Harun Farockis’s film “War at a Distance” in @MoMAPS1’s #TheaterOfOperations Gulf War exhibit gave me even more to think about the ethics of digital recreations of cultural heritage destroyed in war, eg, #Palmyra: vdb.org/titles/war-dis…
Farocki points out that the guidance technology used for self-driving cars, manufacturing equipment, etc, was developed primarily to guide missiles.
The laser scanning technology that can measure a cultural monument is the technology developed to scan an enemy landscape and lock on to targets.
Farocki also explains that “war in the electronic age presents itself as being an event free of people.”
I’ve been thinking for a while about why it seems so problematic that digital reconstructions of destroyed cultural heritage rarely feature people (this quote is from my piece here: static1.squarespace.com/static/517aa1e…)
Farocki’s work helped me see it together - that the technology of destruction is also the technology of creation - and that both technologies elide the existence of people whose lives don’t interest those who control the technology.
@morehshin’s work has also repeatedly pointed out the connections between destruction and supposedly neutral digital recreation, like her spectacular lecture/performance here: vimeo.com/337394969
In 2021, a Nepali monastery told the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts that the museum possessed a sacred painting stolen from the monastery in 1967. The museum responded by offering to give the monastery a replica... if they would sign away their rights to the original. A 🧵
In August 1967, the American scholar Mary Slusser photographed the painting during an annual festival at the Yempi Mahavihara (also known as I Baha) in Patan, Nepal. In September, , as her diary shows, a dealer offered it to her.
In Nepal's Buddhist communities, sacred artifacts like the painting are owned jointly by their worshippers. They cannot be sold. Slusser's other writings show she knew this, and knew that it was against Nepal's law to export such artifacts. Still, she bought it.
Arguing that tales of dragons are evidence that dinosaurs lived in human times - humm. Arguing that anything Herodotus says was literal truth - nope. (Nice buff H-man, there, though.)
“by funding scientific studies on Native American human remains… federal agencies have created incentives for institutions to hold on to ancestors in ways that undermine the goals of NAGPRA…”
It’s not that they didn’t think about consulting tribes - it’s that they thought doing so was a bad idea for their research. Holy moly.
Inscriptions friends... is pecking out a circular letter form instead of carving freehand weird for ca. 530 BCE? (Context in next tweet.)
So, John Marshall buys this stele in fragments from 1902-1913: metmuseum.org/art/collection…. Marshall was offering £10 a letter for further fragments of the inscription, or £500 for the rest of it.
In 1907, here's the part of the inscription he has (left) and two more parts he's offered by a dealer in Athens (right). The new parts have the cautious circles.