Its is very difficult for me to care about art when people are dying. Even though it 60 years later and I don't know any of people who died or even any of their families I still care more about them than the art.
When I saw the trailer for this I rolled my eyes.
Its is very difficult for me to care about art when people are dying. Even though it 60 years later and I don't know any of people who died or even any of their families I still care more about them than the art.
When I saw the trailer for this I rolled my eyes.
And this my friends is the reason why History NEEDS to be teached in school, all school from elementary through college...so that people understand why History is important and how it has and will affect them in the future; just to name a few reasons.
If every textbook, historical document, internet, encyclopedia, art piece etc. were wiped off the face of this earth do you think human beings would instantly become stupid and die off??Wow, the All or Nothing Fallacy. I've learned enough history to know that we have progressed. World War II may have killed more people than any other war, but when you look at percentages, the picture is different: Genghis Khan's wars of conquest killed on person in nine of the World population. The 30 Years War killed half of Germany.
Wow. You're so deep.
share[deleted]
Their culture is the only thing that proved they even existed in the first place.
So some of you are arguing that these objects have more value than the people themselves because "We" can know about them from the objects.
I can guarantee you that we would be able to learn a lot about about lost peoples (like the so called Caribs and Arawaks) if they were around to tell their own stories.
Take Stonehenge.
Great monument.
But has no meaning because no one from the culture is around to tell us what it was for. Was is for worship. Was it a big ass clock.
I'm sorry if I don't get it. But to me worrying about saving the art of the people when there are actual people to save seems like your priorities are mixed up.
Lets not forget that those people have art inside their hearts too. There isn't and finite number of art. The art done doesn't actually have more value (not talking monetary here) than the art that could come out of those people who died. Why not try to save the culture that exist inside those people.
Obviously, I am not faulting the people who saved the art. I am just having a very very very hard time caring about the art. I care more about a single life than any group of object. Someone who died could have invented the cure for cancer or AIDS.
When I think about WWII, I think about all the stacks of dead rotting bodies.
So am supposed to say. "At least we got the art."
No one is arguing that the art has more value than the artists themselves.
What is being said is that, as with all human beings, the artists will eventually die. To say that their art has no value or should not be saved, devalues the lives of those very artists.
The view that by assembling a group of people who would not otherwise be fighting in the front lines to undertake a mission to save the world's great art that the Nazis had looted in any way shape or form adversely stopped or slowed down the attempts to save the lives of human beings is a lie.
Some people are only able to care about single issues. Those people are, unfortunately very limited in both their intellect and their humanity.
It is very possible to care both about those who died and the art that was saved. Both were important.
And no you should not think, "screw the dead, at least we got the art". You are supposed to recognize that ANY action that made the Nazis lose was a good thing. That even if we could not save those lives that anything that caused their murderers a loss was a win. I have met camp survivors and a lot of them said that knowing that the art was recovered meant that at least the Nazis did not get to take EVERYTHING from them.
One woman who got back to very valuable paintings said that she could not save her family who were taken to the camps early on (she had manged to escape the Nazis) but getting that art back meant that she could remember the joy that art had given her parents and that she remembered the stories her grandfather told about when they got the art. It meant the world to her that British and American soldiers risked their lives to recover what had been stolen.
The point of my original post was that In the grand scheme of things a movie about the art they saved does nothing for me because I am more concerned with the human stories of survival or death.
My heart feels almost nothing for art, so I am not interested in this movie.
Yes, I rolled my eyes when I saw the trailer and though "really". Who is going to care about this.
My point was never about if they should have saved the art.
They saved it, good for them.
My point was there are millions of more interesting stories to be told.
And even with the woman who lost her family but got her art back. If that woman had no family and was just missing a piece of art that she got back the story would have no impact on most people. Most people would be moved because she lost her family and the art is just something she is clinging to for happiness because her family can't provide it anymore.
Lets see how well the movie does. Then we will see how many people care about this story.
You need to spend the rest of your life in a dark room with the shades pulled and the door locked.
shareFYI, I care a lot more about the world's art than I do you.
You are literally too stupid to insult.
"Lets see how well the movie does. Then we will see how many people care about this story."Well OP you've got your answer - The Monuments Men is a hit with audiences. Its in the top 5 at the box office for the third weekend in a row which means it's got word of mouth. Audiences love it. It will be in the top ten for weeks.
The point of my original post was that (...) My heart feels almost nothing for art, so I am not interested in this movie.
Yes, I rolled my eyes when I saw the trailer and though "really". Who is going to care about this. (...)
My point was there are millions of more interesting stories to be told.
Do not roll your eyes at a loss of culture. During WW2, there were millions of soldiers actively engaged in fighting but this story tells a story of the very few that were more focused on saving art.
shareYou can care about both. They are not mutually exclusive.
shareSo, in your mind, the only numbers that matter are the German numbers? To you, only 12 million died? Or they are the only one that matters?
Not the 27 million killed by Stalin? That's not important at all? Or the millions that died in Asia?
transongeist.com
When the film is specifically dealing with the art that the Nazi's looted, those killed by the Nazis ARE the relevant focus.
Yes, others died, but that is not germane to the discussion about Nazi looted at.
That being said, the work undertaken by the real Monument Men was not wasted time nor did it take away from the murders committed by the Nazis.
When the film is specifically dealing with the art that the Nazi's looted, those killed by the Nazis ARE the relevant focus.
Yes, others died, but that is not germane to the discussion about Nazi looted at.
the real Monument Men was not wasted time nor did it take away from the murders committed by the Nazis.
The what the what? What could possibly be focused about a 12 million person death count!? That's the entire war, if you want to focus on that go ahead and make a two year long movie with a million extras. Get all the detail in there.
Focus means narrowing down, not blowing up the scale!!!!!!
Unless the war crimes were committed by the monuments men themselves bringing in Allied War crimes and figuring out the blame game once again destroys any notion of FOCUS.
And for FOCUS'S SAKE just because there are a million interesting stories from WWII doesn't mean that a story about the Art specialists can't be interesting! Your loss milltoonnvanilli....
What could possibly be focused about a 12 million person death count!? That's the entire war
if you want to focus on that go ahead and make a two year long movie with a million extras
Unless the war crimes were committed by the monuments men themselves bringing in Allied War crimes
just because there are a million interesting stories from WWII doesn't mean that a story about the Art specialists can't be interesting!
Really?? Yes, millions of people died, but without the culture that Hitler was trying to destroy, what were we fighting for? What would it have been to win the war and have our culture and history snatched out from under us, and that is EXACTLY what would have happened if Hitler had his way. All of the art would have been destroyed: do you even comprehend what that means? Works by Michelangelo, Raphael, Rembrandt, Phidias, Leonardo, Cezanne, etc: these are irreplaceable and belong to the world. There would have been nothing left. NOTHING. The Schliemann gold is still missing! The Nazis destroyed thousands of works by Picasso, impressionists, and modern artists because they deemed the 'trash': they are irreplaceable and lost forever.
Yes, 12 million, and even more people than that. Much of the stolen artwork belonged to Jews killed by the Nazis: does that matter to you? Would it matter to you if it had been destroyed and had never been returned to its rightful owners? Some is still being returned as it turns up! Do you think the soldiers who fought for a way of life should have failed to preserve a cornerstone of our culture simply because it wasn't human? Art lasts forever- it's ageless and timeless, left for us to preserve for the next generation. Would you really allow Hitler to destroy most of the art in Western Europe, and with it our culture, as if it had no value? That makes no sense at all.