A saw a comedian once who pointed out that museums are largely buildings composed of stuff we took from someone else.
“Hey, come on in. Check out all this sweet stuff we took from other cultures!”
I mean, even if it was legally purchased at some point, the country of origin should be able to repatriate important pieces at a reasonable price.
That said, museums serve an important service for introducing people to different cultures, but it is a kind of organized theft. It’s a complicated issue.
The only case that can be easily made to keep items is if it would likely be destroyed if returned, like how the Taliban was destroying important cultural artifacts in the name of fundamentalism.
Really? Even if the seller doesn’t want to sell? That seems unreasonable. How far should the national origin of something infringe on legitimate ownership rights?
If I buy a piece of art on vacation, should the great grand-children of the artist be able to force my great-grandchildren to sell it against their wishes? Why?
On a related note, I read there is a huge industry in faking artifacts. In fact they say at many museums what you are seeing on display, often isnt the real thing because the real item is just to valuable and is stored somewhere.
So if a relic is returned, could they send back just a forgery?
I mean in France their are these caves which have ancient drawing on the walls but people arent allowed in to see them so they visit a recreation. Here in Kansas city at the zoo their is an area built to simulate the Australian outback which features not just kangaroos but a recreation of an Australian settlers home with Australian newspapers on the walls and such.
I get it, but what about situations where an impoverished country sells something it doesn’t really care about and then two hundred years later, it turns out that the artist has become the most important artist from that country ever? Shouldn’t they have an opportunity to repatriate those works?
I understand that this is unconventional. Perhaps such a case would go through the courts.
But in a hypothetical case like that, part of the reason the artist was recognized two centuries later is that some museum preserved, studied and displayed the artist’s work. Don’t they deserve something for that?
I have zero doubt that there are North American (either Native American or colonial) artifacts sitting around in a few museums outside the US. I don’t see most Americans demanding them back, although I assume there are the odd exceptions. Just none that I have personally heard of.
Also, doesn’t Japan have a number of WWII era artifacts, including swords? Why do they NEED this one? Since they friggin’ bombed us, I think it’s more than fair to say they’re an integral part of OUR history, and we’re entitled to physical evidence of that.
Not saying it’s okay to take random items from civilian homes, but that isn’t what we’re talking about, here.
I don’t think so. At least, not without paying the price that will make the owner voluntarily sell it.
If there was fraud or malfeasance or something in the original purchase, then maybe. But the system you’re proposing seems like it would effectively end property rights for any international transfer. Don’t ever buy something that originated in another country because at some arbitrary point in the future, they might decide that they wished that someone hadn’t sold it and that they should get it back without your consent.
Yes, they do deserve something for doing that. However, the original country should have an opportunity to purchase them at some reasonable price (which would be in dispute, to be sure).
I know from watching Antiques Roadshow that Chinese art and artifacts are increasing in value because newly rich Chinese people and institutions are buying up pieces that come up for sale in the West. So in your example of a newly rich country that wants the art of its important artists, it should buy what it can on the open market. And in the case of pieces in museums, they can try to negotiate a deal under which they acquire the pieces with the cooperation of the Western museum.
It feels like you’re glossing over something pretty essential here. How do you determine what a reasonable price is for a unique piece of art? Doesn’t the fact that the owner won’t agree to sell for that price mean that it is not in fact reasonable?
I have no issue visiting a replica site, I think it is great they are preserving Lascaux for a possible improvement in technique in the future. And vis a vis Australia, I think it is great that they are now prohibiting climbing in the holy mesa, and wish it had been like that all along. I would have no issue if the locals had some sort of visitors center with docents to explain what we are seeing and a place to view it from a distance. We went to some nature preserve along 95 in Nevada that did a very nice visitors center with a good amount of interesting details about the plants and critters and a nice small museum about the local tribal history and an early settlers family. mrAru and I love stopping at places like that as we travel.
The museum in Chicago has some nice items acquired around 1900 when they said many royal families in Europe were falling from power or needed money so they sold alot of artifacts like swords and armor and crowns of old kings. Europe is full of old castles which once held the royals of whoever ruled that city or territory. Now some have been turned into hotels and such. Wonder what happened to the old families treasures.
BTW, One time the states of Colorado and I think Montana got into a dispute of the body of Buffalo Bill.
I recall hearing of US tycoons over a century ago, prominently Hearst and Rockefeller, buying ancient European treasures and entire estates to decorate their plutocrat castles. Look in such places for valued artifacts.
After opining upthread that returns now likely reflect changing power balances, I was asked what “should” be a reparation standard. I really don’t know. We have collected Southwest American arts and crafts. Most pieces are 20th century, and attributable. One basket from northern California is 200 years old, and our Cahokia pot ca.1000 CE) is a museum de-accession. Are these looted items that we must return to… somebody? Our ancient-looking Mesoamerican items are likely reproductions so no worry, probably.