China: Auction of looted relics a lesson to world (Xinhua) Updated: 2009-03-02 19:05 Comments(4) PrintMail BEIJING -- China said here Monday that Christie's auction of the two looted Chinese relics last week was a lesson to the whole world, including the French people. China had tried to dissuade Christie's from auctioning the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) bronze rabbit and rat heads sculptures, which were looted from Yuanmingyuan, the Old Summer Palace, by Anglo-French allied forces during the Second Opium War in 1860. After China's repeated efforts ended in futile, the Association for the Protection of Chinese Art in Europe filed a motion at the Tribunal de Grande Instance in Paris, seeking an injunction to stop the auction. But the motion was rejected by the court on February 23. The rejection had caused strong reaction in China and people started to question the value of the French culture, Zhao Qizheng, spokesman of the second session of the 11th National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). "We have always admired the French culture. What happened this time? Does French culture get sick? What kind of value is behind this?" Zhao quoted online comments as saying. But Zhao also said he believed that the value of French culture is not carried by a handful of people, but by the whole French nation. He went on quoting several French writers including Victor Hugo, whose works truthfully recorded the history. "In the eyes of history, one of the two outlaws will be called France, the other will be called England. I hope there will come a day when France, liberated and cleaned up, will send back this booty to a plundered China," Zhao quoted Hugo as saying. He also quoted Bernard Brizay, author of "1860: the Looting of the Old Summer Palace", as saying that for the French, the looting of Yuanmingyuan would be the same as if the Prussians in 1870 had razed Versailles down to the ground, looted the Louvre (museum) and set fire to the national library, as Yuanmingyuan was all of those at once. Zhao said former French President Jacques Chirac read Brizay's book and expressed his appreciation to the author, who as a French, clearly recorded that part of history. The two relics were auctioned last week for 14 million euros ($17.92 million) each to anonymous telephone bidders in Christie's sale of the collection of Yves Saint Laurent (YSL) and Pierre Berge in the Grand Palace of Paris. After the sale, China's cultural heritage authorities ordered strict checks of all exports and imports by Christie's in China. On Monday, a Chinese antique collector named Cai Mingchao identified himself as the person behind the winning bids for the two relics. But he said at a press conference that he will not pay for the bid. Cai, a collection advisor of the National Treasures Fund in China, said he believed that "any Chinese person would stand up at this time" and he was making an effort to fulfil his own responsibilities. So far, five of the 12 bronze animal fountain heads in Yuanmingyuan have been returned, while the whereabouts of five others are unknown.
From : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...o-Chinese-fury-over-stolen-relic-auction.html By Malcolm Moore in Shanghai Last Updated: 2:51PM GMT 26 Feb 2009 Jackie Chan has criticised the auction of bronze relics 'stolen' from China The two sculptures, of a rabbit and a rat, were originally part of a set of 12 bronze fountainheads that were looted from Beijing's Summer Palace during the second Opium War in 1860. After passing through a succession of owners, they ended up in the collection of Yves Saint Laurent, the late fashion designer. Despite stiff Chinese opposition, and a lengthy legal case, the heads were auctioned for £14 million each. The sale triggered fierce nationalism in China, where the heads have become a symbol of China's subjugation by colonial powers. Kung Fu expert Jackie Chan even criticised the auction as announced he was working on a new movie about the theft of cultural relics. "This behaviour is shameful," he said. "They remain looted items, no matter whom they were sold to. Whoever took it out (of China) is himself a thief. It was looting yesterday. It is still looting today." China has been forced to spend millions of pounds buying back other parts of its pilfered heritage in recent years. An entire museum in Beijing has been set up to hold repatriated art, including the tiger, monkey, horse, ox and pig heads from the same set. Stanley Ho, the gambling tycoon, bought several of the other heads and donated them to China. He reported paid £6.5 million to ensure the return of the horse's head from Taiwan. The identity of the buyer for the rat and rabbit heads has not been disclosed. However, the Chinese government has promised a crack down on Christie's, which it says has repeatedly sold looted art. "In recent years, Christie's has frequently sold cultural heritage items looted or smuggled from China, and all items involved were illegally taken out of the country," the State Administration of Cultural Heritage said. The department said all of Christie's operations in mainland China would be subject to increased checks. It added that the auction had "harmed the cultural rights and hurt the feelings of China's people and will seriously impact (Christie's) development in China." "The State Administration of Cultural Heritage resolutely opposes and condemns all auctions of artefacts illegally taken abroad. Christie's must take responsibility for the consequences created by this auction," it said. It also warned that it would use all "necessary channels to recover all relics stolen and illegally exported throughout history." Shortly after the sale, Liu Yang, a Chinese lawyer who spearheaded efforts to have the pieces returned to Beijing, warned that the failure to return the heads would not soothe Franco-Chinese ties, already frayed after Nicholas Sarkozy defied China to meet the Dalai Lama. "I will not comment on diplomatic relations," he said. "But it will certainly harm relations between the peoples of both countries."
