smaller pieces that the public doesn't know about? Also, what about the pieces no one wants to see, because ithey don't know about most likely?

In an ideal world art should belong to the culture that created it, or their descendants such as in Mayan artifacts.

In an ideal world that art should be freely accessible to all people of the world.

In an ideal world art should have no monetary value beyond the price paid to the artist.

In an ideal world "ownership" should be by the people via non-profit making national trusts charged with the care and public display of the artworks in it's possession.

Museums around the world should display copies of art from other cultures - would anyone notice or even care if the Elgin Marbles were copies? The genuine articles could from time to time be displayed on world or regional tours much as they are today.

Unfortunately we, I say we as in the global we, have assigned monetary value to pieces of art such that they are no longer art but investment. The genie is out of the bottle, I don't see how we can get it back in.

As for who should have it? I don't know. My only opinion is that it should be shared & seen, not put in some collector's vault for only him to see & enjoy, as happens all too often.

All too many of the world's finest pieces of art are locked away from view purely based on the amount of money paid for them. Sad.

But as above, if there are good copies of the works available should we care? Beats the sh1t out of me.

See, I think copies should be made. If great copies could be made than people who can't afford to buy plance ticket and leave home for a long time can have a good chance of going somewhere closer and seeing the piece that they want to. Of course that draw back would be a world filled with Davids, LOL.

Was I the only one seeing the irony in the weeks after the fall of Baghdad, when they sent in people from The British Museum to safeguard ancient Iraqi artifacts from looting?

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Reply to the quote I've put in bold - Not during the Cultural Revolution, they didn't. So much artwork was destroyed in the insanity because of its history or because it was considered bourgeois.

That doesn't mean that art is safe anywhere (one country is not necessarily less likely to become embroiled in conflict than another), but it seems that art is treated differently in different types of conflict. The Nazis looted lots of art for their personal gain, but destroyed little. Uprisings of the "common people" see more destruction of art as a symbol of wealth.

Jet is absolutely right. Countless numbers of art and artifacts were destroyed by the Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution.

The saving grace for Chinese history at the time was the National Museum in Taipei. Worth a visit.

As for cultural artifacts and museums, well, yes it makes a nice idea to return them to their original countries but hardly practical as most of these countries are incapable of taking care of the ones they still have. Egypt springs to mind.

Okay, what China did during the Culture Revolution isn't the point. It's......well in the OP. Plus we are talking about today, were the art should be and who should be responsible for it's care, not who dropped the ball over sixty years ago. Funny that, I say China and Chinese art and everyone jumps to the CR.

Now, what about Egypt? I have not heard of any art being destroyed, except the deterioration of the out door sites from visitors and natural causes.

Was I the only one seeing the irony in the weeks after the fall of Baghdad, when they sent in people from The British Museum to safeguard ancient Iraqi artifacts from looting?

Oh yeah!!! How could I forgot that? The first thought I had was "Well, there's a bunch of stuff the Iraqis won't be getting back." Has anyone heard any word on when these pieces might be returned?

Was I the only one seeing the irony in the weeks after the fall of Baghdad, when they sent in people from The British Museum to safeguard ancient Iraqi artifacts from looting?

Oh yeah!!! How could I forgot that? The first thought I had was "Well, there's a bunch of stuff the Iraqis won't be getting back." Has anyone heard any word on when these pieces might be returned?

I hadn't heard that one. Did they pitch up in a white transit van with "Plunderers-R-Us" on the side. Obviously the return date will be when Iraq finally becomes a safe and secure democratic state. The only questions being which part of Iraq did the artifacts come from and which part gets them back?

What the heck are you guys talking about? Art? What do you mean "art". Take a piece of rock and carve it and it is still just a piece of rock. If I plow poignent and artful patterns in my rice field should these be saved for posterity? Take some oily pastes and smear them on a piece of thick cotton cloth and you have.....an all smeared up piece of thick cotton cloth....now you may like to look at it and it might even prompt an emotional response in some....but it is STILL just an all smeared up piece of thick cotton cloth. If everything that caused emotional responses in people was to be conserved then the entire universe would have to be dipped in plastic and preserved for posterity....time would have to be stopped because the passing of time would change stuff.......

What the heck are you guys talking about? Art? What do you mean "art". Take a piece of rock and carve it and it is still just a piece of rock. If I plow poignent and artful patterns in my rice field should these be saved for posterity? Take some oily pastes and smear them on a piece of thick cotton cloth and you have.....an all smeared up piece of thick cotton cloth....now you may like to look at it and it might even prompt an emotional response in some....but it is STILL just an all smeared up piece of thick cotton cloth. If everything that caused emotional responses in people was to be conserved then the entire universe would have to be dipped in plastic and preserved for posterity....time would have to be stopped because the passing of time would change stuff.......

I love it when you post!!

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Reply to the quote I've put in bold - Not during the Cultural Revolution, they didn't. So much artwork was destroyed in the insanity because of its history or because it was considered bourgeois.

