queensuri
May 25, 2010
Writing Feedback / Art history paper about looted artwork during WWII [NEW]
I just need general feedback like if my sentences and grammar make sense and if I'm answering the question below in the title
Jewish Artwork "Taken" During WWII: the Difficulty in Getting It Back
The looting of artwork has been a consequence of war, riots, and natural disasters for centuries. During World War II, thousands of pieces of art were stolen as a result of the organized looting of European countries by agents acting on behalf of the ruling Nazi Party of Germany. This plundering occurred from 1933 until the end of World War II, although most plunder was acquired during the war. Over the years, many of these artworks have been uncovered, but these are only a tiny percentage of what was stolen.
Hitler, who ironically was a failed art student, wanted to amass the world's greatest art collection. Even before the 1930's, he had plans to turn his home town of Linz into a museum city, stocked with finest European works of art. Once Jews were relegated as nonhumans, the Nazi's considered them outside the law and then Hitler effortlessly seized their art collections. As his armies conquered Europe, more and more trophies were collected and stored in bunkers arranged for this purpose, most notably, the salt mine at Alt Aussee, where Hitler's private collection was stored.
Aside for Hitler's thirst for art, his deputy, Goring, had a need that was insatiable. When his agents in various European countries discovered artworks, Goring made a pretence of paying for them, but in reality, the Jewish owners readily handed over their treasures for a tiny fraction of their full value in exchange for deceptive promises of safety. Additionally, the Nazi's held "Jew auctions" - Jews were coerced into selling their art collections at bargain to raise money for the benefit of Nazi Party and the Third Reich.
After the war, many of the artworks the allies recovered were returned to the country of their origin, entrusting these countries with the task of finding their previous owners. However, much of the art never got to their rightful owners. The government of Austria, specifically, capitalized on Nazi crimes, as Hubertus Czernin, an Austrian journalist wrote "The art was stolen by the Nazis and stolen a second time by the Austrian government." Austria demanding that the artwork previously owned by Jews be kept in Austria to augment the national patrimony.
The Russians, as they liberated parts of Europe, came across caches of stolen artwork and took them to the Soviet Union instead of trying to find their rightful owners. They claimed these artworks with the excuse that it was in compensation for their own art which had been destroyed by the Germans three years earlier.
In the years following World War II, many pieces of art that had been previously owned by Jews was sold on the black market. In recent years, many of these artworks have turned up in many different museums across the globe. In 1997, France was shocked by the revelation that many of their national collections contained over two thousand works of art that had been stolen by the Nazis. The Burrell Collection in Scotland also contained one such artwork. It had been sold in 1936 to provide funds to cover an unfair Nazi tax demand. In the UK, the Tate Gallery held a stolen artwork which had hung on its walls since 1961, however, in 2000 it was returned after a well proven claim of ownership by the children of a Jewish banker shot by the Nazis in 1937.
The art world is very aware that museums and private collections possess Nazi tainted art. Many European countries have set up commissions to investigate restitution claims, and museums agreed to review the provenance of art acquired since the start of World War II. However, in actuality this injustice is proving difficult to rectify. Only very recently have looted artworks been returned to their original Jewish owners or their families and there is a plethora of reasons why.
When it comes to private collections, looted art is very difficult to trace until it enters the marketplace. Even then, an auction house that identifies a looted work may simply return it to the vendor rather than divulge its background. The provenances of many pieces of art were deliberately altered to disguise their whereabouts during the notorious 1933-1945 period. Countless museums have been slow to investigate the provenance of each of their artworks and publish those findings. Also, museums are reluctant to relinquish the important paintings of their collections, unless confronted by indisputable claims and therefore, many don't actively seek out the rightful Jewish owners of those pieces found to be looted art. Before the 1990's, the most frequent defense museums used to explain the missing works of art was that they "must be behind the Iron Curtain." But after the fall of the Soviet Union this was no longer an excuse.