Oh what bullshit. Victor Hugo et al, along with French culture, has nothing to do with it. It's all about the ducats, so that's where you have to play them. Christies needs China more than China needs Christies. What the PRC needs to do here is make it an affair of state. That is, it isn't that Christies is doing anything illegal, but it has greatly insulted the Chinese people and nation. Because of that, the PRC should feel that it is not in its national interest to allow such a company to continue to operate or do business on Chinese soil. Further, any company that does business with Christies would also be no longer welcomed in China. -madsign1 Now, what do you think would happen? It was never about France, the french people, culture, crepes, whatever. It has always been about money, pure and simple. If China wants those relics back, forget about engaging France as a nation; grab Christies by the nose and kick it in the ass while you rip their lungs out financially. They may just decide to pay off the owner the full price of the bid themselves, and then return the relics to the PRC as a gesture of good will... or else face the loss of millions in future business. Frankly, I'm surprised that China is half stepping on this... -huh
Well said !!! -bigclap -bigclap -bigclap Will add a few articles to this thread that gives a background of the Opium war and how Beijing have been looted for over 3 years by the 8 colonial powers.
Ralph, Check out this article and see what Christie's reply is. China demands: Bring us the heads of the Qianlong Emperor Posted: February 26, 2009, 1:30 PM by NP Editor Full Comment, Araminta Wordsworth Full Comment brings you a regular dose of international punditry at its finest. Today: China says its feelings are hurt after France failed to step in to halt the auction of two Qing dynasty bronze heads. Appropriately enough, action star Jackie Chan is coming to the rescue. The contentious sculptures — 18th-century heads of a rabbit and a rat — were looted in 1860 by French and English troops from a fountain in Yuanming Yuan, the imperial Summer Palace near Beijing. They were among objects collected by Yves Saint Laurent, the French couturier, and his partner, Pierre Bergé and auctioned off by Christie’s in Paris. Total take from the three-day event was an astonishing $594-million. The first day alone raised $327-million, already more than any private sale ever. Bergé says he had no problem with returning the heads so long as Beijing agrees to a few modest demands. “I acquired them and I am completely protected by the law, so what the Chinese are saying is a bit ridiculous,” he said before the sale, according to a report in The Daily Telegraph. “But I am prepared to offer this bronze head to the Chinese straight away. All they have to do is to declare they are going to apply human rights, give the Tibetans back their freedom and agree to accept the Dalai Lama on their territory. “If they do that, I would be very happy to go myself and bring these two Chinese heads to put them in the Summer Palace in Beijing. It’s obviously blackmail but I accept that.” Responding to his olive branch, Ma Zhaoxu, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, ducked the question. In a news item carried by the state news agency he said it is “absurd to infringe on the Chinese people’s fundamental cultural rights under the banner of human rights. He urged those involved to understand and respect the just demands of the Chinese people and help return Chinese cultural properties back to China.” China refused to bid for the bronzes itself because that would mean it acknowledged they were taken legally. Now Jackie Chan has added his two cents worth, according to Charles Bremner, the London Times’ Paris correspondent. “ ‘They remain looted items, no matter whom they were sold to. Whoever took it out [of China] is himself a thief,’ he said in Hong Kong. ‘It was looting yesterday. It is still looting today.’ The star of Shanghai Knights and Rush Hour accused Western countries of stealing cultural relics from nations with ancient heritage such as China, Egypt and Cambodia and yet insisting they were doing so only to preserve them. Chan said that he is planning a film about the search for and return of some of China’s stolen national treasures from the palace with filming scheduled to start next year.” Most gallingly for Beijing, many choice Chinese artworks were removed by Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalists to Taiwan, where they remain on display at the National Palace Museum. And these won’t be coming back any time soon. Although the Forbidden City Museum said recently it would lend Taipei 29 Qing pieces, a sign of a broader thaw in relations between the two sides, Taiwan fears China may not return any treasures it sends over, a museum publicist told Reuters. And while Beijing is all het up about the bronzes now, nobody cared much about them at the time of the looting — the fountain was in a state of disrepair as the catalogue notes by Rosemary Scott, Christie’s Asian art expert, explain. In addition, the bronzes were designed by Europeans. The “magnificent clepsydra” was originally executed for the Qianlong Emperor (1737-95), with the help of Jesuit missionaries, she writes. “In the centre was a huge marble shell, but on either side were seated the twelve Chinese calendrical animals, each representing a two-hour period in the Chinese horary cycle. The bodies were human, clothed and carved in stone, but the bronze heads were cast as meticulously formed animals. These superb and remarkably realistic heads were almost certainly designed by Giuseppe Castiglione … The treatment and even the expression of the faces are remarkably close, and none of the fine detail has been lost in the bronze casting … “Sadly, by the end of the Qianlong reign the court seems to have lost interest in the European Palaces of the Yuanming Yuan, and they had fallen into disrepair. In 1795 the order was given to strip out and melt down the bronze pipe-work for the fountains and clepsydra, no doubt in order to augment China’s constant requirement for copper. Thus, even before the storming of the Yuanming Yuan by French and British troops in 1860, the Qianlong Emperor’s spectacular water features had already been dismantled and their pipe-work disbursed. These superb bronze heads, however, remain as a testament to an emperor’s caprice and the remarkable skill of the European missionary artists who worked for him.” Of the 12 heads, five are missing. The other five were bought at auction in recent years, mostly by wealthy Chinese benefactors, and returned to Beijing. Now Beijing has launched a worldwide drive seeking the return of 1.67 million cultural relics being shown in 2,000 museums. It has also issued orders making it difficult for Christie’s to do business in China. Compiled by Araminta Wordsworth awordsworth@nationalpost.com Photo: Hong Kong action star Jackie Chan speaks during a photo call in Hong Kong, during which he criticized the sale of two Chinese artifacts at an auction of objects collected by Yves Saint Laurent. (MIKE CLARKE/AFP/Getty Images)
A few articles next about the looting and plunder of the summer palace. The event of "Burning the Old Imperial Palace" took place in the late Qing Dynasty. It is one of the crimes committed by the Anglo-French Allied Forces when they invaded China in 1860, and also, an appalling culture-destroying activity in modern Chinese history. Located in the northwestern suburb of Beijing, the Old Summer Palace was a royal garden as well as a grand and beautiful palace. Covering an area of over 5000 mu, the Old Summer Palace was a model of Chinese architectural art and culture. Due to the numerous invaluable treasures preserved in it, the Old Summer Palace could be rated as one of the human's cultural treasure house and the largest museum in the world. The Old Summer Palace was plundered and burned twice by foreign invaders starting from 1857 when the Anglo-French Allied Forces launched the invasive war against China. On October 6, 1860, they attacked Beijing and rushed in the palace to carry out crazy plunder. After robbing the palace off nearly all treasures, Elgin, the English minister plenipotentiary ordered to burn the palace. It was almost burned down after being on fire for three successive days and nights. What the Anglo-French Allied Forces directed at was razing the Old Summer Palace to the ground. Nevertheless, due to its huge size and scattered scenic spots as well as vast water area, some remote places and spots on water managed to survive this disaster. According to the investigation performed in the winter of the twelfth year of Tongzhi's reign (1873), there still existed 13 buildings in the palace. The Old Summer Palace suffered another burning in the 26th year of Guangxu's reign (1900) in the Qing Dynasty when the Eight-Power Allied Forces invaded Beijing and burned the already disastrous palace. As a result, the remaining 13 buildings in it were plundered and set on fire. This catastrophe was deprecated by Hugo, a famous French author in this way: "One day, two robbers rushed into the palace. One was busy in robbing, and the other taking pleasure in setting fire. Then they returned cheerfully to Europe. They are respectively called France and Britain. They "shared" the Old Summer Palace, the oriental treasure house, and chuckled to themselves with the view that they have achieved a great victory!"