That doesn't mean that art is safe anywhere (one country is not necessarily less likely to become embroiled in conflict than another), but it seems that art is treated differently in different types of conflict. The Nazis looted lots of art for their personal gain, but destroyed little. Uprisings of the "common people" see more destruction of art as a symbol of wealth.

Jet is absolutely right. Countless numbers of art and artifacts were destroyed by the Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution.

The saving grace for Chinese history at the time was the National Museum in Taipei. Worth a visit.

As for cultural artifacts and museums, well, yes it makes a nice idea to return them to their original countries but hardly practical as most of these countries are incapable of taking care of the ones they still have. Egypt springs to mind.

Okay, what China did during the Culture Revolution isn't the point. It's......well in the OP. Plus we are talking about today, were the art should be and who should be responsible for it's care, not who dropped the ball over sixty years ago. Funny that, I say China and Chinese art and everyone jumps to the CR.

Now, what about Egypt? I have not heard of any art being destroyed, except the deterioration of the out door sites from visitors and natural causes.

Archaeology.org has some interesting articles regarding antiquities smuggling here and here and, here

The British museum is a case in point, the name is a total misnomer as everything in it was plundered from other countries in Britains age of empire. But what if it was all sent back, Would anyone miss it? Would the 'rightful' owners take good care of it and appreciate it?

Yes! Excellant question. So far I would think that in China the answer would be yes, they take better care of old things then people. So many museums there now and the big restorartion project of the Forbidden City. Egypt has a pretty good track record of taking care of stuff as well. I am not sure on Greece.

Here is another thought.....Why should someone outside the countries culture decided how the piece should be treated?

Reply to the quote I've put in bold - Not during the Cultural Revolution, they didn't. So much artwork was destroyed in the insanity because of its history or because it was considered bourgeois.

That doesn't mean that art is safe anywhere (one country is not necessarily less likely to become embroiled in conflict than another), but it seems that art is treated differently in different types of conflict. The Nazis looted lots of art for their personal gain, but destroyed little. Uprisings of the "common people" see more destruction of art as a symbol of wealth.

Jet is absolutely right. Countless numbers of art and artifacts were destroyed by the Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution.

The saving grace for Chinese history at the time was the National Museum in Taipei. Worth a visit.

As for cultural artifacts and museums, well, yes it makes a nice idea to return them to their original countries but hardly practical as most of these countries are incapable of taking care of the ones they still have. Egypt springs to mind.

Okay, what China did during the Culture Revolution isn't the point. It's......well in the OP. Plus we are talking about today, were the art should be and who should be responsible for it's care, not who dropped the ball over sixty years ago. Funny that, I say China and Chinese art and everyone jumps to the CR.

Now, what about Egypt? I have not heard of any art being destroyed, except the deterioration of the out door sites from visitors and natural causes.

Archaeology.org has some interesting articles regarding antiquities smuggling here and here and, here

Thanks, SBK! I can't help but notice it's westerners smuggling here. I wonder who they are selling to?

Finders keepers.

You could argue, for example, that the culture of the ancient Egyptians has no relevance on modern-day Egypt and should modern-day Egyptians be the custodians of history, simply down to the fact that these things happened in their country millenia ago...

You could argue, for example, that the culture of the ancient Egyptians has no relevance on modern-day Egypt and should modern-day Egyptians be the custodians of history, simply down to the fact that these things happened in their country millenia ago...

Good point, who owns history? I will have to mull that over.

^^ That is the point, IMO. After all, what else is art, if not aesthetically pleasing history? Art produced today will be someone else's history. So, does a present day civilisation have the sole right to their past, no matter how much they have metamorphosed, or tried to destroy/deny that past?

^^ That is the point, IMO. After all, what else is art, if not aesthetically pleasing history? Art produced today will be someone else's history. So, does a present day civilisation have the sole right to their past, no matter how much they have metamorphosed, or tried to destroy/deny that past?

I would think that if that civilization still had close connections with that past it would a very emotional need to have control over it. I know your exampl eis aimed at China, so I will say that the CR didn't last that long. mainland China's efforts to protect their past has double easy since that time. There are many sites in China that get the label of World Heritage site ( I think it's called) places that are historical enough and well preserved enough, kinda like protected areas of the wild. So, who is to decide if China or any country is ready to protect their culture? I know China is trying to get back pieces and there are many who won't even consider selling, some how that just doesn't feel right?

Nice young fellow that works for me got himself a fine art degree and has just finished his masters in Art identification. He did his thesis here in HK, and even amazed himself that in the majority, if not all of the high end antiquity dealers up to a third of their stock is fake. Those lovable Chinese have learned that if you require an internationally recognized certificate of authenticity ( from Geneva ) for your Tang Dynasty Horse, the honest scientists Will take the merest scrapping from the underside of the piece. The loveable rogues ( not ) therefore buy genuine Tang Dynasty pottery of no particular value, break it up for dust and paste the underside of horsey with nicely aged crap.......Bingo, scientist fooled nice little earner for Johnny Triad.

