Elgin MArbles

Document Sample
Elgin MArbles Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                                      Nordstrom 1

Jakob Nordstrom


ENC 1102

12 April 2012

                           The Elgin Marbles Annotated Bibliography

“Bring Them Back.” Dir. Ioannis Kaspiris. 2011., 2011. Video.’s 2010 video clip “Bring Them Back” demands viewers to take their
side on the Elgin Marbles controversy: that they are returned to Greece.’s
video opens with a mock news bulletin before transitioning into a tour of the New Acropolis
Museum and ending with the request that viewers sign an online petition.’s
created this film in order to influence the opinions of viewers. The intended audience is the
world-wide public; he seeks to convince as many people as he can.’s video
begins as a farce; attempting to appeal to the viewer’s pathos presents
altered images of Big Ben while Aristole Elginiadis condescendingly replies to the questions of a
contrived interview. This scenario is intended to induce an emotional response when the viewer
sees Big Ben removed from its tower.’s satire is not a very successful
appeal because it mocks some of the very people it seeks to persuade: the British public. The
remainder of the film offers convincing appeals beginning with logos and ethos when shows the viewer the spectacular New Acropolis Museum at the foot the
Acropolis hill. The museum was created with housing the missing Elgin Marbles as one of its
goals; logically, its existence counters the British argument that the Marbles could not be
preserved in Greece. The museum’s existence also grants Greece and the film credibility by
showing the viewer that there is a place to keep the Marbles and that the is
not merely voicing Grecian discontent. The film ends in an appeal to kairos as’s actors request that the viewer sign an online petition saying that “you
have the power [to help] and together we must mobilize global opinion.”This is a kairotic appeal
because it asks the viewer click the online petition directly after the video ends. While does make some good arguments for relocation their opening may have
offended an important part of their target audience.

Cruikshank, George. “The Elgin Marbles! or John Bull buying Stones at the time his numerous
       Family want Bread!!.” Cartoon. The Times 1816: n.pag. Print.

         The 1816 political cartoon by George Cruikshank “The Elgin Marbles!” or John Bull
buying Stones at the time his numerous Family want Bread!!” raises doubt about the financial
soundness of the Elgin Marbles purchase. George Cruiskshank drew this cartoon to lambast the
government and Lord Elgin. George Cruishank’s speaks as a humorist to his audience: the
reading public of London. The image includes an aristocrat (presumably Lord Elgin) trying to
sell the marbles to John Bull and the British lower class. There is a dialogue between the
aristocrat and the others. In the background of the image lay broken sculptures and other rubbish.
Reading from top to bottom cartoonist George Cruikshank begins with a satirical logos appeal
                                                                                       Nordstrom 2

when the aristocrat attempts to sell his marbles saying “Never think of BREAD when you can
have STONES so wonderous cheap!!,” This is satire because at this time in history the British
lower class was not well-fed; everyone in the lower class was thinking about how to get food for
their family and not about buying damaged statues no matter how remarkable. The opening line
is a logos appeal as it illustrates for viewers how illogical the British government’s purchase is
from the lower class’s perspective. The following reply by John Bull builds a pathos appeal; “I
had rather not buy them at present – Trade is very Bad & provision very Dear & my family can’t
eat Stones!,” as John Bull is seen as a father figure to the British people his children - the lower
class – repeat “Give us Bread! Give us bread! Give us Bread!” This stirs the emotions of the
reader; who can resist their child’s plea for food? A kairotic appeal appears in a notice lying at
the feet of John Bull reading “Ministerial Economy a Farce of 1816,” which is George
Cruikshank’s commentary on the poor economy at the time of the cartoon’s publication. This is a
timely appeal that states: the economy is bad now; now is not the time to spend frivolously. The
cartoon’s ethos is based on the credentials of its creator George Cruikshank, a collaborator of
Charles Dickens, and the fact that it appears in the time-tested The London Times. All appeals
function well in George Cruikshank’s cartoon.

“Elginism.” TBWA\Athens Advertising. 2001. Print.
         The Parthenon Marbles Cultural Awareness Program advertisement published in
2001”ELGINISM*” incites viewers to reconsider the Elgin Marbles controversy. The Parthenon
Marbles Cultural Awareness Program created this film in order to get attention for their cause of
restoring the marbles to Greece. The intended audience is the general public of any nation the
ads run in; likely European magazines. The Parthenon Marbles Cultural Awareness Program
advertisement includes, in bold, red lettering, ‘ELGINISM*’ followed by ‘Cultural Mutilation’
in a smaller yellow font; the image consists of a disheveled young man missing half of his right
arm wearing nothing but his underwear. Below this image there is a caption by a British
eyewitness to the centuries old removal of the marbles. The bold red lettering by the creators of
this image provides an appeal to kairos because the color red creates a sense of urgency in
viewers; it is the same shade as a stop-sign (meaning stop now) in almost all cultures. An appeal
to kairos and pathos lies at the bottom of the image in a small caption “Elgin Marbles: Missing
since 1801.” It is a timely appeal because this advertisement was created 200 years after the
removal of the marbles. “Missing since 1801,” mirrors a phrase one might associate with a
missing child. This is a subtle pathos appeal that is designed to incite the feeling one must
experience if their child has gone missing. A pathos appeal appears in the image of the amputee
since it is difficult to imagine any person who would not take pity on a man missing his right
arm. The use of the image of the amputee also constitutes an appeal to Logos; when one views a
person or a thing that is missing parts the logical thing to do is to complete the person or thing,
this is a function of our minds attraction to symmetry and logical patterns in the world around us.
The Parthenon Marbles Cultural Awareness Program leads itself ethos by including Sir Robert
Smirke’s quote “[i]t particularly affected me when I saw the destruction made to get down the
basso-relievos on the walls of the frieze. Each stone as it fell shook the ground with its
ponderous weight, with a deep hallow noise; it seemed like a convulsive groan of the injured
spirit of the temple;” this leads credibility because it is from a British knight who witnessed the
maiming of the Greek Marbles. This ad creates a compelling argument for the return of the Elgin
                                                                                         Nordstrom 3