In order to obtain restitution for their stolen artworks, claimants face a multitude of stumbling blocks. Sixty years after the war, particularly if families were destroyed by the Holocaust, it is often impossible to find documentary evidence to authenticate restitution claims. Heirs frequently do not speak the language of their grandparents. "Many claimants are elderly and don't have much money to pay for research," said Sarah Jackson, a researcher at the Art Loss Registry, based in London. "It's desperately time consuming and difficult to search the archives. Sometimes the paper trail goes through six or seven countries. Going to court is also expensive. There isn't any blanket way of dealing with these cases." In the United States, individual museums and Jewish organizations are behind the search for plundered art. However, in Europe almost every country has implemented a different method.
In Britain, hundreds of pieces of art spread among sixty six museums have been identified that have gaps in their provenance during WWII era. According to British law, six years of ownership is enough to establish a "good title." Additionally, with the execution of a new law, Britain cannot return looted art, instead claimants are paid compensation. Britain's art market, specifically, Sotheby's and Christie's, until recently were considered lax when it came to researching the provenance of each artwork put up for sale. Only a short time ago, Christie's was accused of a cover-up when it identified a looted work of art and failed to inform the heirs of the original owner. An Art Coordination Office in Magdeburg, Germany, has a database with seventy thousand looted artworks listed. Currently, only eighteen hundred of these artworks are being sought by ninety Jewish families. The director of the coordination office, Michael Franz, said the he was only knows of ten restitutions from the thousands on the list. One reason for this may be that the statute of limitations, according to German law, ran out in 1948.
Yet, despite the innumerable barriers they will face, many individuals or their heirs are determined to repossess the property that is rightfully theirs. The significant sentimental value of these treasures often outweighs their astronomical monetary value. Anne Webber, head of the Commission of Looted Art in Europe, explains that "the important thing about art...is its huge emotional and symbolic value for the families from which it was taken." One claimant recalled a painting of poppies that as a child, he had seen his father purchase from a local German artist. He yearned for the return of the painting because it would help bring back the memories of his family, all of which were exterminated in the Nazi concentration camps. Another man, who was in his seventies, longed to track down a painting that he described as a portrait of woman in a blue dress. The woman turned out to be his mother who had been murdered by the Nazis.
In the past few decades, many heirs were successful in retrieving their looted works. The grandchildren of Jakob and Rosa Oppenheimer received the 16th century Venetian paintings "Portrait of Alvise Vendramin" and "Portrait of a Bearded Gentleman." These paintings had been part of the collection of the Oppenheimer's Berlin art gallery, but in 1935 the Nazis forced the couple to sell everything for a pittance. These paintings ended up at the Hearst Castle, in the state of California, until their origins were discovered and were returned to the heirs of the Oppenheimer couple. Maria Altmann's story is seen as another spectacular success. Two Gustav Klimt paintings worth about three hundred million dollars were returned to the Altmann family after a drawn our lawsuit with the Austrian government, who considered the two paintings a source of pride and a national treasure.
Despite all the successful artwork restitutions recently, there are still many claims still face obstacles. Even after the 1998 Conference on Holocaust Era Assets which laid out eleven principles in dealing with the return of the valuables stolen by the Nazi's, there are still countries that refuse to return stolen artwork. Sweden, one of the countries that signed on these eleven principles, still hasn't returned a painting that has been undisputedly established as a work that was lost due to Nazi persecution. The Moderna Museet, the museum that hold the Blumengarten painting "Flower Garden at Utenwarf," had promised to return the painting but almost seven years after the heirs approached the museum, the painting has yet to be returned. Some of the conditions of restitution put forward by the museum require that the painting be loaned to the museum for twenty years and a sponsor be found to purchase the painting a loan it to the museum for the required period. These conditions are extremely insensitive to the claimants who are elderly and probably would not live to see the painting after the twenty loan demanded by the museum. Additionally, after the museum's unsuccessful search for a sponsor, the claimants located a sponsor but this sponsor would only agree to a three to five year loan. The museum refuses to modify their demands and this gives the world an impression that "rather than trying to find a solution, the museum is trying to prevent one".
This issue is controversial and the stakes are high. Over the years, many of these artworks have been discovered, but what was returned is only a small percentage of what was looted. Much of this tainted art is still in circulation among the many art markets of the world. The restitution of these looted treasures is the least the world can do to correct some of the injustices done to the Jews during the Second World War.
