• Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    that’s wild, their policies go back only a single century? it’d feel so weird to be calling something from the 1920s a priceless cultural artefact lol. 1900s is modern times!

    • DeHuq2@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Russia went through two fundamental changes in the last century, with very little remaining of the previous state or culture associated with it. So yes, an art object from 1900 that went through a revolution, a world war and a collapse of soviet union is a valuable artefact.

      To add: Article 1 For the purposes of this Convention, the term `cultural property’ means property which, on religious or secular grounds, is specifically designated by each State as being of importance for archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science and which belongs to the following categories: . . . (e) antiquities more than one hundred years old, such as inscriptions, coins and engraved seals; (f) objects of ethnological interest; (g) property of artistic interest, such as: (i) pictures, paintings and drawings produced entirely by hand on any support and in any material (excluding industrial designs and manufactured articles decorated by hand);

      https://theblueshield.org/defining-cultural-heritage-and-cultural-property/

      • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Russia is not unique in that. i’m just saying it’s weird to imagine a time and place that’s so vivid in our memory today could be in the same category as ‘real’ history. it’s not advocacy for pinching a russian painting

        • DeHuq2@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Althrough i am sure there are people over a hundred years alive today, i sincerely doubt russian empire is vivid in anyone’s memory. Where do you think “real” history starts at?

          • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            i can watch movies and listen to music recorded then. there’s objects and buildings that old all over. you can read what people back then wrote almost effortlessly. there’s millions of photographs!

            • DeHuq2@lemmygrad.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              That still doesent change the interternational definitions of a cultural property. I dont get why you are so stubborn about it. It is called cultural property, not ancient.

              • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
                cake
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                i don’t know why you chose to interpret ‘a century doesn’t feel that old to me’ comment as some kind of attack on the concept of protecting cultural objects, but here we are. i was never arguing with you

    • save_vs_death [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      While 1900s sounds funny, you have to put the line somewhere. Consider that the oldest buildings today in the USA, (like for example the Jamestown Church) are basically yesterday when compared to random buildings still in use in Europe, like the Aula Palatina, some random ass church in Germany built in the year 300.