Art theft is a massive industry which is sadly ignored by the majority of law enforcement. The next time a major piece of art is nicked, go to the BBC web site and you will see the theft reported under bloody ENTERTAINMENT, I kid you not.

I blame David Niven. The systematic rape of civilization's culture is not performed by suave dashing fellows that do it for the wiz of it all. Nice chap after sending his findings for his masters was warned in no uncertain terms that if he published them, nasty things would happen to him and his family. No dashing dinner suited gent there, just a rather nasty Vietnamese with a knife.

Actually I didn't just mean China. That was just an example. I don't know what the answer to this question is. I would, for instance, like to see the Elgin Marbles returned to Greece because I think Greece does a superb job of preserving its history & art, as does Italy for instance. They are also both countries that many people visit simply to view the art, so I don't think the "viewing public" loses anything by them keeping possession of their art.

When you get to some other countries, I'm not sure that the line is quite that clear.

Then you have the question of going to view these pieces. Every year, countless visitors flock to British museums & art galleries, & to places like the Louvre, the Hermitage etc, simply to view the extensive collections there. It would be very difficult to view these pieces if they all went back to their original countries, and would it be as interesting? Seeing them piecemeal, instead of in these mindblowing collections?

You could argue, for example, that the culture of the ancient Egyptians has no relevance on modern-day Egypt and should modern-day Egyptians be the custodians of history, simply down to the fact that these things happened in their country millenia ago...

A little like the trophy cabinet at Everton Football Club

They not only sold our clan history, they distorted the truth. Dam Athena and her Perseus dog. And where was Poseidon, that water rat?

It would be very difficult to view these pieces if they all went back to their original countries, and would it be as interesting? Seeing them piecemeal, instead of in these mindblowing collections?

I agree to a degree NR.

If the country of origin has shown that it can take care of works that need to be preserved, then it should be allowed to do so. But you make a copy of them first, most of the viewing public that visit the Natural History Museum would never realise that the original was a few thousand miles away, neither would they care, as far as they are concerned they are viewing the real goods.

WE should all have an alter to art in our homes and we should bow down to it and worship at least three times a day. If we did this then I'm sure that the solution to the question of ownership would become clear.

Nice young fellow that works for me got himself a fine art degree and has just finished his masters in Art identification. He did his thesis here in HK, and even amazed himself that in the majority, if not all of the high end antiquity dealers up to a third of their stock is fake. Those lovable Chinese have learned that if you require an internationally recognized certificate of authenticity ( from Geneva ) for your Tang Dynasty Horse, the honest scientists Will take the merest scrapping from the underside of the piece. The loveable rogues ( not ) therefore buy genuine Tang Dynasty pottery of no particular value, break it up for dust and paste the underside of horsey with nicely aged crap.......Bingo, scientist fooled nice little earner for Johnny Triad.

Art theft is a massive industry which is sadly ignored by the majority of law enforcement. The next time a major piece of art is nicked, go to the BBC web site and you will see the theft reported under bloody ENTERTAINMENT, I kid you not.

I blame David Niven. The systematic rape of civilization's culture is not performed by suave dashing fellows that do it for the wiz of it all. Nice chap after sending his findings for his masters was warned in no uncertain terms that if he published them, nasty things would happen to him and his family. No dashing dinner suited gent there, just a rather nasty Vietnamese with a knife.

I like to read the New York Times and in the art section they report art crimes all the time. It's amazing how much it happens and who is involved.

Actually I didn't just mean China. That was just an example. I don't know what the answer to this question is. I would, for instance, like to see the Elgin Marbles returned to Greece because I think Greece does a superb job of preserving its history & art, as does Italy for instance. They are also both countries that many people visit simply to view the art, so I don't think the "viewing public" loses anything by them keeping possession of their art.

When you get to some other countries, I'm not sure that the line is quite that clear.

Then you have the question of going to view these pieces. Every year, countless visitors flock to British museums & art galleries, & to places like the Louvre, the Hermitage etc, simply to view the extensive collections there. It would be very difficult to view these pieces if they all went back to their original countries, and would it be as interesting? Seeing them piecemeal, instead of in these mindblowing collections?

It kind of funny you mention Italy, they are going through many problems of pieces being stolen and sold to American museums. The museums didn't want to give them back and everybody had to go to court, it was a mess.

You bring up something that I have thought about, where people go to see art, Europe and sometimes America. Cities getting tourist dollars for pieces of culture that aren't theirs. I have met people who wanted to go to the UK to see Asian art but for whatever reason, fear what have you , wouldn't go to Asian to see the same art. Funny, eh? So, I wonder, if these works were returned would that mean people would travel to these "other" places that they wouldn't before, thus making more international connections and engaging in cultural exchange, or just stay home? Would it be good for these countries to get these pieces back?