UK temporarily bans export of 19th century photography album

During wars, artworks are secured from damage from bombings and from the potential theft/destruction by the enemy. Unfortunately, some groups in this world are behaving like the same people who destroyed the library of Alexandria and some "progressives" in the West turn a blind eye to it.

Hell, Britain can barely secure their borders let alone artworks. If ISIS came marching through the UK Cameron would be on the phone to Obama begging the USA for help as usual.

JDThomas are you mentally impaired in some way? The benefit of typing a response is the time it gives you to think (I believe this to be your problem) before you post. Give it a go you never know you may type something intelligent (I doubt it buy still worth a go).

Why don't you and RichRMA aka RichKKK go hang out out in the "whites only" section. There you can discuss why Britain is the only country that should be allowed control over the world's artwork.

OK "Amateur Snaps"? That moniker is enough to let me know you're an Epsilon-minus semi-moron at the most.

Wow so you aren't mentally impaired just stupid and ignorant beyond believe. The UK isn't a whites only country, far from it, something you would be aware of if you had half a brain cell or the ability to type on your keyboard without drooling on it.

Governments the world over attempt to hold onto historically important artifacts. Its about money sometimes and (I would hope in this instance) about protecting an important album that may otherwise fall into a private collection and be lost to the world not just the UK.

The original reference to ISIS/Taliban is due to their own propaganda videos showing them destroying priceless historic artifacts (statues usually) that we are now all the poorer to be without.

Also are you aware that you are been openly racist on an open forum. You are the only person to bring colour into this. Maybe you should be more thoughtful in what you post?

@JDThomas - one word mate - Mexicans!

Arguing with you losers in pointless. You aren't even making any sense.

What the hell do you know about Mexicans?

I wouldn't expect you to know any Texas history since you're a Eurocentric bigot, but the Republic of Texas was co-founded by Americans and Mexicans. We called ourselves Texans and Tejanos. The whites didn't come to Mexico and steal the land it was given to us. When the dictator Santa Ana subverted the Mexican constitution the fight was on. Many Tejanos fought alongside the Texans to protect the Republic of Texas from being taken back by Santa Ana's army.

Learn your facts before you try to give a Texan a history lesson.

@JDThomas,

Sorry mate, you mis-understood. I wasn't even thinking about or referring to Texan/Mexican history at all but the amount of Mexicans flooding over your border. I mean you talk about the lack of British border control (and that is certainly true) when you have major issues there yourself. It is reckoned that within 20 years Spanish will be the most spoken language in the USA.

I'm a bigot it seems, an anti-american one then. At least I can understand why people want to fly aircraft into your buildings, cut your heads off and blow you up, wrong as it all is.

The way black americans are still treated by some white americans and the police is nothing but disgraceful.

"One nation under god"! (or "una nación bajo Dios" as it will soon be) More like "One nation under Satan" is a more apt description.

Like the British empire fell, the american one is about to go.

JD has an identity crisis and a deep self-hate: a need to slag off other nations and peoples, whilst simultaneously needing to defend his (for no gain, other than trying to feel better about himself)

Notice he throws in the "bigot" bomb when cornered; despite it being obvious to anybody reading the thread that he is the only person to make bigoted remarks? (he's called people he deos not know: nazis, white supremists, members of the KKK)

BTW JD - You tell people to learn some history. The irony!

To all those who say this is a stupid post: he has a point although maybe not conveyed in the nicest fashion. Have you ever been to the British Museum?

The truth is that if it weren't for private philanthropists who, in some cases, spent their family's entire fortune on preserving artifacts such as the Elgin Marbles, they would have surely been lost. The fact is that these allegedly "stolen" artifacts are wonderfully preserved, protected, and placed on public display for all the world to see. If they were kept by the Queen for her private display only, I'd agree that they should be returned. But they are now preserved for all the world for generations to come.

No quation marks needed in "stolen." They were blatantly ripped, broken and removed and STOLEN and sold and bought and transferred and reconstructed. They are not yours; you are not protecting them by anyone, and they would be publicly displayed in their native Greece.

And indeed almost every country now has similar prohibitions in place to protect national patrimony precisely because of the history of plunder...and not just by Great Britain. It would be useful if the axe grinders trolling here knew their history, past and present, but. then, why let the facts get in the way of a little anonymous internet breast beating!!

Very true. Well said.

Unfortunatly we have to suffer some very sad people on the net.

Keep calm, don't lose your heads!

The good ol' USAF will go in and smart bomb ISIS, women and children to Hellfire!