2 great site about the 8 power allied invason of China. http://www.china.org.cn/e-8guo/index.htm http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/viewthread.php?tid=601496 Gives an account with pictures about the invasion.
To be honest, as an amateur historian, I can surely appreciate that many things had happened in the course of international political events, with pluses and minuses on all sides. The PRC is certainly not an innocent in many instances, and it only got to the point where foreign powers could dictate to it because of Chinese hubris and an inability to see beyond its own nose. Thus some historians say that it was inevitable that China got royally spanked for its arrogance. However, when a historically looted item that is readily identifiable resurfaces, it is the inherent right of the original nation to demand these artifacts of their cultural heritage. This however, has been a touchy political topic for many western nations, as most of their top museums are loaded with foreign loot in one fashion or another. Marc Aurel Stein, Ludwig Borchardt, and a host of other notables of archeology got their fame by robbing the exact history that they sort to learn. Further, western culture continues to condone and indeed, romanticize these cultural rip off artists with Hollywood films like Indiana Jones, The Librarian, and National Treasure types of big screen glorification. All of these efforts seem to rightly suggest (as exemplified by the Indiana Jones tag line of, "...it belongs in a musuem") that these relics need to be safeguarded for future generations. However, it is the unspoken but implicit understanding of these films that really important relics should be sequestered in western museums (presumably because native cultures and races are too stupid to be up to the task) that gets my ire. Oh, suffer the poor white man, having to live with such a burden... -rolleyes Had the French government any balls, they would have told Christies to shove it, confiscated the items (as they were known to be of Chinese origins and known to have been looted) and just returned them to the PRC government. I'm not sure if those links are appropriate or germane to the thread, as both seem to focus on the Boxer events around 1900 (about 40 years later). Also, many of the comments there seem to be unqualified pro PRC politicized. (Ralph quietly steps back off the soap box, and retakes his seat...) -innocent2
Fair commentary actually. But if China politicize it and calls for a boycott of Christie auctioning operations worldwide, wouldn't it be further demonize for over reacting and that they are not observing the rules of international trade and there might be implications to the WTO pact. Just because China is communist does it mean it has no moral credibility to ask for the return for the looted treasures whatsoever to the rest of the world ? Spin by either the Chinese and the French and the west have to be presented. Its only fair. However the facts remains that the Invasion did occur and the Opium war and how Chinese have been made addicted to it are indelible facts of history. This was the point whereby China have been carve up into various sphere of influence and territories and the West have always said that this is not colonization at all. How pathetic can that be ? Wasn't HK a colony under the Brits till 1997 ? Seriously, there is a need for a Chinese version of the turmoil that engulf it during those years. The refusal to examine the Chinese records of the atrocity and gross violation of the dignity of China during those years can only point to the one's very own bias itself. Many of us here I believe have an education that is western in its core. And the typification of the Chinese in some textbooks depicting the history of those period are sometimes truly appalling. One example would be that the Chinese are portrayed as xenophobic Fumanchu, pig tailed, slant eyes eunuchs whose only saving grace is that all experts in chinese kungfu. We are familiar with the West Version of the events. Its time we look at the Chinese version.
