Riegl. The Modern Cult of Monuments Essay Example

Riegl. The Modern Cult of Monuments Essay Name: Tutor: Course: Date: We will write a custom essay sample on Riegl. The Modern Cult of Monuments specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Riegl. The Modern Cult of Monuments specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Riegl. The Modern Cult of Monuments specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Riegl: The Modern Cult of Monuments This article explores the history of creation of monuments, the value attached to them and the need to preserve such works of art. It explains the obsession with preservation of monuments as dictated by their value. The origin of the monuments stems from ordinary works of art, both artistic and literary. They are created by humans to commemorate or keep certain events and deeds alive for future generations. According to the author, preservation of monuments is connected to their value. In earlier centuries, the value of what was considered a monument rested on its artistic and historical features. However, modern monuments are valued according to our perception of them, or the kind of feelings they evoke in us. Intentional monuments are created to remember specific people and events, with their value solely at the hands of their makers. Historical monuments vary broadly, but their most significant characteristic is that their value is determined by our modern perception. Some of the monuments in this class are unintentional, and are not made to commemorate specific events and persons. Rather, they include all the artifacts of an event, thus leaving the commemorative value of such artwork at the viewers’ discretion. Age value monuments are also not created with specificity in mind; instead their main characteristic is that they signify the passage of time. These are classifications of monuments created in earlier centuries, indicating concern for pure art and incorporation of history. The cult of monuments arises from the value that humans attach to them. Earlier monuments possess both age and historical and intentional value, all of which are commemorative. The value given to age value monuments is derived from the passage of time, implying that the older a monument, the more valuable it is. An example is The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, now transformed into The Church of San Lorenzo in Miranda. Historical value, on the other hand, commemorates a particular time in the history of human development, with the aim of freezing time to revolve around that specific period. An example is a scrap of paper, such as one containing the address of Andreasi’s letter to the Marques of Mantua, 12 February 1483. Intentional value is more relevant to current monuments as it represents a sense of immortality. Such monuments are always preserved, with laws governing their protection from destruction. They symbolize an event or person whose deed should not be forgotten, more so, if they have a bearing on the present events, such as the Trajan’s Column in Italy. This transition to modernity has been witnessed since the Italian renaissance, when people started appreciating monuments for their value. Modern monuments are created to satisfy human senses and intellect, as opposed to ancient ones, which had commemorative value. The cult of monuments has evolved from commemorative significance to focus more on artistic value. This means that they are preserved for different reasons than in earlier centuries. For instance, focus has shifted to use value, art value and newness value with attention also being paid to the monuments’ secular and religious value. An example is the â€Å"Let the Children Come unto Me† painting by Fritz von Uhde, which Catholic adherents term as secular. Monuments are being maintained for their practicality as seen in use value, including the dome of St. Peter’s in Rome. This aspect of practicality is what prompts preservation. Newness value aims at ensuring a monument is made to look as fresh as it was when first created. This causes conflict with the earlier cult of age value whereby the uniqueness of a monument was derived from it bei ng old. Obviously, modern monuments are more aesthetic oriented than before and may eventually lose their cultural value. According to the author, â€Å"Thus we also require that the old monuments have the external appearance of a (fresh) artifact; that is to say, that they make a complete and pristine impression (Riegl 21).† This sums up the modern cult of monuments, a struggle to preserve not the cultural or historical value, but the aesthetic value of monuments. Response to question: Is our current plethora of monument making without a clearly defined style or use of culturally understood symbolism indicative of a loss of a clear cultural understanding that art and history are both significant attributes involved in the making of a monument? It is true that our current plethora of monument making lacks a definite style and cultural symbolism. This is because more attention is paid to beauty, hence the rush to regenerate some works of art. This is with disregard to the historical and artistic value attached to monuments. Modern monuments are created to please the eye rather than for commemorative purposes. Additional questions Are the current works of art befitting of the term â€Å"monument†? Given the current deflection from history, is there a place for monuments of intentional value in these modern times? Is there a way for modern architects to adhere to newness value without conflicting with age value when designing monuments? Works Cited Riegl, Alois. The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin. Cambridge (Mass.: MIT Press, 1982. Print.