Reminding myself why I work to care for art and other cultural patrimony at all?
While the answer to the question may seem obvious, I maintain that we should always question it as, perhaps, sometimes it may not. The twisted road of my logic leads, ultimately, to the question of “What should we save?”. I will not set foot in that theme park, but by dancing around it, will attempt to answer the original.
The idea of questioning the purpose of caring for collections and thus the jobs of registrars, conservators, shippers, insurers, attorneys, curators, administrators, archivists educators, and more stems from the furor from my colleagues surrounding the multiple incidents of climate activists gluing themselves to works of art. Naturally, when your job requires you to take a symbolic bullet for your collection, a nauseating incident like this fans angry flames.
That said, it worked. The protests worked. They drew the attention of international media to their cause because of the objects’ cultural value. That value it retains like a succulent because of its age, history, and of course, its artistic merit. All of which the stewards of those collections help to protect.
In this next video from London’s National Gallery, the protester simply explains it all. He unflinchingly expounds upon the role of the work in the protest thus increasing the value of the work in every sense. Now you can go to the gallery just to see the work that starred in that protest. The security also almost appear to respect their stance and do not interrupt the “performance” as if it were planned.
Art is important and should be held for future generations to see, but when there’s no food, what use is art?
While the protester specifically points out that the work does not bear the same importance as feeding the impoverished and protecting the world for future generations, in a way he shows its value by association. One can argue that the work has more cultural value than he gives it because of this protest and the attention it demands– not from solely from notoriety but from what it represents and how they modified it to make a critical point. Cultural relevance is everything for a work and how much more relevant can it be?
Other examples of this include the destruction of statues and monuments. When the Taliban took control of Afghanistan after Soviet rule and promptly destroyed many historic sites. The Taliban symbolically as well as metaphorically conquered the nation and sought to further advertise its dominance with the act. That the act outrages us through destruction shows the need for protection.
Conversely, despite more than a hundred years of distance between the dismantling of the Confederate States of America and the present, somehow monuments to their power remain (despite them losing). Defacing and even toppling them thus embodies extreme power for both sides of the debate. As someone originally from the South, I heard many times the phrase, “It’s about heritage, not hate.”. That argument persists to this day.
From the National Geographic article “Toppling Statues is a first step toward ending Confederate Myths”. The General Robert E. Lee monument in Richmond, Virginia.
The looting of museums in both Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, to name but a couple of examples, reinforces the value of our patrimony in the grand scheme of history. Hard fought restitution of objects from events decades or centuries ago attempts to right the past wrongs and exemplifies the symbolic role of cultural patrimony in representing ideology.
These objects can also play a representative role. This New York Times article does a good job placing art in the role of propaganda in its depiction of conflict in relation to the war in Ukraine. Monuments, of course, represent forms of propaganda, too, but when defaced, additionally become symbols. Guernica, however, depicts the suffering and destruction of war in order to make a point and motivate a population. This act strangely resembles the gluing of one’s hand to a work. Both utilize art to draw attention and make a point.
Of course, these objects’ worth does not require upheaval, war, and destruction for relevance. Many everyday interactions inspire big ideas whether in life, relationships, or business. However, those interactions usually remain relatively private within our inner lives, within a small group of friends, or within the pages of a text. When the objects themselves assert themselves to the point of mass recognition, they grow in stature and importance such that all the become worth fighting for.
