"Greece Sort Of Owns The Parthenon Marbles"
"Greece sort of owns the Parthenon Marbles"
Sort of? SORT OF?
On July 5th 2024, yet another discussion about the Parthenon Marbles took place, at the British Museum. I never expect much anymore when it comes to this subject. Every time there's some kind of update on this ongoing debate, somehow my frustration reaches a new level. Because for every sensible debater, there will always be someone like 'classicist' Mary Beard.
According to Mary Beard, Greece only 'sort of' owns the Parthenon Marbles. "These are objects which are international, they belong to humanity, not to one particular bit of it", she said on July 5th.
Obviously I resent the entitlement in those words, the audacity to undermine the ethnic value of another country's heritage. The Marbles are international, you say? They don't belong to "one particular bit" of humanity? But if it hadn't been for that "one particular bit" of humanity, there wouldn't have been any Marbles to speak of. As a Greek person, I find it downright insulting of her, a British person, to say the Marbles don't belong to the "one particular bit" of humanity that birthed them.
How about we have a little laugh? Mary Beard said that the Parthenon Marbles are like a "child in a messy divorce case".
That's a wild simile. And by 'wild' I mean 'stupid'.
I'm calling it stupid because 'child of a divorce case' makes it sound like the Greeks and the Britons built the Parthenon together.
I know, of course, that Beard didn't make this simile out of stupidity. By comparing this debate to a child custody battle, she's insinuating the Marbles belong to the UK as much as they do to Greece, and that this is merely a matter of compromise. She knows exactly what she's doing, as a trustee of the British Museum.
On Twitter, she will 'educate' the public about what the Marbles should be called, in what feels like an attempt to justify naming the Marbles after the man who looted them. Whether you refer to the marbles removed from the Parthenon exclusively, or the 'less famous' stolen treasures, one thing is for certain; Elgin was a thief, and no amount of quirky 'pedantry' by Mary Beard is going to change that.
Lord Elgin was responsible for literally ripping pieces off of an ancient building, ignoring its cultural significance to Greek people. Make no mistake; he didn't find the Marbles on the ground, deserted and unappreciated by the Greeks. He RIPPED THEM OFF. Violently.
However, Mary autocorrect-to-the-rescue Beard will come to his defense, and tell you that when Elgin coveted the Marbles, the Parthenon was already in "a very sorry state". She went as far as to claim that "there is doubt at all he saved his sculpture from worse damage". All this is in a BBC archived piece written by Beard in 2011, in which she supposedly looks at both sides of the argument, yet it still felt one-sided when I read it.
So...he saved the Marbles from damage...by violently ripping them off the edifice? Gotcha.
We need to remember, everyone; the goal here is to make the BM Trustees and Elgin's ghost feel good about themselves.
"I want to see those marbles shared I think realistically, more generously with Greece", she said, on July 5th.
I wonder how Mary Beard would feel if one day a random person broke into her house and told her; "I planned to keep this place for myself, but you know what? Let's share it! I want to be generous to you."
Does she think she sounds like the bigger person? Does she think the British Museum is doing Greece a favor by entertaining the idea of sharing the Greek Marbles? How progressive!
How hypocritical.
She continued "I would like to see again the Parthenon marbles being ambassadors for a particular sort of Hellenic classical culture in which both Greece and the United Kingdom, and many other countries in the world, share; they can do their job not just in Athens or London- what about Beijing?"
What about Beijing, Mary? You reeeaaally don't want the Marbles to return to Greece, do you? If you could, I have a feeling you would personally deliver the Marbles to Mars. After all, the Marbles can be interplanetary.
I jump back and forth to her 2011 piece, where she asks; "Who owns great works of art? Do monuments such as the Parthenon belong to the whole world?" and "Are they the possession of those who live in the place where they were first made? Or are they the possession of everyone? The likelyhood is that we will be debating these issues for many years to come." Well, quite frankly, if we keep debating this for many years to come, it will due to the BM Trustees' own denial of reality. The questions Beard asks are easy to answer. Too easy, in fact.
In the same 2011 piece, Beard ponders the meaning of Cultural Property, of ownership. She points out how everyone can appreciate the works of Shakespeare and Mozart, and how things get sticky when it comes to the global appreciation of a tangible work of art such as the Marbles. The answer to this conundrum is obvious, if one looks at the matter objectively; the Greek Marbles belong in Greece, in the museum close to the Parthenon from which they were wrongfully torn from, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion if Elgin and his entourage hadn't taken them as souvenirs. The truth is that there is no real need for a debate, the BM trustees just keep dancing around the topic. They will harp on the complexity of this so-called debate because they don't like the idea of letting the Marbles return to Greece.
