As the Greeks themselves couldn’t prevent the destruction of their ancient monuments — as when the conquering Turks blew up the whole Parthenon — and in fact smashed most of their own classic statues to burn for lime, as the Venus of Milo was snatched from the kiln — and as Britain kept the originals safe even during the Blitz, there seems little argument in favor of sending those international treasures to Athens.
It wasn’t the Turks, it was the Venetians who besieged Athens and the Turks used the Parthenon to store explosives which the Venetians bombarded and kapow….
The Parthenon was bombed by the Venetians, not the Ottomans.
The Venus de Milo was found by a farmer and sold to French buyers under very suspicious circumstances.
Last edited 1 year ago by Constantine Acropolites
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago
I think good reproductions are great for educational purposes and if it’s not possible to see the originals. However, there is something ineffable about being in the presence of something from the past, something made or used by our ancestors, which gives us a connection to these people; at least this is so for me, it may not be for everyone.
Last edited 1 year ago by Linda Hutchinson
Larry Jay
1 year ago
Go to the Cast Courts in the Victoria and Albert Museum and ask yourself does it matter that you are not seeing the originals? The Victorians were quite happy to show reproductions for the education of the public and so should we be. https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/history-of-the-cast-courts
The cast courts at the V & A are usually empty of visitors, why do you think that might be? Surely it’s the knowledge that we’re not looking at the craftsman’s actual work, but a more or less accurate simulacrum. The casts were made for public education and enjoyment before the age of mass tourism, when most people were unlikely ever to see the originals ‘in the flesh’. They were therefore a very acceptable second best. Ironically, having been made about 150 years ago, they now show a level of detail which has often been lost in the originals, through industrial pollution and general decay. In that sense, the replicas can be said to be ‘better’ than the originals. But even so, few people are interested in looking at them!
A sad commentary on the lack of education of the visitors. When I visited the Louvre just over a decade ago, there was a throng of people in front of the Mona Lisa, so much so that the officials only allowed enough time for a glance at it before moving you on, while other paintings in the same room were ignored. Despite some very good programmes on Art through the Centuries on TV, dating back to Kenneth Clark’s “Civilisation” it seemed that most of the visitors were only there to be able to tick “saw Mona Lisa” off their bucket list.
Those plaster casts were made to train students so that they could equal or surpass the ancients. They weren’t made to give any really detailed information about the originals, and certainly not to stand in for the originals.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
The ‘restored’ Library of Celsus at Ephesus has many facsimile elements within it, and looks magnificent.
Most of Knossos looks like what it is:a fake. Not a detailed digital replica, as the Tuscan Elgin Marbles will be, but a fake, a “recreation” as imagined by Arthur Evans.
Last edited 1 year ago by Edmond Marc du Rogoff
philip kern
1 year ago
I don’t THINK I would be disappointed to see reproductions, esp if they are made to look more like the original. I say that, though, as someone who has seen the originals. Maybe I would feel different if I only ever saw the copy. I don’t think so, however, because what I would be experiencing is what was seen in ancient Athens. Maybe, with reproductions, curators could move closer to recreating the original context. The question left unanswered here is whether the museum would feel obligated to return all its treasures once it starts.
Interesting point, and that would in turn lead to the question of what exactly is a museum, as opposed to a simple repository of artefacts.
As someone involved in the art world, the issue of authenticity in a work of art is a vexed one. As digital and video artworks take up an increasing slice of the market, the production of an actual object from scratch takes on a different type of value which hasn’t fully been explored. And where does “scratch” start? I make my own canvases as a deliberate choice, with wood stretchers, nails, fabric and primer, but these are all pre-manufactured before i start to fashion them into what is increasingly seen as a rather retro foundation for the application of pigment.
This article alludes to many of the value-judgments we impose upon works of art and in doing so, engages with the constant battle to renew our understanding as to why certain objects have greater value than others, especially where there’s no utilitarian value. It therefore helps to bring into focus what it means to be human, since (it seems to me anyway) it’s precisely those objects which reflect our humanity to which greater value is attached.
Colin Elliott
1 year ago
A Greek friend of mine is happy that these marbles are in the British Museum. The reason he gives is that they recognise the part that their removal from the unappreciative control of the Turks and display, free, in a major museum has played in the education of the world in ancient Greek civilisation, and in the Greeks of the nineteenth century obtaining their freedom.
While I’m personally neutral as to where they reside (since they won’t be replaced on the original building), I can understand the museum’s extreme reluctance to concede to political campaigns by giving up an important and original exhibit acquired over 200 years ago, and where they can be seen alongside other exhibits (all original) from major civilisations. Since a museum is as much for research as for public viewing I’d guess originality is vital.
