tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35183976.post7000370168398048820..comments2023-10-26T06:35:55.278-05:00Comments on Illicit Cultural Property: Cultural Property Internationalism: A Raw Deal for Afghanistan? (UPDATE)Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00815004368881797395noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35183976.post-1512468574719072302007-06-12T15:53:00.000-05:002007-06-12T15:53:00.000-05:00The fact of the matter is that National Geographic...The fact of the matter is that National Geographic (which not a government institution) is hoping to make tons of money off the Afghans. Ms. Rosenbaum's ad homimin attack on Ms. Munson relies on unfounded anonymous "insiders" who no doubt have a axe to grind. She doesn't even mention Tom Hoving (who was behind the original Tut show). Instead she quotes the Met who are known to trade in the black market. <BR/>The idea that the Afghans should lend their most prized objects for nothing is ridiculous ivory tower liberalism. The Afghans can't even view the objects in their home country because they do not have the funds to properly protect and display them. Take Tom Hoving's word, National Geographic is robbing the Afghans and our government especially the NEH is letting them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35183976.post-52286602368220779172007-06-07T04:13:00.000-05:002007-06-07T04:13:00.000-05:00Loan agreements are an interesting subject, and it...Loan agreements are an interesting subject, and it appears to be a very underdeveloped area in terms of the scholarship. Perhaps that is because it takes a certain degree of inside knowledge to know what a good deal is for a nation wishing to display its antiquities abroad.<BR/><BR/> Also, as you say, the real value may come in other areas of foreign relations which are not readily apparent. I think this may come into play with bilateral agreements a great deal, especially in the way the US has chosen to implement the UNESCO Convention.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00815004368881797395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35183976.post-89510421422392798342007-06-06T09:01:00.000-05:002007-06-06T09:01:00.000-05:00Interesting 'how much a country could expect' for ...Interesting 'how much a country could expect' for antiquities loans. This kind of deal is really quite a taboo subject, and I'd like to read more about bilateral deals between governments on antiquities loans - can you suggest any references?<BR/><BR/>The real value of such deals is not necessarily the actual price tag (this kind of arrangement is really just in the case of the 'blockbusters'). It is of the political capital and prestige. When I helped with organising exhibition loans there wasn't an actual sum of money given to the and lender from the exhibiting institution, but rather a series of obvious and imperceptible favours. Of course insurance is most important, but for, say, a private lender, putting a piece on show could mean a tax break. It could also enhance the value of the piece, and be used in the run-up to a potential sale. Or it could simply form an obligation from one institutional lender to another. <BR/><BR/>I don't know if the Afghan government has done badly at all. I commented <A HREF="http://politicalarchaeology.wordpress.com/2006/12/17/bactrian-shenanigans/" REL="nofollow">here</A> on the Bactrian treasure when it first went on loan to France. Seems to me that this very important group of objects is being promoted, though its international tour, into a national(ist) archaeological icon, akin to Tutankhamun and the Emperor's Warriors. <BR/><BR/>Needless to say, there are plenty of reasons why Afghanistan's international image could do with improving, but is it really the country's population, or its current rulers, or its NATO overlords, who are benefiting? <BR/><BR/>Will Anderson <BR/><BR/>http://politicalarchaeology.wordpress.com/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com