There's this childish insistence in the British Museum's reasoning, to keep associating the Parthenon Marbles with the UK much more than with Greece. I feel this stems from something that can be traced back to Elgin and his own avarice; a strange need to latch on to a part of a culture that was never theirs to begin with.
The insistence to connect the Marbles to the UK is the undertone to the 'child in a divorce case' comparison. It's what ultimately makes Beard's argument fall apart, and brings the hypocrisy to light. She said the Marbles don't belong to Greece, they belong to humanity. They're international, she said. And I ask; where was that sentiment before Greece called the British Museum out? Before we asked for the return of the Marbles? Before Melina Mercouri, Greek Minister of Culture, started fighting for them? If this matter had never been raised, would you ever care about your British Museum becoming "the world's greatest lending library", Mary?
What Mary Beard wants you to hear is; Why should Greece have the Marbles, when the whole world should have them?
What Mary Beard actually means is; If the UK can't keep them, then no one can.
Especially not Greece. The BM Trustees are adamant about that.
Which brings us back to the ridiculous "child in a messy divorce case" phrasing. A simile that doesn't apply in this situation and makes no sense, unless Beard imagined the BM as the delusional party who has convinced themselves this child is theirs even though there's no relation between them. But that would be too much self-awareness to expect from this academic.
You wanna compare the Parthenon Marbles to a child, Mary? Okay, but it's not a child 'in a messy divorce case'. This is a child that was abducted from its own home. It's a hostage situation, Mary. The British Museum is keeping a child hostage.
Greece wants her child back.
And as for cultural 'ambassadors', the British are free to send their own, instead of playing around with OUR cultural heritage.
More Posts from June-sunsets and Others
I'm Greek and I'm fed up
Where do you think that recent trend of making Dionysus a peaceful deity comes from ? Unless it's a coincidence that both Hades II and Kaos decided it. Even then, I don't understand how they had the idea. There are at least 10 myths that prove the opposite. A quick look on Theoi is enough.
The only time he's really called gentle, it's literally used as an antithesis to his terrifying nature (because duality is awesome).
And seeing this quote requires people to read the Bacchae 😂, yk, an actual source.
(being gentle to Ariadne doesn't mean he's like that to everyone)
So, what do you think ?
Like in Euripides's play, he described him "most gentle and cruel to men". The ancient Greeks new the dichotomy and complexity of his character, but of course many gods could enforce cruelty to those that acted hubris to them.
Dionysus of course ,most of the time in art and literature is casual and relaxed, hence why he didn't get much attention of his more dark side.
Also is the fact how for centuries, the renaissance and mostly Western Europe viewed him. Most people would portray Bacchus and other Roman depictions of him. Alas why this common misconception exists today.
It's also worth noting that many people look at things at a surface level. They see a couple of based and mid portrayals of Dionysus and think they know enough about him. That's an issue i see in retellings of people constantly making him a caricature because of this surface narrative.
Your response reeks of 'I will twist every sentence into something else'. First of all;
'How nice of you to accuse me of xenophobia because I believe that a book that hasn’t even been published shouldn’t be ridiculized. Very rational.'
I did not accuse you of xenophobia. Where on earth did I accuse you of xenophobia? You read 'you're going into these retellings without fully grasping the purpose and cultural value of Greek mythology' and what you got from it was 'xenophobia'? Are you kidding me? What I wrote is literally what it says on the tin (which is not xenophobia). And OP did not ridiculize anything; they made a humorous speculation on a future book and you couldn't handle it. Very mature.
'If you believe that the concept of ancient greek mythology retellings as a whole is disrespectful, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. I just find it completely unnecessary to insult this woman’s intelligence and speak of her as if she’s an idiot to be led by the nose.'
In the conclusion of my 'rambling' I state that this isn't about all retellings being inherently bad:
I believe a good retelling can be done. It's possible. Unfortunately, they are extremely hard to find (or, apparently, extremely hard to write). Most myth retelling writers do the same mistake Miller does; looking at ancient myths through a modern lense, and judging them based on that. Then they claim they can 'fix' them (which is another level of insulting) and they end up distorting those myths to the point where they are completely different stories, unrelated to the original source.
Also no one insulted Miller's intelligence? No one called her an idiot. In fact, she might know exactly what she's doing. I just don't agree with it, I think it's wrong and she's being disrespectful to the mythology and the culture it originated from.
(There is a general misconception of Greek culture in general when it comes to Western academic circles. It's frustrating.)
'And how is that her fault? Anybody who buys a retelling and becomes convinced that they are reading the true and original version of the story is an idiot. Madeline Miller’s books are advertised towards adults.'
That's true, anybody who buys a retelling thinks they are reading the true of the story is an idiot. But there's a problem in Miller's attitude towards mythology as well. How is it also not her fault, when she says things like 'the ending of the novel is a huge pushback against mythology' in her interviews? Really, Miller? Are you comparing yourself to Homer? Are you saying your retelling is on a par with this thousands-of-years-old epic? Be for real.