A Chinese collector deliberately sabotaged an auction of two 18th Century bronze animal heads by refusing to pay after 'buying' them at a Christie's sale in Paris.I think the rumors say this guy could lose his earnest money (3.5 million euro?) for this action? By Richard Spencer in Beijing Last Updated: 2:30PM GMT 02 Mar 2009 In a new blow to troubled relations between China and France, the collector, Cai Mingchao, said he took the action in a protest against the sale of looted treasures. The heads, which were seized from Beijing's Summer Palace 150 years ago, belonged to the late fashion designer Yves St Laurent and had been cleared for sale by the French courts. But the sale was fiercely opposed by the Chinese government and heritage organisations in Beijing. China demanded that Christie's stop the sale, but it went ahead and each of the animals, a rabbit and a rat, "fetched" 15.7 million euros (£13.9 million) from a "buyer" who bid anonymously by telephone. Mr Cai said that the action was a "patriotic act". "I think any Chinese person would have stood up at that moment," he said. "It was just that the opportunity came to me. I was merely fulfulling my responsibilities." The China National Treasures Fund, to which Mr Cai is an adviser, said it backed the plan to sabotage the auction. "The fund faced great pressure and risks by bidding for the two sculptures, but this was an extraordinary method taken in an extraordinary situation, which successfully stopped the auction," said Niu Xianfeng, its deputy head. The fund is a patriotic association of collectors, historians and prominent figures, which works closely with the government. Mr Cai is himself a well-known collector and owner of an auction house. The two heads were part of an elaborate 18th century fountain constructed by European Jesuit priests at the Summer Palace outside Beijing. Each of the 12 animals of the Chinese zodiac was represented, spouting water in turn during the two-hour period of the day for which it was supposed to be responsible in Chinese astrology. The Summer Palace was burned and looted by British and French soldiers at the end of the Second Opium War in 1860 in retaliation for the execution of their emissaries by the Chinese court, and the heads disappeared. Five others have come up for auction in recent years and been bought and returned to China by Chinese millionaire philanthropists. The other five are missing. The rat and the rabbit were sold along with a vast collection of art by Pierre Berge, Yves St Laurent's former lover and business partner. He particularly outraged China by saying he would give the heads back for nothing if it "gave Tibet its freedom". France and China have been at loggerheads for a year because of widespread French support for free Tibet campaigners and because of a meeting between President Nicolas Sarkozy and the Dalai Lama last December. Mr Cai gave no indication what would happen next. Mr Niu pointed out that the deadline for payment of the money had yet to arrive, and neither said whether the Fund was in a position to pay if they decided to do so. But Christie's said the rules were simple - buyers who failed to pay up within a week did not receive the goods. In a statement, it added: "We are aware of today's news reports. As a matter of policy, we do not comment on the identity of our consignors or buyers, nor do we comment or speculate on the next steps that we might take in this instance." The Chinese State Administration of Cultural Heritage said it had been unaware of Mr Cai's bid. Mr Berge, who raised 373 million euros (£334 million) from the auction - a world record for a private collection - said he was happy to keep the bronzes if necessary. "I'll keep them at my place," he said. "We will continue to live together in my home."
