Exploration of the Cult of Monuments, Essay Example

Monuments have existed throughout history for both artistic and historical purposes.  Each historical age had certain sentiments about monuments, and these feelings are reflected in their attitudes about how the monuments are preserved.  The purpose of this paper is to explore the cult of monuments in relation to how art and history have been understood.

Monuments are created primarily as a means for record-keeping.  Whether or not the artifact is valued as historic or artistic is relative to the age in which it is studied.  Every work of art can be interpreted as a historical monument.  And every historical piece can be interpreted as artistic.  Art monuments are usually intentional, while historic monuments are usually unintentional.  However, there are no absolute rules, and depending on the society studying them, monuments can be both.

There are three major categories to establish the meaning of a monument: age-value, historical value, and art-value.  While the categories have their distinct characteristics, each category is not finite, and will often overlap with one another.

Art-value of a monument is understood with two different interpretations.  The first interpretation of art-value is that ancient monuments have historical value, and any art must conform to ancient aesthetics.  This view was popular became popular in the Renaissance and lasted until the nineteenth century.  The second interpretation raises the value of modern work over ancient pieces.  The emphasis is the creation of new monuments and anything ancient should be destroyed.  However, if only modern art is valued, then nothing is considered sacred and art and monuments are merely contemporary fads.

With the nineteenth century, the cult of monuments began to place historical value above art value.  Historical value aimed to prevent decay and preserve the original state of the artifact as much as possible.  The main concern was to maintain the monument for future study.

Age-value places significance on monuments for the amount of time has elapsed since their creation.  Because age is treasured, the philosophy is that monuments should not be disturbed and left to their natural processes.  While age-value does not support the intentional destruction of monuments, it also is against restoration and preservation.  The philosophy of age-value became popular in the twentieth century.  An advantage of age-value is that it can be universally appreciated regardless of factors such as religion and socioeconomic status.  However, a disadvantage of this interpretation is that in order for monuments to retain value, they must be care for to some extent, otherwise they will disintegrate.

At present, an artifact has relevance if it has intentional commemorative value.  A monument is valued if it is able to preserve a moment in time for future generations.  Immortality is valued, so preservation and restoration are necessary.  In order for a monument to meet the criteria, it must have use-value; the monument must be functional and not fallen into ruins.  Another factor of intentional commemorative value is that it must also have art value.  The modern monument cult dictates that work either have newness value or relative-art value.  New monuments have value because they are fresh, and can reflect immortality and youth.  While newness value can be enjoyed by a wider audience, relative-art value can only be appreciated a more educated person.  Both newness and relative-art values realize the importance of preservation.

The distinction of a monument is dependent upon the age in which it is studied.  The values of one age are different than another.  For example, while the Renaissance placed value on monuments for merely artistic purposes, people of the nineteenth century become curious of the events surrounding the art.  As a result, historical value gained prominence.  And while the twentieth century valued age, it is now understood that monuments must be preserved in order to retain their value.  To understand the monument, the culture must also be appreciated.

Work Cited

Riegl, Alois. “The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin” [1903]. Oppositions, 25 (Fall 1982), 21-51.