Ultimately, the fact that she's a Classicist means little to me when she characterizes mythological figures -mortals and gods- in a way that reduces them to caricatures; she simplifies them so they can fit the boxes of modern character tropes.
That's when retellings become direspectful. And that's an instance where changing an existing character's personality is bad writing. Especially when this character was originally pretty complex and means something to the people of this culture.
As a Greek person, I have the right to call her out on that.
I didn't accuse you of xenophobia, but I'm pretty sure you accused me of being anti-art. So no, I'm not anti-art. I'm just Greek and irritated with Miller's BS. People are allowed to express criticism on art. All art, including Miller's.
So Madeline Miller is writing a Persephone retelling. So let's make our bets about the book.
The winners will win this picture of a brick.
So let's make a bet.
A.) She will potray Demeter as an abusive mother, whaile the kidnapping will be ereased, and Hades will be baby boyfied.
B.) Hades will be potrayd as eveil incarnate, and Demeter will be potrayd as a poor poor blorbo (similar to how she potrayd Circe)
C.) Both will be potrayd as the worst. Demeter, and Hades will be potrayd as abusive, and Persephone will be potrayd as a poor poor girl who always has to suffer.
My bet is that it will be C.).
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Dream Theory Shortcuts
Full post - unpolished
The Opening Segment
Astrid
Richard
Rory
Charles
Glickman
Betelgeuse's Couple's Therapy
Betelgeuse/Jeremy parallels and Garden of Eden symbolism
Astrid's Demonic Birthing Sequence
Darktoonverse
Spoken dream/nightmare allusions
Critical analysis of the literal interpretation
References:
Casper
Carrie
The Shining
The Fly/Rosemary's Baby
The Wizard of Oz
Alfred Hitchcock
Elvira pt. I & pt. II feat. Labyrinth
B&W Segments
Ed Wood/Plan 9 From Outer Space
Mario Bava
Five: I married a mannequin.
*shows everyone a picture of Dolores*
Five: We don't need counseling.
Alchemy & Dreams in Beetlejuice
Part 2
The more I reflect on the plot of Beetlejuice 2, the more I doubt that much of what happens in the film actually took place.
It's all written allegorically. Tim's work has always embodied Jungian themes such as archetypes and the shadow self, as well as his use of alchemy & numerology in the original Beetlejuice movie. For example, his use of the planet Saturn and its symbolism, as well as how he relates it back to Beetlejuice by having him wear several watches on his wrist, and freezing Adam & Wolf in time. "Sands of Time", "Saturn: the Father of Time".
You know how everyone who appears in your dreams is supposed to represent yourself?
Astrid = Lydia
"The images of alchemy are the most complete expression of individuation as a process, and they are therefore a valuable aid to understanding the symbolism of dreams." - Carl Jung
Astrid wears a silver dress, Lydia wears a red dress. In alchemy, (something Jung believed was a method to understand the psyche within our dreams) silver needs to be purified by red. Combined, these colours symbolise the union of spirit and matter, or the balance of opposing forces, essential for the completion of the alchemical process. So we have Astrid and Lydia symbolising the spiritual (silver/mercury) and the material (red/sulfur). This is why Lydia watches Astrid at the end of the dream getting married and having a baby. She is watching her dream representation living out her material desires.
They completed the alchemical process by fixing their relationship (forgiving yourself).
Astrid is so similar to Lydia, even storming off on her bike when Rory proposed. Rory also pushes Lydia to do the Ghost House show when we know that exploiting the dead is very OOC for her. If Astrid is Lydia, then Rory must represent her teenage feelings towards her parents. Her father married Delia who teen Lydia couldn't stand, and they both forced Lydia to move with them and adjust to their lifestyle.
Astrid and Lydia reconciling is Lydia reconciling with her past self. Through silver and red, spirit and matter, this is the completion of the alchemical process. Why did they put Delia in a purple dress alongside these two, when purple in alchemy symbolises the transmutation outcome? They could have chosen any colours, but the ones chosen just so happen to correspond with the story. Silver is spirit, Red is matter, Purple is the merging of spirit & matter, resulting in "enlightenment". You say Beetlejuice's name three times because in alchemy it's the number of completion (sulfur, mercury, salt).
And I must repeat myself: there is no clear indication of where Astrid's dream sequence begins. The sequence at the end seems to start after Lydia looks at the Maitlands' model with the lights as stars above her. Lydia is looking down at the town (the material realm), while her head is in the stars (the spiritual realm).
The whole Beetlejuice franchise is about alchemy, because Betelgeuse himself is an alchemist. He is the Trickster/Magician archetype, who is able to manipulate reality and able to traverse between the living and the dead, also known as rebirth.