In a rush? For a quick synopsis, just read the red highlighted lines. But if China politicize it and calls for a boycott of Christie auctioning operations worldwide, wouldn't it be further demonize for over reacting and that they are not observing the rules of international trade and there might be implications to the WTO pact. I doubt that. Even the WTO does not allow the trade of stolen goods or items internationally acknowledged to be proceeds from a war crime. By disallowing trade with a known purveyor of stolen goods, China is actually standing up for honest trade. Much like how Pepsi was boycotted out of South Africa years ago, public sentiment is very important. Christie's is hawking stolen property; everyone knows that. To say something ludicrous like "it wasn't being used" (their statement of defense that most of the plumbing was already dismantled in the first place before the troops razed the place) was patently ridiculous. It would be liken to say that if you're not using something, then I have the right to come and dispossess you of it? Hogwash. Just because China is communist does it mean it has no moral credibility to ask for the return for the looted treasures whatsoever to the rest of the world ? Spin by either the Chinese and the French and the west have to be presented. Its only fair. Form of government or politics here has nothing to do with it. However, it's obvious that politics can play a role in its resolution vis a vis the public sentiments. Hence my previous statement of "Had the French gov any balls..." Further, the owner's (of the items) comments of giving the items back if China alters its behavior vis a vis Tibet, is pure political extortion. Much as I'd like to see China get out of Tibet, this is absolutely the wrong way to go about it. However the facts remains that the Invasion did occur and the Opium war and how Chinese have been made addicted to it are indelible facts of history. This was the point whereby China have been carve up into various sphere of influence and territories and the West have always said that this is not colonization at all. How pathetic can that be? Wasn't HK a colony under the Brits till 1997 ? That much of history had been readily acknowledged. Bad things happen in history and it's also a historical truth that all participants want to paint their share of it to be the nicest of the lot. Again, it was all about money and trade; the Chinese didn't want anything the Brits had to offer so the Brits needed to invent something that the Chinese would come back for, because the English themselves were already addicted to Chinese teas (odd to imagine that all this came about for fear of a trade deficit, eh?). They decided to give the Chinese an equal craving, but at the point of a gun. When the Qing government tried to confront them, it set the stage for the Opium Wars, which ultimately revealed China to be a backwards, mismanaged and a literal pushover kingdom for anyone who had any inkling of avarice. Whereas most Chinese point the finger to those "foreign devils" and lament of China's suffering at their hands, I really don't. Recall that at that same time period, China was in open revolt (Taiping Rebellion) and more Chinese were killed (by some accounts between 20-30 million) by Qing troops (some of which were commanded by westerners) than by European troops. Further, if one dispassionately explores European history, we find that not only did Europeans manifest this expansionist behavior amongst themselves, they did much the same to nearly every other race or culture they encountered over the course of hundreds of years of history. So, by such standards, they were essentially a bunch of greedy mongrels waiting to pounce on any opportunity that presented itself. When they encountered China, they saw a woefully unprepared state that could offer no real resistance and it was thus a prize to be taken like any other. Hence, the bulk of the blame really lay with the Qing for not having the good sense to face the seriousness and consequences of intercourse with a very self serving world. China was carved up because it was already a victim of its own shortsightedness and ill preparedness. Much like a hyena will scavenge from a carcass left over from a lion's hunt, the Europeans fell on a China weakened by years of Qing neglect. Ultimately, it was the Chinese people that suffered because of it. Another thing that must be recognized, is that even bad history can also have silver linings. Hong Kong, a backwater coastal village, would still be running around in its bare feet save that twist of history. Further, all those priceless photographs of late Qing China would not have existed had it not been for European incursions. These pictures have driven an interest in China (both good and bad) that continues to this day. That's how history is, even in bad times, some good does occasionally rise to the surface. Seriously, there is a need for a Chinese version of the turmoil that engulf it during those years. The refusal to examine the Chinese records of the atrocity and gross violation of the dignity of China during those years can only point to the one's very own bias itself. Many of us here I