Art History 196/296: Art, Law, and Ethics
Course content and goals: This course addresses a broad range of ethical and legal issues pertaining to art, ownership, looting and theft, museum policies, and cultural heritage. Beginning with a review of the key international and nation laws, this course will then explore a series of case-studies related to the collection, trade, and display of art, from Greek and Roman antiquities to Indigenous material cultural, from paintings looted in wartime to photographs of troubling or disturbing subjects. We will also explore the broader ideologies connected with the acquisition and display of cultural heritage, such as nationalism and the universal museum, as well as the role of modern museums and our ethical responsibilities as art historians.
Learning outcomes: after completing this course, students should:
1. Understand the key legal frameworks that govern the collection of objects of cultural heritage as well as their limitations
2. Demonstrate an awareness of ethical considerations in the collection and display of cultural heritage as well as related theoretical issues such as the role of museums in society, colonialism, and nationalism
3. Communicate the outcomes of independent research in both oral and written presentations and gain skills in leading seminar discussions.
Prerequisites: none
Required materials: all readings will be posted to Canvas
Communication expectations: I aim to respond to all emails within one working day (M-F, 9am-5pm). Please let me know about any issues that may impact your ability to participate in this course as soon as possible.
Weekly course outline:
Week 1 (January 7): Introduction and legal frameworks
What are the major international laws that concern the trade of cultural property? How does this differ from national laws? What are the limitations of these laws? How is cultural property defined and who defines these terms?
Read before class: Fitz Gibbon, K. 2005. “Chronology of cultural Property Legislation” in K. Fitz
Gibbon (ed.) Who Owns the Past? Cultural Policy, Cultural Property, and the Law. Rutgers
University Press, pp. 3-9. To be discussed in class:
Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 1954
UNESCO “Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1970 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects, 1995
Week 2 (January 14): Art, archaeology, and the nation
What is the relationship between ancient artefacts and modern nations? How have antiquities been used for modern political agendas? How are links between ancient and modern peoples legitimized in the context of the ownership of cultural property? Case study: Parthenon marbles
Fitz Gibbon, K. 2005. “The Elgin Marbles: a summary ” in K. Fitz Gibbon (ed.) Who Owns the Past? Cultural Policy, Cultural Property, and the Law. Rutgers University Press, pp. 109-121.
Merryman, J. H. 1985. “Thinking about the Elgin Marbles,” Michigan Law Review 83(8), pp. 1880- 1923.
Melina Mercouri’s speech at the World Conference on Cultural Policies organized by UNESCO in Mexico City (1982): https://melinamercourifoundation.com/en/unesco-in-mexico-july-29- 1982/
Hamilakis, Y. 2007. “Recollecting the fragments of national memory” and “Purifying the landscape, producing the heterotopia of Hellenism” in The Nation and Its Ruins: Antiquity, Archaeology, and National Imagination in Greece. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 78-99.
Cuno, J. 2010. “Identity Matters” in Who Owns Antiquity? Museums and the Battle over Our Ancient Heritage. Princeton, pp. 121-145.
Additional reading for 296 students: Hamilakis, Y. and R. Greenberg. 2022. Archaeology, Nation, and Race: Confronting the Past, Decolonizing the Future in Greece and Israel. Cambridge University Press.
Week 3 (January 21): Museums and their colonial legacies
How are museums entangled with colonialism and what ideologies lie behind “anthropological” collections? Where, when, how, and from whom was cultural heritage collected in the past? What are the current approaches to restitution of this cultural heritage and have they been successful? Does the idea of the “universal museum” still have value today? Case study: the Benin bronzes
British Museum, Contested Objects: the Benin Bronzes: https://www.britishmuseum.org/about- us/british-museum-story/contested-objects-collection/benin-bronzes
Cuno, J. 2011. “The Enlightenment Museum” in Museums Matter: in Praise of the Encyclopedic Museum, University of Chicago Press, pp. 11-33.
Appiah, K. A. 2006. “Whose Culture is It?” New York Review of Books 53, February 9.
Van Beurden, J. 2022. “Benin Dialogue Group: a Model for a European Approach?” in Inconvenient Heritage, 161-176.
Additional reading for 296 students: Coombes, A. 1994. Reinventing Africa: Museums, Material Culture, and Popular Imagination in Late Victorian and Edwardian England, Yale University Press. OR Mitter, P. 2013. Much maligned monsters: a history of European reactions to
Indian art. Oxford University Press.