Betelgeuse = Lydia's Masculine Self
Alchemical texts were concerned with achieving the coniunctio oppositorum (the union of opposites). This process is also known as "The Marriage of Opposites" or "Chemical Wedding". Whose marriage/wedding was important to the plot in both movies?
Delia finds her masculine self (Charles) thanks to Betelgeuse at the Soul Train. The Soul Train is the ferry which carries souls along the River Styx. It's the main river in the underworld that separates the living and the dead.
"The living and the dead; can they co-exist?" - Lydia Deetz
So, Lydia was watching Astrid (her dream self) get married and have the Beetlebaby. Everything Astrid goes through is a mixture of Lydia's fears and desires. Lydia's teen self feared that Betelgeuse was using Lydia as a way to have access to the living realm, and we know this because of Astrid's experience with Jeremy. However, by this logic, it also means Lydia desires marriage and a baby with Betelgeuse. Unfortunately, Lydia is in the material realm, while her masculine self is in the spiritual realm.
Canonically speaking, since we know Lydia loves horror films, dreaming of giallo movies aligns much better with her character than ignoring her ability to speak to the dead.
Allison: Patrick, this is everybody. Everybody, this is Patrick.
Ben: Hey, Patrick.
Klaus: Hey, Patrick.
Diego: Hey, Patrick.
Vanya: Hi, Patrick.
Luther: I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name. Patrick, was it?
One thing I need foreigners to understand about Hellenic polytheism is you cannot categorise the Divine into neat little boxes like they're laboratory samples you're putting in quarantine. The Gods interact with each other and with the world, their domains mingle the same way our lives and the people in them connect like the links of a chain.
This is why you see us Greeks advocating for foreigners to do research into our culture if they want to approach Hellenic polytheism, and this is why you don't cherry-pick the Gods that "fit your vibes/aesthetic" and exclude the rest. You can't ignore aspects of existence and you can't ignore the Gods.
Do you need to work heavily with every single deity? No, of course not. But you do need to show them respect, even if it's from a distance.
The kind of mythology flex it is to be able to say "Hey! I'm a Real Alive Person and I was born and raised in mountain Πήλιο (Pelion), the actual mythical home of the Centaurs (and birthplace? If I'm not mistaken?)"
Because hey. I exist :)
And xenoi still think they're the rightful inheritors of Ancient Greek culture. Maddening to consider.
No bc back when I was reading Percy Jackson as a kid, I was so hurt to read the line where it said that the Greek Gods follow the path of "Πρόοδος" to the West and have "relocated to the US" or whatever. As a lil kid, my immediate reaction was
"WHY?! We're still here aren't we? Is Greece empty now? Is Olympos vacant? Why would Our Gods abandon us? What about the demigods born in Greece?"
It's a special kind of rage pain when you take into account ALL OF THE FUCKING STOLEN ANCIENT ARTIFACTS. That our culture often depicts them as being abducted. I've cried in frustration about this.
Haha, is that why everything's burning down? Because the Nyphes were (stolen?? again????) "relocated" and are no longer roaming the Greek forests? Is that why everything's flooding, because Poseidon is no longer here to regulate the Seas and Waters? Are we really Dying Off?
It's like plucking a beautiful flower from it's birthplace and trying to get it to get used to an environment it was not made to grow in. It's this level of absurdity. What the fuck.
That's why I'm a Greek Person studying Archaeology. We need more of us. Desperately.
My hands are shaking as I'm writing this and I'm slowly losing my mind about it :DDD
But to leave on a positive note. Hehe, mythology flex. I could have been born a Centaur if I really wanted to. Happily galloping away in the fields in the comfort of my own ignorance of our culture being ripped apart, dismembered and depicted as the gnarly bloody soulless mess the xenoi have made it be in mainstream media.
Ah, there's always next life. ^-^
I feel you, anon, and I've often felt the same as you. Our cultural heritage is rich and we are still here, a long line of people passing the Greek culture down. No matter what xenoi say, they will be eventually humbled by the truth if enough of us let the world know.
The PJO series did a big damage to us, matter how innocent it seems to the Westerners. If you check my #pjo and #rick riordan tags you'll see discussions about the books and of course the bigoted line "the gods abandoned Greece for the modern pillar of Western civilization, aka the US".
Hold on και καλή δύναμη!!!
=========================
If my posts have helped you in any way consider buying me a ko-fi 💖
-
b33skitty liked this · 2 months ago -
marysmirages liked this · 6 months ago -
bi-conic-genderfluid-iot liked this · 6 months ago -
vitathecrab reblogged this · 6 months ago -
percy-lol reblogged this · 6 months ago -
percy-lol liked this · 6 months ago
-
june-sunsets reblogged this · 7 months ago