believe have an education that is western in its core. And the typification of the Chinese in some textbooks depicting the history of those period are sometimes truly appalling. The problem here is more of a technical and not political nature. While I wholly agree that a more rounded historic view needs to be explored, I have serious misgivings about your choice of the word refusal. It colors the discussion in a confrontational frame by suggesting that there is a continued, steadfast and purposeful dishonesty by western scholars to selectively review only facts that are supportive of, or favorable to eurocentric political historic needs. In a similar vein, I get the sense that some Chinese demand a wider field of study not for the sake of historic clarity, but more for emotional and national redress of the sense of having been greatly wronged. Inotherwords, the motivation for a more inclusive review is not for the sake of history per se, but rather for an emotionally charged, national ax to grind. Indeed, the suggestion of western rebuff of Chinese records is hardly supported by the fact that many western scholars themselves have openly and repeatedly expressed a fervent desire to mine the trove of as yet untranslated Chinese data on exactly those events. There needs to be a much better way to wholesale translate all the available Chinese authored works on its historical records for the western world. There just isn't enough technical ability yet to fully reveal the trapped data within Chinese and other language sources. I'm hopeful that one day, a method like Google Books would emerge, but one that cuts across language barriers so that we can freely and reliably read and enjoy each other's literary works, regardless of original language form or text. I'm sure that many Chinese historians too, are eager to fully appreciate the trove of western historic views. One example would be that the Chinese are portrayed as xenophobic Fumanchu, pig tailed, slant eyes eunuchs whose only saving grace is that all experts in chinese kungfu. That's just Hollywood adding mystery and exotic manner, in an effort at creative salesmanship, to an audience that knew very little of the real deal. Others had done much the same for other cultures. An example would be the Vikings, who never wore horned helmets until they appeared in stories molded by Swedish artistic license and other subsequent entertainment venues. In this regard, this is not dissimilar even to how turn of the century Chinese really believed that the streets of America were paved in gold. Stories and tales of other cultures were often embellished by all throughout history. The dangers of course, is that sometimes these cultural falsehoods are based upon ethnic or political points of division that make their retelling poisonous. We are familiar with the West Version of the events. Its time we look at the Chinese version. Actually, IMHO, it's been long overdue.
Good day to you Ralph. Cheers for the great reply. Well, I am still trying to digest what you have said and yeah, its going to be a long reply from me. Let's wait a while more to see if there are more respond to your post before I add my 2 cents more This is an entertainment forum after all, I don't think we can get much respond though, which is why I set up the poll, so that the viewers can simply state their stance. The respond is pretty sad isn't it ? I don't think we are going to get very far in this discussion even though to me, its actually quite an important part of the Chinese psyche that is interesting. We have the great Chinese Diaspora due to the hard and tragic consequences back all those years. And this forum makeup is really impressive, We have Chinese from all over the world that is in this forum. But I really wonder weather if there is any interest at all about their origins.. Perhaps perhaps Let's see.
I think I would find it ironically hilarious if they were then stolen from Berge's home, and somehow, mysteriously wind up reappearing in the PRC during an art auction, LOL... :bowdown:
Well, it looks like they may have found another one of those fountain heads: Well, let's hope he does the right thing and gives it back... -clapclap-clapclap-clapclap
While you're entitled to your opinion, and ultimately, the items having little intrinsic value (they're just hunks of shaped metal), they are nonetheless an artifact of Chinese civilization. As such, they all belong to the Chinese people and should be returned. In view of international laws regarding looting and stolen items of national or historic significance, the art house is clearly in the wrong. IMHO, the French judiciary ruled poorly in this case, and may have fallen prey to feelings of nationalist sentiments than a totally objective reading of the historic facts. What is really impressively galling to me is the fact that the holder of the stolen property then had the nerve to attempt to align himself with the Tibet protest movement to give his position an air of legitimacy. There may be many more in China, like you stated, but the set is not complete without ALL the original pieces, and THAT is the only thing that is acceptable to both China and to the Chinese people.