I just need general feedback like if my sentences and grammar make sense and if I'm answering the question below in the title
Jewish Artwork "Taken" During WWII: the Difficulty in Getting It Back
The looting of artwork has been a consequence of war, riots, and natural disasters for centuries. During World War II, thousands of pieces of art were stolen as a result of the organized looting of European countries by agents acting on behalf of the ruling Nazi Party of Germany. This plundering occurred from 1933 until the end of World War II, although most plunder was acquired during the war. Over the years, many of these artworks have been uncovered, but these are only a tiny percentage of what was stolen.
Hitler, who ironically was a failed art student, wanted to amass the world's greatest art collection. Even before the 1930's, he had plans to turn his home town of Linz into a museum city, stocked with finest European works of art. Once Jews were relegated as nonhumans, the Nazi's considered them outside the law and then Hitler effortlessly seized their art collections. As his armies conquered Europe, more and more trophies were collected and stored in bunkers arranged for this purpose, most notably, the salt mine at Alt Aussee, where Hitler's private collection was stored.
Aside for Hitler's thirst for art, his deputy, Goring, had a need that was insatiable. When his agents in various European countries discovered artworks, Goring made a pretence of paying for them, but in reality, the Jewish owners readily handed over their treasures for a tiny fraction of their full value in exchange for deceptive promises of safety. Additionally, the Nazi's held "Jew auctions" - Jews were coerced into selling their art collections at bargain to raise money for the benefit of Nazi Party and the Third Reich.
After the war, many of the artworks the allies recovered were returned to the country of their origin, entrusting these countries with the task of finding their previous owners. However, much of the art never got to their rightful owners. The government of Austria, specifically, capitalized on Nazi crimes, as Hubertus Czernin, an Austrian journalist wrote "The art was stolen by the Nazis and stolen a second time by the Austrian government." Austria demanding that the artwork previously owned by Jews be kept in Austria to augment the national patrimony.
The Russians, as they liberated parts of Europe, came across caches of stolen artwork and took them to the Soviet Union instead of trying to find their rightful owners. They claimed these artworks with the excuse that it was in compensation for their own art which had been destroyed by the Germans three years earlier.
In the years following World War II, many pieces of art that had been previously owned by Jews was sold on the black market. In recent years, many of these artworks have turned up in many different museums across the globe. In 1997, France was shocked by the revelation that many of their national collections contained over two thousand works of art that had been stolen by the Nazis. The Burrell Collection in Scotland also contained one such artwork. It had been sold in 1936 to provide funds to cover an unfair Nazi tax demand. In the UK, the Tate Gallery held a stolen artwork which had hung on its walls since 1961, however, in 2000 it was returned after a well proven claim of ownership by the children of a Jewish banker shot by the Nazis in 1937.
The art world is very aware that museums and private collections possess Nazi tainted art. Many European countries have set up commissions to investigate restitution claims, and museums agreed to review the provenance of art acquired since the start of World War II. However, in actuality this injustice is proving difficult to rectify. Only very recently have looted artworks been returned to their original Jewish owners or their families and there is a plethora of reasons why.
When it comes to private collections, looted art is very difficult to trace until it enters the marketplace. Even then, an auction house that identifies a looted work may simply return it to the vendor rather than divulge its background. The provenances of many pieces of art were deliberately altered to disguise their whereabouts during the notorious 1933-1945 period. Countless museums have been slow to investigate the provenance of each of their artworks and publish those findings. Also, museums are reluctant to relinquish the important paintings of their collections, unless confronted by indisputable claims and therefore, many don't actively seek out the rightful Jewish owners of those pieces found to be looted art. Before the 1990's, the most frequent defense museums used to explain the missing works of art was that they "must be behind the Iron Curtain." But after the fall of the Soviet Union this was no longer an excuse.
