Three Goddesses.
Pediment sculpture from the Parthenon, Athens
438-432 BCE
Pediment sculpture from the Parthenon, Athens
438-432 BCE
I believe the origin of a piece of art is where it should reside. Culturally, the environment which reflects creation will be part of the viewing of audiences' adding to the authenticity and experience. I think if the Collissiem was removed and placed in another country for viewing. It just doesn't sound right, does it? The only exception for moving a piece of art from its origin of creation would be if that area was unable to care properly for the piece in order to preserve it for the sake of art contribution.
Now, how does one decide who "owns" existing pieces, which are in the hands of non-origin countries? There are so many examples of this situation they are unmentionable. The Battle of the Parthenon is an example of possibly a never ending argument. It is difficult to judge on this scenario. For the sake of the safety of art pieces, the best, ideal decision should reflect where the piece of art would both 1) be best preserved long term and, 2) where the piece of art is housed is most easiest accessible, most traffic of audiences, and presented in a way that best reflects the beauty of the piece.
In a perfect world, all pieces of art would be bi-locators. Virtually, each peace could be viewed by all, anywhere on earth. Then the physical piece would have its home in the town of its origin to help bring business, awareness and as I stated earlier, authenticity. However, this is not going to happen unless there are radical world changes which would require the relocation of pieces of art for safety.
So, until then, we will have to visit the "biggies," the museums that hold the pieces we are interested, in whatever country and city they currently are shown.
Now, how does one decide who "owns" existing pieces, which are in the hands of non-origin countries? There are so many examples of this situation they are unmentionable. The Battle of the Parthenon is an example of possibly a never ending argument. It is difficult to judge on this scenario. For the sake of the safety of art pieces, the best, ideal decision should reflect where the piece of art would both 1) be best preserved long term and, 2) where the piece of art is housed is most easiest accessible, most traffic of audiences, and presented in a way that best reflects the beauty of the piece.
In a perfect world, all pieces of art would be bi-locators. Virtually, each peace could be viewed by all, anywhere on earth. Then the physical piece would have its home in the town of its origin to help bring business, awareness and as I stated earlier, authenticity. However, this is not going to happen unless there are radical world changes which would require the relocation of pieces of art for safety.
So, until then, we will have to visit the "biggies," the museums that hold the pieces we are interested, in whatever country and city they currently are shown.