Week 4 (January 28): Antiquities, provenance, and looting
How are antiquities acquired for museum collections? How does the trade in antiquities relate to looting at archaeological sites? What are some of the challenges facing museums who seek to collect antiquities legally and ethically? Case study: the Getty Villa
Guest speaker: Judith Barr (Curatorial Assistant, Getty Villa) will speak to us about her work doing provenance research on objects in the Villa’s collections. One of your assignments for this week is to come prepared with questions for our visitor.
Watson, P. and C. Todeschini. 2006. “The Getty – the ‘Museum of the Tombaroli’” in The Medici
Conspiracy: the Illicit Journey of Looted Antiquities from Italy’s Tombs Raiders to the World’s Greatest Museums, Public Affairs, pp. 80-99.
Renfrew, C. 2000. Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership: The Ethical Crisis in Archaeology. Duckworth, pp. 15-51, 65-80.
Saunders, D., J. Barr, and N. Budrovich. 2021. “The Antiquities Provenance Project at the J. Paul Getty Museum” in J.N. Hopkins, S.K. Costello and P.R. Davis (Eds) Object Biographies: Collaborative Approaches to Ancient Mediterranean Art, Yale University Press, 207-219.
Additional reading for 296 students: Cuno, J. 2011. Museums Matter: in Praise of the Encyclopedic Museum. University of Chicago Press.
Week 5 (February 4): Indigenous cultural heritage in the United States
How have museums in the United States collected Indigenous cultural heritage? What is the current legislation that applies to these collections? What are some of the challenges and limitations that come with restitution efforts? Case study: Ancient One/Kennewick Man
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990
Watkins, J. 2004. “Becoming American or becoming Indian? NAGPRA, Kennewick and cultural affiliation,” Journal of Social Archaeology 4(1): pp. 60-80.
Rassmusen, M. et al. 2015. “The Ancestry and Affiliations of Kennewick Man,” Nature 523: pp. 455– 458.
Minthorn, A. 1996. “Ancient One / Kennewick Man: Human Remains Should Be Reburied,” Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation.
Lonetree, A. 2012. “Introduction” and “Exhibiting Native America at the National Museum of the
American Indian: Collaborations and Missed Opportunities” in Decolonizing Museums:
Representing Native America in National and Tribal Museums. University of North Carolina Press, pp. 1-28, 73-122.
Additional reading for 296 students: McGhee, R. 2008. “Aboriginalism and the Problems of
Indigenous Archaeology,” American Antiquity 73(4): 579-597. AND Colwell-Chanthaphonh,
C., T. J. Ferguson, D. Lippert, R.H. McGuire, G.P. Nicholas, J.E. Watkins, and L.J. Zimmerman, “The Premise and Promise of Indigenous Archaeology,” American Antiquity 75(2): 228-238.
Week 6 (February 11): Art, ownership, and war
What happens when art is stolen or destroyed in a time of war? What are some of the laws in place to return art to its rightful owner? What are some of the challenges that come with these restitution activities? Case study: Gustav Klimt’s Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer
Simpson, E. (ed.) 1997. The Spoils of War, World War II and Its Aftermath: The Loss, Reappearance, and Recovery of Cultural Property. New York. – Parts 1, 3, and 4
Thérèse O'Donnell,T. 2011. “The Restitution of Holocaust Looted Art and Transitional Justice: The Perfect Storm or the Raft of the Medusa?” European Journal of International Law 22(1): 49- 80.
Nicholas, L. 1995. The Rape of Europa. The Fate of Europe’s Treasures in the Third Reich and the Second World War. Vintage. (excerpts). N8795.3.E85
O’Connor, A.-M. 2015. The Lady in Gold: The Extraordinary Tale of Gustav Klimt’s Masterpiece, Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer. Vintage. (excerpts).
Additional reading for 296 students: Miles, M.M. 2008. Art as Plunder. The Ancient Origins of Debate about Cultural Property. Cambridge.
Week 7 (February 18): The ethics of photography
What are the ethical implications of displaying photographs of human suffering?Are there the same concerns when displaying photography that is meant to influence public opinion? Where is the line between reporting and sensationalism? Case study: find a photo in the news or
from social media that is relevant to our discussion
Butler, J. 2005. “Photography, War, Outrage.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 120, 822-827.
