|
Spoils of war
 There are two contrasting stories on our news pages in this issue. One concerns the ruling by the Spoliation Advisory Panel that two pieces of porcelain in two of our finest museums were taken from their owners by the Nazis during World War II and must be returned. The institutions concerned, the Fitzwilliam and the British Museum, have readily agreed to a return and compensation respectively. The other is of a case in Sweden concerning a painting in a Stockholm museum that was judged to have been taken from a Holocaust victim. In this case, the institution concerned has been accused of dragging its feet over the return of the painting, by Emil Nolde, to the heirs of the victim.
Swedish press reports say museum officials have attacked the lawyers acting on behalf of the heirs, saying that they charge excessive fees. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t, but that’s hardly the point.
Or is it? Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of this specific case, claimants in cases of looted works of art from the Second World War are sometimes accused of "being in it for the money" and of course lawyers won’t work for a bowl of rice. In many cases, a claimant is either the original victim, or a close relative seeking the return of a prized family collection. Sometimes, the claimant is a much more distant relative, who might not even have known of the existence of the painting, porcelain, or whatever.
Is it fair then, that such a fuss should be made over works of art to which claimants might have no emotional attachment whatsoever? Art that is now being enjoyed by countless visitors in a museum or gallery and which, when returned, might be sold to go into a private collection?
On balance, I think it is. Every effort should be made to return such works, even in cases where claimants are motivated by money. If I owned something which was subsequently proven to have been stolen from somebody else, I’d want them to have it back. I’d prefer it to go to the original loser, rather than a distant relative, but I’d have to accept that it was never really mine in the first place. Giving it back would simply be the right thing to do.
And of course, I’d also want to go after the person who sold it to me!
Editor
Phil Ellis |