I searched for references to the cleaning, but those I found were clearly using it as argument for sending them to Greece, because ‘we can’t be trusted to look after them’. I didn’t find any reference to acid, although there was one to soap and water, along with ‘copper tools’, although it’s plausible, considering the evolving attitudes to conservation over the years. I would be interested to know how their condition compares with those in Athens. Are they free to view in Athens?
No and in fact in many Greek museums UK pensioners now pay more than others, as part of the punishment for Brexit.
If we were to agree to send the Parthenon Marbles to the (very good) new Acropolis museum it should be on condition that UK visitors get in free, as we can see them free now.
In answer to your last question, no. There’s an entry charge to the museum.
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago
There is a distinction between the appreciation of an artistic object in itself and the appreciation of something because of its rarity. A lot of stamps for example are valued by collectors because of their rarity if a large number of the same stamp was discovered and came on the market the price would crater. The same instinct affects the fine art market and our perception of art works.
Although most of us would be reluctant to acknowledge it standing in front of the Mona Lisa is different to standing in front a copy of the Mona Lisa because of its rarity. There is only one Mona Lisa. There are, of course, similar paintings by Leonardo da Vinci of the Madonna and child but if Leonardo had churned out hundreds of the same Mona Lisa and they had all survived it is impossible to believe all the paintings would attract the same veneration.
Great and rare beats great and common every time.
dee gee
1 year ago
I could spot a John Myatt fake at 100yards.
He’s not that good a forger/painter… in fact he’s rather poor.
Says a lot about the ‘art establishment’ that so many were fooled.
Indeed. The same goes for van Meegeran, I can’t think how anyone was taken in by his forgeries. However, some of Tom Keating’s ‘Sexton Blakes’ are fairly convincing.
Agreed.
van Meegeran paintings are cringe 🙂
I have 2 compilation vids of Keating’s 1980s Channel4 series, where he doesn’t give that many of his secrets away, but you can tell he knew his craft.
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Gainsborough’s “Morning Walk” was attacked by a screwdriver? That’s one tool with a bad attitude and no taste – obviously a modernist.
Well what sort of behaviour do you expect from something that calls itself a ‘screwdriver’? Talk about toxic masculinity! Like those aberrant vans (as reported by the BBC and others) that on a whim like to drive into crowds of people
As the Greeks themselves couldn’t prevent the destruction of their ancient monuments — as when the conquering Turks blew up the whole Parthenon — and in fact smashed most of their own classic statues to burn for lime, as the Venus of Milo was snatched from the kiln — and as Britain kept the originals safe even during the Blitz, there seems little argument in favor of sending those international treasures to Athens.
something useful for the UN to do. operate a series of museums for humanity’s treasures. think of it as a planetary Smithsonian.
It wasn’t the Turks, it was the Venetians who besieged Athens and the Turks used the Parthenon to store explosives which the Venetians bombarded and kapow….
The Parthenon was bombed by the Venetians, not the Ottomans.
The Venus de Milo was found by a farmer and sold to French buyers under very suspicious circumstances.
I think good reproductions are great for educational purposes and if it’s not possible to see the originals. However, there is something ineffable about being in the presence of something from the past, something made or used by our ancestors, which gives us a connection to these people; at least this is so for me, it may not be for everyone.
Go to the Cast Courts in the Victoria and Albert Museum and ask yourself does it matter that you are not seeing the originals? The Victorians were quite happy to show reproductions for the education of the public and so should we be.
https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/history-of-the-cast-courts
The cast courts at the V & A are usually empty of visitors, why do you think that might be? Surely it’s the knowledge that we’re not looking at the craftsman’s actual work, but a more or less accurate simulacrum. The casts were made for public education and enjoyment before the age of mass tourism, when most people were unlikely ever to see the originals ‘in the flesh’. They were therefore a very acceptable second best. Ironically, having been made about 150 years ago, they now show a level of detail which has often been lost in the originals, through industrial pollution and general decay. In that sense, the replicas can be said to be ‘better’ than the originals. But even so, few people are interested in looking at them!
A sad commentary on the lack of education of the visitors. When I visited the Louvre just over a decade ago, there was a throng of people in front of the Mona Lisa, so much so that the officials only allowed enough time for a glance at it before moving you on, while other paintings in the same room were ignored. Despite some very good programmes on Art through the Centuries on TV, dating back to Kenneth Clark’s “Civilisation” it seemed that most of the visitors were only there to be able to tick “saw Mona Lisa” off their bucket list.
