In this discussion board, we will explore the sometimes-tense relationship between art and religion. Since the dawn of civilizations, and emergence of early forms of worship, art and religion became intertwined in powerful ways to bring – or reject – visual representations of the unknown. There are countless examples, one that comes to mind is the role of art within the Catholic Church. For thousands of years painters, sculptors, tapestry weavers, etc. have worked serving of the church creating exquisite narratives as visual aids in communicating church teachings for a vast population of believers. Yet, there have been instances of destruction of art after being considered against the Catholic dogma. With this in mind let’s read about other examples.
Read: 1. Read the essay on Iconoclasm on page 54 in the textbook. The essay is titled THINKING ABOUT ART – ICONOCLASM. Find the definition of the term iconoclasm.
2. Read the article on the ISIS destruction of the ancient city of Palmyra. Take notes one your response to what is happening in Syria.
1. In a three-hundred-word essay include the definition of iconoclasm. Address some of the issues around the destruction of religious images such as the ramification of stolen art on the black market. 1) should we even bother/attempt to stop the destruction of these works of art and architecture? If so, who should be responsible for the safeguarding of this cultural sites and objects? 2) Do you think we should care about what’s going on in Syria? Does it even matter? Why or why not? (80 points)
The Future for London's Museums: Development Strategies Disclaimer: This work has been put together by an understudy. This isn't a case of the work composed by our expert scholastic authors. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any assessments, discoveries, ends or proposals communicated in this material are those of the writers and don't really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. Distributed: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 THE FUTURE OF LONDON'S MUSEUMS Q. What does the future hold for London's galleries? – – – – – – – – Conceptual The accompanying exploration paper examines the current state of London's exhibition halls, centering upon three perspectives: their verifiable improvement, their present issues and discusses, and their systems for guaranteeing future survival and flourishing. To discover these certainties five senior administration figures from five driving London historical centers were met and requested to finish polls examining the topics specified previously. The exploration centers at much length upon the choice of the present Labor government to acquaint free affirmation with London's historical centers and to back this strategy with assets from the National Lottery. Another key part of the examination was to decide the level of rivalry presented to London's exhibition halls by European, American and other universal galleries; further, to find how London's historical centers may raise their execution to coordinate this opposition. A third focal part of the exploration, saw both from the sides of historical center administration and from the legislature, is the subject of the methodologies that London's galleries will seek after in the twenty-first century. The survival and achievement of London's historical centers will particularly rely on the choices made in regards to such methodology and its viability once set up. The present research evaluates the feasible viability of such procedures, and the outcomes that their execution will have upon the general population's 'exhibition hall encounter'. The aftereffects of the exploration paint twofold sided picture: as an afterthought, of hopefulness with respect to the expanded affirmations figures saw since free confirmations started, and, on the opposite side, a bleak scene commanded by the London exhibition halls' absence of monetary help and by the negative outcomes of the administration request of putting participation figures before a subjective masterful and social experience. – – – – – – – – Substance PAGE (Jump to) Unique Area 1: Introduction Area 2: Literature Review Area 3: Methodology Area 4: Results and Analysis Area 5: Conclusion Area 6: Bibliography Segment 7: Appendixes – – – – – – – – Segment 1: Introduction Since the establishment of the British Museum very nearly two hundred and fifty years back, London has had a universal notoriety as the historical center capital of the world, as the city with the best accumulations, the best experts and the most to offer the interest of the general population. Notwithstanding the British Museum, London can flaunt the Natural History Museum, the Science Museum, the London Transport Museum, the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Theater Museum among various other world-class exhibition hall encounters. In their initial decades London's exhibition halls prospered through the liberality of private gifts and endowments, and through regal and government financing; these adequate assets gave historical centers, for example, the British Museum unrivaled assets for the development of great design and the get-together of the most marvelous examples and pieces from over the globe. In any case, by the mid 1990's, and mirroring Britain's changed