Azoulay, A. 2012. The Civil Contract of Photography. Zone Books. Sontag, S. 2004. Regarding the Pain of Others. Picador.
Additional reading for 296 students: Sliwinski, S. 2011. Human Rights in Camera. University of Chicago Press.
Week 8 (February 25): Whose work do we display?
Should museums and galleries display controversial art or works of art by controversial artists? Is there a difference between art created in the past and art created today? Who should decide what we put on display? Case study: Dana Schutz, “Open Casket” at the Whitney Biennial, 2016
McCartney, N. 2023. “In light of #MeToo: reconsidering the art/artist relationship for better futures,” Visual Studies 38(3-4), 557-570.
Frank, P. 2017. “In the #metoo Era, Do These Paintings Still Belong in a Museum?” Huffington Post, December 14.
Brown, M. 2018. “Gallery removes naked nymphs painting to 'prompt conversation'” Guardian, January 31.
https://ial.uk.com/art-censorship-social-media/
D’Souza,A. 2018. “Who Speaks Freely?: Art, Race, and Protest,” The Paris Review,
https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2018/05/22/who-speaks-freely-art-race-and-protest/
Kennedy, R. 2017. "White Artist’s Painting of Emmett Till at Whitney Biennial Draws Protests". The
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/21/arts/design/painting-of-emmett till- at-whitney-biennial-draws-protests.html.
Greenberger, A. 2017. "The Painting Must Go’: Hannah Black Pens Open Letter to the Whitney About Controversial Biennial Work". ARTnews. https://www.artnews.com/artnews/ news/the-
painting-must-go-hannah-black-pens-open-letter-to-the-whitney-about-controversial- biennial work-7992/
For 296 students: find a recent example of an artwork that has been removed from public display for discussion
Week 9 (March 4): Presentations and discussion
Week 10 (March 11): Presentations and discussion
Finals week: Research paper due (no final exam)
Assessment and grading (196 – undergraduate students)
Reading responses: 35%
Participation in class discussion: 10%
Discussion leader: 10%
Case study paper presentation: 10%
Case study paper: 35%
Reading responses: this is a discussion-based seminar; it is therefore essential that you attend all classes, complete the readings, submit your reading responses, and come to seminar prepared with questions to ask your classmates. Any missed classes beyond one will result in a reduced participation grade. To facilitate discussion, you will submit a reading response before each class. These should include (1) a short summary of the readings, (2) questions or observations on these readings, and (3) questions for group discussion. These are not graded but should demonstrate your engagement with the text.
Discussion leader: each student will lead part of the discussion for one class based on either the assigned case study OR a case study of choice. At least five key questions or discussion prompts must be submitted in advance. Please email me by the end of week 2 with your preferred topics in order and I will do my best to match you with something you are interested in.
Case study paper presentation: includes (1) a ten-minute presentation outlining the case study that you have chosen followed by (2) a question that your case study raises for a group discussion
Case study research paper: final papers should be around 2,500 words. Each paper should (1) consider one specific case study (as presented in class), (2) discuss how the various legal and ethical concerns covered by the course apply, and (3) what questions may still be left open.
Workload: approximately 12 hours/week: 3 hours in class, 4 hours reading and reading response (weekly); 1 hour discussion leader, 1 hour presentation, 3 hours case study paper (averaged over the quarter)
Assessment and grading (296 – graduate students)
Book reviews: 35%
Participation in class discussion: 10%
Book presentation: 10%
Research paper presentation: 10%
Research paper: 35%
Reading responses and book reviews: the additional book readings assigned to graduate students are meant to provide broader theoretical perspectives on each topic. In addition to completing the readings assigned to the 196 students, you are required to submit a short book review (max 1000 words) on the book (or articles) of the week (in weeks 2-7).
Book presentation: each 296 student will give a short (5 minute) presentation on their book reading for the 196 students during class.
Research paper presentation: a ten-minute presentation outlining your research paper and time for questions
Research paper: final papers should be around 3,500 words. The paper should apply one or more of the major theoretical topics discussed in this course to your own area of research. You may focus on one specific object, a museum, or collection of objects, but should focus on broader questions surrounding the acquisition and display of cultural heritage in your field rather than the describing an individual case study.
Workload: approximately 12 hours/week: 3 hours in class, 4 hours reading and reading response (weekly); 1 hour book presentation, 1 hour research paper presentation, 3 hours research paper (averaged over the quarter)