“Elgin Marbles.” The London Times 18 April 1816: 3. Print.
         The 1816 article written by an anonymous correspondent entitled “Elgin Marbles,”
strives to justify Britain’s Elgin Marbles purchase. The correspondent begins with a stunning
description of the Parthenon Marbles and their creator’s ability while reminding readers that the
sculptures are irreplaceable; later he explains that Phidias was so brilliant that he did not need to
study anatomy in a morgue as other great artists have. The author wrote this article to encourage
his English readership to think positively about the Elgin Marble purchase in a time of economic
strife for England. The intended audience appears to be upper- to middle-class English citizens;
while the journalist displays significant bias toward his subject. The journalist begins with a
direct appeal to his reader’s pathos charging that “the heart of a man of taste […] clings to these
relics of the great Athenian;” and declaring that any decent human would desire to protect these
great works of art. This appeal is designed to inspire a feeling of guardianship over an artifact of
cultural and artistic importance. The journalist’s opening statement also contains an appeal to
kairos telling his readers that “there is no calling up the great Phidias to renew his inestimable
labors.” He asserts that the sculptures are irreplaceable and that time might not bring them
another master sculptor like Phidias; thus the Marbles must be preserved now before they are
forever lost. Further in the article the journalist appeals to his reader’s sense of logos proclaiming
that Phidias “[had] no need [to] pour over the disgusting mammocks in the operating room;” he
asserts that since Phidias, as some other artists have, did not dissect human bodies to learn
anatomy; the work of such a magnificent artist must logically be preserved. The journalist speaks
with some ethos on his subject; he uses precise and descriptive language, he employs several
prominent artists’ names to help increase his credibility including Rapheal, Da Vinci, and his
subject Phidias. This article’s rhetorical appeals work well despite the journalist’s obvious bias.

Merryman, John. “The Public Interest in Cultural Property.” California Law Review 77.2 (1989):
      339-364. Print.
         An article published in 1987 in the California Law Review entitled “The Public Interest
in Cultural Property” by John Merryman persuades his readers to consider why cultural artifacts
hold importance both legally and culturally. Merryman begins by describing the meaning of the
term Cultural Property in a legal sense then he moves on to explain that every culture in history
shows interest in preserving their culture; he asserts that cultures are emotionally bound to their
histories and finally that governments across the world need to reexamine their cultural property
laws. John Merryman wrote this article in order to further debate on and elucidate the issues
surrounding cultural property. Writing from an informative stand point Merryman’s directs his
article toward those persons interested in property law, cultural artifacts, and international
politics. Merryman initially uses appeals to ethos to lend credibility to his argument and to help
define the terms of his article when he states that “Cultural Property […] include[s] […] almost
anything made or changed by man.” He continues on offering a more comprehensive definition
composed by the UNESCO convention. Following the definition Merryman makes a compelling
appeal to logos by emphasizing that since nearly every civilization that has ever existed has
sought to preserve its’ cultural property and that doing so is a universal trait of mankind; he
asserts “Despite cultural variations, in most (all?) places care […] about objects that […] express
their own and other people’s cultures.”Furthering this appeal to logos he insists that humans have
been collecting and preserving their history since “long before the modern state or earlier forms
                                                                                         Nordstrom 4

of political organization.” Merrymen proves that cultural artifacts hold importance to all people:
thus it is logical for all governments to have fair and honest legislation regarding these artifacts.
Merryman states that there is pathos inherent in cultural artifacts; that artifacts make people feel
“nostalgia for the people, events and cultures that produced them.” This appeals to the reader’s
own sense of culture and feeling of belonging; it might bring to mind a particular artifact that is
important the reader. Merryman then leads the reader into an appeal to kairos insisting that the
governments of the world have a fundamental need to reexamine laws on cultural property when
he asserts that “[c]ultural nationalism contrasts sharply with the idea of a ‘[world-wide] cultural
heritage’ that has appeared in recent international legistlation.” This asks the lawyers, judges and
legislature to take action about the legal aspects of cultural artifacts: that change is needed now.
Merryman presents compelling arguments throughout this article.

Shared By: