While internationalists and cultural nationalists differ in their views of cultural heritage, both camps acknowledge the value claims of the other. While the proponents of each position may prioritize their own value claims, cultural heritage should be seen as a universally valuable human resource. The resulting tension between universalism and cultural specificity leads to conflicts regarding the distribution of power among cultural groups. They also point to colonial dynamics as an example of how cultural heritage is controlled.
The concept of cultural heritage is long-standing and has been developed by historians, philologists, and ethnographers. The development of museums, ethnographic collections, and great libraries was made possible by the work of these individuals. Preservation of cultural heritage is fundamental to the construction of nations and the internationalist world order. In addition to the value of cultural heritage, it has given rise to many new disciplines and professions. Listed below are some examples of how cultural heritage is protected.
Using cultural heritage without permission may result in wrongful appropriation. The unauthorized use of a cultural object by a non-native person is regarded as cultural appropriation. However, the term is often used to describe any form of cultural appropriation that has the potential to cause harm. The same goes for misrepresenting oneself. The question of whether or not cultural appropriation is acceptable is a difficult one.
Cultural preservation can be morally permissible. While defending this argument, Jeffers also points to the importance of cultural preservation as a form of resistance against racism and colonialism. Unlike many other books on cultural heritage, this one doesn’t focus on art as a form of expression. Instead, Jeffers examines the reasons people choose to engage in artistic practices and why they might do so. If you are interested in understanding the moral justifications of cultural preservation, this is a must-read for all cultural-conscious readers.
While there is no universally accepted definition of cultural heritage, it is possible to develop a conceptual framework that reflects the diverse evaluative assumptions. Scholars have distinguished between unofficial and official heritage as a means of challenging dominant historical narratives. While it is easy to argue that some heritage scholars are hesitant to adopt a process-oriented heritage approach, there is nothing wrong with combining these approaches. However, there are significant advantages and drawbacks.
In addition to its linguistic and conceptual basis, cultural property claims can be based on the values of artifacts and cultural practices. Countervailing considerations are generally based on the purported universal value of cultural property. The object’s aesthetic, cultural, or historical value are just a few of these. Ultimately, the legal basis of cultural property claims can be a critical factor in determining whether these objects are legitimately protected.
Regardless of the legitimacy of a cultural heritage claim, there are also ethical questions raised about its presentation and use. Some non-Western artworks have been relegated to anthropological museums or stripped of the relevant cultural context in modern art museums. These questions have prompted debates about cultural appropriation and the role of marginalized cultures in a democratic society. Once a cultural heritage issue is raised, it may lead to legal challenges in museums.