This Chicago Tribune feature story quotes the Oriental Institute's Professor of Mesopotamian archeology as saying: "away from the cultural context that produced them, objects are little more than beautiful and intriguing knickknacks"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/magazine/chi-mxa1109magazineplunderpg1 0nov09,0,953532.story ... which might be too bluntly spoken for all his colleagues to accept -- but context does seem to be the highest priority of their discipline. On the other hand - the Director of the Art Institute of Chicago is quoted as saying: "By bringing these beautiful objects together under one roof, encyclopedic museums allow us to make the connections between different cultures, which I think encourages better understanding and tolerance of these cultures," --- and ---- "Archaeological reports can never take the place of gallery presentations of antiquities. Only the objectthe actual antiquity, the thing itself, there on view, ineluctably ancient, with the aura and fracture of agehas the allure to attract the people's curiosity." And again -- this man may be more outspoken than his museum colleagues -- but possibly they also prioritize those interests --- which, one might notice, are a bit tangential to aesthetic experience (at least as I know it) As far as I'm concerned -- art museums could make do with perfect copies - so there is no need to violate international laws of property So -- I suppose I would side with the archeologists here -- but to apply the word "knickknack" to everything in the collection of the Oriental Institute of Chicago -- OUCH!!!! . Such an approach to cultural history is a bit skewed. _____________________________________________________________ Click here to find Medical Transcription Training programs. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2211/fc/Ioyw6ijmaKOcQBIjInuWonWcUPwufn IlfIkL2SpwFK9RcsBzqQL7kY/?count=1234567890