@Wye Photography And likely saving your pansy asses while we're at it. You'd be speaking German if that traitorous Churchill hadn't killed your own people to convince the USA to enter WWII.

And if I recall, Britain is also engaged in this "war on terror" over in the Middle East murdering women and babies too. So don't get too proud about your country. They're always the first in line behind the USA.

And for what it's worth judging the whole of a nation's citizens by the actions of their politicians is completely ignorant.

Your grasp on history seems somewhat feeble at best.

Does the date of the US entering the war not ring any bells with you?

No one I know would ever deny the massive contribution that the young men of the United States made to the defeat of Nazism in Europe.

By the same token, no one should deny that had Britain not successfully resisted invasion in 1940 and stood alone against Hitler, then world history would have been very different.

Your attitude towards people who gave their lives to resist the evil that Nazism represents is really very sad, and suggests a rather poor education.

British is a "race" now?

"White British" is a race (if one can (or even wants to) define "race", which I suggest is problematic at best, impossible at worst); or more correctly a "ethnicity classification" or "ethnic group" that is defined and used, by the British Government. 82% of British residents were counted as White British in the 2011 census.

There are more White British in the USA than the UK. 8 in 10 American names are British and the White British are the biggest single "ethnic group" in the USA.

Your mileage with the usefulness of this may vary. It may, or may not, be as useful as describing somebody as Navajo or Swedish or Japanese or....whatever you want.

Jesus I can't even deal with the white supremacy going on in this thread right now.

I had no idea there were so many National Front members in the DPReview community.

...And gave many of said lands in return whatever they use as civilization (if any) nowadays.

steelhead3, it's kind of important to point out that your version of history is very selective.

Historically, lots of countries "thought it necessary to rob foreign lands of their treasures by military force", as you put it.

The Spanish, the Portuguese, the Germans, the Austrians, the Dutch, the Belgians, the Turks, the Italians, the Greeks, the Russians, the Japanese, the Chinese... you get the point.

History is interesting and there are very few countries who haven't eyed up something that lay beyond their borders and thought, "we'd like a bit of that".

Times change. Back in then, people felt more secure as part of a conquering empire or nation. Come to think of it, that may not have changed much...

At least we have HISTORY! and lots of it, unlike some!

Steelhead

If you consider the arts in whole: visual arts, music, literature, architecture; then there is not a nation of earth that can come close to what Britain, a small nation has created and achieved. Add in scientific endeavour and innovation, and there is no nation, or culture, in history that comes close.

Yes, Britain has robbed lands with force: I'm struggling to think of any nation, in history, that has not done so.

You live in a land that was taken with force by the British. The minerals that created your wealth were taken. The traditionally English speaking parts of the USA are a little-big England over the sea. Your towns and states are named from British places; your common laws are English, your beloved constitution is essentially the English Bill Of Rights.

The English took their laws, language, art, culture and religion to the new world. You are lucky to have inhereted that culture.

Next time you are in Britian, visit the galleries and have a look at British art (and craft), through the centuries and millenia.

Nowhere comes close; not so consistently, and for such a long time period.

And the bonus is that the best galleries are absolutely free; and open to everybody.

Next time you're in the USA, stop by the WWII Memorial in DC and pay your respects the the US soldiers who fought and died so you aren't part of the Nazi German Empire right now.

If the British government were so interested in acquiring that collection, I don't believe they would have lacked the funds to outbid any private entity...

My hunch is: this is just some politician's power trip that has nothing whatsoever to do with what you mentioned, but everything with his self-aggrandizing for electoral purposes.

And BTW, so many of the works national museums have in their collections are not even on display. And to get a permit to get close to one of them you have to be a close friend of a politician (or do him/her a huge favor.) How's that different from a private entity keeping the artwork for himself/herself?

As Clint Eastwood said in the movie, The Eiger Sanction, the idea that "art belongs to the people" is stupid. Art belongs to those who can truly understand and appreciate it.

And where exactly is it suggested that this is a "British national pride issue"?
It also states that the photographer lived in Britain, further reading would show you that all his photographic work was produced in Britain.
It's not unreasonable to want to study the material in the country in which is was produced.
It is a temporary ban, that's all.

As to your claim that access to the items stored and restored by museums and galleries in Britain are in the gift of politicians, you display a deep ignorance of the academic world.

Anyone who actually knows me will tell you how ridiculous your snap assessment of me is.

I have lived and worked in many different countries, including the US, and get deeply embarrassed by overt displays of British pride, which I hold to be very rarely justified.