monetary conditions, London's historical centers wound up needing extensive new assets to pay for repairs and advancements in order to keep pace with different galleries in the capital urban areas of Europe and in America. The coming of the National Lottery in 1994, and the terms of its constitution whereby a lion's share of its assets would go to historical centers and exhibitions, clearly offered the simple opportunity to realize a restoration in the fortunes and success of London's galleries. Subsequently between 1994-2003 more than £13 billion was given to great motivations by the National Lottery and the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) (Selwood and Davies, 2005: p.3); £1 billion was given to six hundred historical centers the nation over (Selwood and Davies, 2005: p.3). These assets were proposed for the development of new structures and display corridors, and to remunerate exhibition halls and displays for the loss of income that they would cause once free affirmation was presented. A couple of littler exhibition halls were likewise empowered to open in London in light of gifts from the HLF. The following radical advance in the ongoing history of London's historical centers came when the Labor Party in their 1997 pronouncement, guaranteed that when chosen they would bring free induction into London's exhibition halls — a move that it was foreseen would incredibly build participation from individuals from the overall population. In the occasion, this expectation ended up being perfect, especially in the two years quickly succeeding the presentation of free confirmation. The administration serve at that point responsible for historical centers in 2001, Estelle Morris, talked about 2000 as 'an extraordinary period of openings and thriving' (DOC, 2000) for London galleries. The year 2000 saw nine noteworthy development or restoration extends in London's extraordinary exhibition halls and an aggregate of £379 million spent on this (£193 million of which originated from lottery sources) (Selwood and Davies, 2005: p.4). The most dynamite of these undertakings was the development by Norman Foster of the Great Court at the British Museum costing £110 million (of which £47 million was gotten from lottery sources) (Selwood and Davies, 2005: p.5). With everything taken into account, it appeared that the lottery was demonstrating an essential treating power in the revival and rebuilding of London's incredible historical centers. This positive thinking was plainly reflected in the guest figures following free affirmation. In 2001/2002 London exhibition halls that had beforehand gotten capital financing from lottery sources saw an amazing ascent in guest quantities of 5.3 million when contrasted and the 1999/2000 season; in 2002/2003 this figure hopped again to 6.3 million additional visits contrasted and 1999/2000 (this speaking to an expansion of 89%). A conspicuous difference London historical centers that did not get lottery financing say they yearly participation figure drop by 7% out of 2001/02 and 13% out of 2002/03 when contrasted with the 1999/00 season. To take an individual example, the Victoria and Albert Museum saw an expansion in participation from 75,773 in November 2000 to 132,882 in November 2001 (this figure even hopped 270% by March 2002). Similarly, participation figures at the Science Museum ascended by 120% and the National History Museum by 74% in a similar period (All figures: Selwood and Davies, 2005: pp. 6-10). In any case, this surge of unremittingly amazing and rising confirmations figures covered a noteworthy concern agitating a significant number of the supervisors and chief's of London's driving historical centers. These figures obviously invited lottery financing as an indispensable methods for restoring London's exhibition halls and making them aggressive with historical centers found in New York, Paris, Berlin and somewhere else. In any case, the approach of free affirmation presented in the meantime a far more prominent level of powerlessness and vulnerability in the monetary courses of action and security of London's historical centers. It was evident to historical center strategists and executives that a lot of lottery cash would be expected to adjust for the loss of income persisted once free affirmation was presented. Essentially, it would be fundamental that lottery commitments of the levels of 2001 would be supported as long as possible; nothing would be more awful that one tremendous year for two of thriving and huge venture pursued by ten or twenty years of under speculation and decrease. It is late charge ascribed by numerous exhibition hall chiefs against the legislature and the HLF executives that they were guileless in significantly disparaging the levels of speculation that would e required to manage the revival of London's historical centers as well as their survival. The British Museum alone, for example, as indicated by its executive Neil MacGregor stands to lose £80 million more than ten years from lost incomes and recovered VAT. Expanded participation figures are invited normally by all historical center executives on the outright condition that adequate assets are made accessible to pay the expenses of this expanded participation. Selwood and Davies computed that since the coming of>GET ANSWER