Those plaster casts were made to train students so that they could equal or surpass the ancients. They weren’t made to give any really detailed information about the originals, and certainly not to stand in for the originals.
The ‘restored’ Library of Celsus at Ephesus has many facsimile elements within it, and looks magnificent.
Knossos too
Most of Knossos looks like what it is:a fake. Not a detailed digital replica, as the Tuscan Elgin Marbles will be, but a fake, a “recreation” as imagined by Arthur Evans.
I don’t THINK I would be disappointed to see reproductions, esp if they are made to look more like the original. I say that, though, as someone who has seen the originals. Maybe I would feel different if I only ever saw the copy. I don’t think so, however, because what I would be experiencing is what was seen in ancient Athens. Maybe, with reproductions, curators could move closer to recreating the original context. The question left unanswered here is whether the museum would feel obligated to return all its treasures once it starts.
Interesting point, and that would in turn lead to the question of what exactly is a museum, as opposed to a simple repository of artefacts.
As someone involved in the art world, the issue of authenticity in a work of art is a vexed one. As digital and video artworks take up an increasing slice of the market, the production of an actual object from scratch takes on a different type of value which hasn’t fully been explored. And where does “scratch” start? I make my own canvases as a deliberate choice, with wood stretchers, nails, fabric and primer, but these are all pre-manufactured before i start to fashion them into what is increasingly seen as a rather retro foundation for the application of pigment.
This article alludes to many of the value-judgments we impose upon works of art and in doing so, engages with the constant battle to renew our understanding as to why certain objects have greater value than others, especially where there’s no utilitarian value. It therefore helps to bring into focus what it means to be human, since (it seems to me anyway) it’s precisely those objects which reflect our humanity to which greater value is attached.
A Greek friend of mine is happy that these marbles are in the British Museum. The reason he gives is that they recognise the part that their removal from the unappreciative control of the Turks and display, free, in a major museum has played in the education of the world in ancient Greek civilisation, and in the Greeks of the nineteenth century obtaining their freedom.
While I’m personally neutral as to where they reside (since they won’t be replaced on the original building), I can understand the museum’s extreme reluctance to concede to political campaigns by giving up an important and original exhibit acquired over 200 years ago, and where they can be seen alongside other exhibits (all original) from major civilisations. Since a museum is as much for research as for public viewing I’d guess originality is vital.
I searched for references to the cleaning, but those I found were clearly using it as argument for sending them to Greece, because ‘we can’t be trusted to look after them’. I didn’t find any reference to acid, although there was one to soap and water, along with ‘copper tools’, although it’s plausible, considering the evolving attitudes to conservation over the years. I would be interested to know how their condition compares with those in Athens. Are they free to view in Athens?
Re are they free?
No and in fact in many Greek museums UK pensioners now pay more than others, as part of the punishment for Brexit.
If we were to agree to send the Parthenon Marbles to the (very good) new Acropolis museum it should be on condition that UK visitors get in free, as we can see them free now.
In answer to your last question, no. There’s an entry charge to the museum.
There is a distinction between the appreciation of an artistic object in itself and the appreciation of something because of its rarity. A lot of stamps for example are valued by collectors because of their rarity if a large number of the same stamp was discovered and came on the market the price would crater. The same instinct affects the fine art market and our perception of art works.
Although most of us would be reluctant to acknowledge it standing in front of the Mona Lisa is different to standing in front a copy of the Mona Lisa because of its rarity. There is only one Mona Lisa. There are, of course, similar paintings by Leonardo da Vinci of the Madonna and child but if Leonardo had churned out hundreds of the same Mona Lisa and they had all survived it is impossible to believe all the paintings would attract the same veneration.
Great and rare beats great and common every time.
I could spot a John Myatt fake at 100yards.
He’s not that good a forger/painter… in fact he’s rather poor.
Says a lot about the ‘art establishment’ that so many were fooled.
Indeed. The same goes for van Meegeran, I can’t think how anyone was taken in by his forgeries. However, some of Tom Keating’s ‘Sexton Blakes’ are fairly convincing.
Agreed.
van Meegeran paintings are cringe 🙂
I have 2 compilation vids of Keating’s 1980s Channel4 series, where he doesn’t give that many of his secrets away, but you can tell he knew his craft.
Gainsborough’s “Morning Walk” was attacked by a screwdriver? That’s one tool with a bad attitude and no taste – obviously a modernist.
Well what sort of behaviour do you expect from something that calls itself a ‘screwdriver’? Talk about toxic masculinity! Like those aberrant vans (as reported by the BBC and others) that on a whim like to drive into crowds of people
My screwdrivers must have ED: they won’t do anything unless I hand-operate them.
Lucky them!