In order to obtain restitution for their stolen artworks, claimants face a multitude of stumbling blocks. Sixty years after the war, particularly if families were destroyed by the Holocaust, it is often impossible to find documentary evidence to authenticate restitution claims. Heirs frequently do not speak the language of their grandparents. "Many claimants are elderly and don't have much money to pay for research," said Sarah Jackson, a researcher at the Art Loss Registry, based in London. "It's desperately time consuming and difficult to search the archives. Sometimes the paper trail goes through six or seven countries. Going to court is also expensive. There isn't any blanket way of dealing with these cases." In the United States, individual museums and Jewish organizations are behind the search for plundered art. However, in Europe almost every country has implemented a different method.
In Britain, hundreds of pieces of art spread among sixty six museums have been identified that have gaps in their provenance during WWII era. According to British law, six years of ownership is enough to establish a "good title." Additionally, with the execution of a new law, Britain cannot return looted art, instead claimants are paid compensation. Britain's art market, specifically, Sotheby's and Christie's, until recently were considered lax when it came to researching the provenance of each artwork put up for sale. Only a short time ago, Christie's was accused of a cover-up when it identified a looted work of art and failed to inform the heirs of the original owner. An Art Coordination Office in Magdeburg, Germany, has a database with seventy thousand looted artworks listed. Currently, only eighteen hundred of these artworks are being sought by ninety Jewish families. The director of the coordination office, Michael Franz, said the he was only knows of ten restitutions from the thousands on the list. One reason for this may be that the statute of limitations, according to German law, ran out in 1948.
Yet, despite the innumerable barriers they will face, many individuals or their heirs are determined to repossess the property that is rightfully theirs. The significant sentimental value of these treasures often outweighs their astronomical monetary value. Anne Webber, head of the Commission of Looted Art in Europe, explains that "the important thing about art...is its huge emotional and symbolic value for the families from which it was taken." One claimant recalled a painting of poppies that as a child, he had seen his father purchase from a local German artist. He yearned for the return of the painting because it would help bring back the memories of his family, all of which were exterminated in the Nazi concentration camps. Another man, who was in his seventies, longed to track down a painting that he described as a portrait of woman in a blue dress. The woman turned out to be his mother who had been murdered by the Nazis.
In the past few decades, many heirs were successful in retrieving their looted works. The grandchildren of Jakob and Rosa Oppenheimer received the 16th century Venetian paintings "Portrait of Alvise Vendramin" and "Portrait of a Bearded Gentleman." These paintings had been part of the collection of the Oppenheimer's Berlin art gallery, but in 1935 the Nazis forced the couple to sell everything for a pittance. These paintings ended up at the Hearst Castle, in the state of California, until their origins were discovered and were returned to the heirs of the Oppenheimer couple. Maria Altmann's story is seen as another spectacular success. Two Gustav Klimt paintings worth about three hundred million dollars were returned to the Altmann family after a drawn our lawsuit with the Austrian government, who considered the two paintings a source of pride and a national treasure.
Despite all the successful artwork restitutions recently, there are still many claims still face obstacles. Even after the 1998 Conference on Holocaust Era Assets which laid out eleven principles in dealing with the return of the valuables stolen by the Nazi's, there are still countries that refuse to return stolen artwork. Sweden, one of the countries that signed on these eleven principles, still hasn't returned a painting that has been undisputedly established as a work that was lost due to Nazi persecution. The Moderna Museet, the museum that hold the Blumengarten painting "Flower Garden at Utenwarf," had promised to return the painting but almost seven years after the heirs approached the museum, the painting has yet to be returned. Some of the conditions of restitution put forward by the museum require that the painting be loaned to the museum for twenty years and a sponsor be found to purchase the painting a loan it to the museum for the required period. These conditions are extremely insensitive to the claimants who are elderly and probably would not live to see the painting after the twenty loan demanded by the museum. Additionally, after the museum's unsuccessful search for a sponsor, the claimants located a sponsor but this sponsor would only agree to a three to five year loan. The museum refuses to modify their demands and this gives the world an impression that "rather than trying to find a solution, the museum is trying to prevent one".
This issue is controversial and the stakes are high. Over the years, many of these artworks have been discovered, but what was returned is only a small percentage of what was looted. Much of this tainted art is still in circulation among the many art markets of the world. The restitution of these looted treasures is the least the world can do to correct some of the injustices done to the Jews during the Second World War.