It is patently obvious that you have a nasty chip on your shoulder about something, I will not attempt to guess what caused it, only suggest it's probably related to something that happened in your childhood.

Born in Sweden, lived most in his life in Britain, married a British woman, had Royal patronage, did the majority of his work in Britain. I think this actually qualifies that his body of work stays in Britain.

Papi61 demonstrates a history of name calling the minute the foundations of his argument start to fail. Then he falls back to a position of paranoid lashing out at 'elitism', 'academia', etc.

LOL, b craw is simply irked at me for losing way too many arguments to me...

The real irony, is that what he just said perfectly applies to philharris.

for Wye Photography:

sure Mr. Nationalist. So, are you advocating that the British Museum gives all their art treasures that have nothing to do with Britain back to the countries that "legitimately" own them, according to your stupid rule?

exactly...will the the British return the treasures of Egypt?

Italy would literally have no room to store all the Renaissance art currently owned by non-Italian museums and private entities around the world...

Art and stupid national pride: not a good mix.

Yes, return art to Iraq, Syria, and Libya. So ISIS can destroy it...

You have it there...the Muslim death cult lives and will not be defeated until the headless hordes are defeated.

Some knucklehead always has to throw in current politics in response to a rhetorical question.

Some people can hardly keep their blatant racism, xenophobia and hatred for other religions inside...

Not politics. Religious fanaticism that has resulted in the destruction of art from giant carved Afghan Bhuddas to ancient ornate Mosques and countless pieces of priceless statuary. Given the way it's going, it wouldn't surprise me if that photobook was burned in a Britain, say around 2040.

Right Rich, not politics, extreme right-wing politics.

Only stupid racists like you equate everyone from the middle east to ISIS.

JDThomas,

You actually trust the Egyptians, Greeks and others to adequately care for their priceless works of antiquity taking into account the political and/or financial instability of their home countries?

@JDThomas - thus speaks someone with no knowledge of the law in question and the intent of it. Typical for someone living in a country with a history measured in weeks.

This law does not prevent eventual export - it is a temnporary hold - usually of a matter of a few weeks to allow a higher bid (and it must be equal or higher) or study be made - and is only ever applied to culturally significant items.
So, no - it has nothing at all to do with antiquities held in the UK and preventing their return. In fact it encourages their public ownership and move out of private hands.

You know what? It was a light rhetorical response and you white supremacist idiots had to turn it political.

Oh yes, only Europeans can be trusted to ensure the world's art is safe. You people are stupid and blind. You think Britain is financially stable? You think the US is financially stable? CHINA has us all by the balls you idiots.

And @chris_j_l: Don't forget this country bailed Europe out of trouble in two world wars. Your lot would be speaking German right now if it wasn't for this country with a history "measured in weeks". Which is a typical response from a white racist that forgets that there were indigenous people living on this continent before the dirty Europeans came over and decimated them.

And what does my post have to do with ISIS @Peiasdf? NOTHING. Go cry about ISIS on a politico-religious website.

To JD

Art will be returned (from Britian) to its rightful place in the world.

Right after the land, minerals and resources that we (the British) "stole" in North America; and is now occupied by the descendents of those British, is given back to their "rightful" owners.

Surely the land and resources of North America should be returned to their rightful owners; and the Europeans in North America returned to their righful place in the world?

A Greek statue in London is no more out of place than a white man in New England. JD - Get off your high-horse you dickhead.

JD "Is England going to require the return of all foreign works of fine art to their country of origin?"

Right after your country does so. Lead by example, so to speak.

@BadScience - perhaps if JD's country took back some of the 'democracy' and 'freedom' it has exported so liberally then it would be a better place.

You know the Egyptians BURNED hundreds of mummies for kindling, right? So sure, leave them in their "capable" hands...

The current wave of fundamentalist Islam sweeping through the middle east is a worry.

One of their defining characterisitcs is to destroy cultural artifacts that are at odds with their ideology.

Sometimes these artifacts are offered for sale to the west or for swap (with guns); so the ideological grounds are shaky.

I don't by the illogical argument that artifacts must remain or be returned to the country of origin. In the case of ancient artifacts, that civilisation that created them does not even exist anymore. That the land it was created in is still there is irrelevent. Land is forever (well almost); civilisations come and go.

Where would the Nubian artifacts go? Or Mesopotamian...the list is endless. Claims on present geographical boundaries are absurd.

What a cultural wasteland we would live in if ideas and and artifacts were forced to remain where they were created. That is the opposite of what humanity is about.