Stop thinking about the economy and expansion... and enjoy the art.

Today there was an article on the New York Times website titled Moscow Cultural Landmark is Seen as Threatened, which outlines how the Prime Minister signed a decree that would allow developers to demolish a Soviet-era cultural landmark, the Central house of Artists, which houses paintings by Malevich and Kandinsky among others. Although the title is more of an attention grabber than the actual problem at hand, seeing as there have been no rumours of the destruction of this place, just the idea that now that this decree has been signed it is a possibility, it brings into question what society really values.

Without getting too political, it is clear that when it comes to governments, there is a lot more emphasis on the economy and ways to generate money, than on museums and preservation. This article demonstrates how the Prime Minister signed this decree which would essentially allow a billion-dollar real estate company to come in, demolish a well know monument which houses many Russian works that serve as symbols of their culture, only to be rebuilt as housing complexes and shopping malls. It is a sad truth that heritage sites and funding for the arts are often overlooked as governments choose to invest tax payer money in the economy and health related fields. While this is fine, governments need to realize how important cultural landmarks are – cities, provinces, countries would lack an identity if they were to be stripped of the arts, focused solely on science and money-making.

This can also be related to the world heritage list set out by UNESCO, as well as the 1970 UNESCO conventions wherein it outlines the importance of the protection of cultural property. Firstly, although the artwork would be displaced for a while, it would certainly find a home, but who is to say that the government or private sectors will fun a new museum? Together these works stand as a testament to Russia’s artistic history, but apart they are merely fragments – masterpieces, but fragments to the big picture. I’m not insinuating it is necessary to keep all of these works together, but obviously this is something citizens feel strongly about as when the information was released, critics jumped at the opportunity to find problems with it. In short, why ruin a good thing? I’m sure these big companies could find somewhere else to build, without destroying the home of so many great works.