Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Bamiyan, Vandalism, and the Sublime

Bamiyan, Vandalism, and the Sublime In 2001 the Bamiyan Buddhas, towering fifteen-hundred-year-old sculptures long the centerpiece of Afghanistan’s cultural heritage, were blown up in a very public fashion by the Taliban. I work to understand the event—were the Taliban <i>vandals</i> and was this an instance of <i>vandalism</i>?—and to determine the meaning of the now-empty niches and the sculptures’ remains. I argue that the act and its result prompt a powerfully emotive experience in which reason is rendered null, and that this experience is captured by (part of) Edmund Burke’s thinking about the sublime. I consider the possibility that, as some seem to suggest, the altered site itself might be understood as an artwork. I urge that this is misguided. Finally, after clarifying the concept of vandalism, I argue that though the Taliban were not vandals, the result of their act is well understood as vandalism nonetheless. Thus I suggest that careful thinking about the event, perhaps the most infamous example of art desecration in recent history, issues in paradox. And while I hint at a way out of the cognitive impasse, I argue that as it stands the Bamiyan episode, which occasioned a colossal loss of meaning and value, defies understanding. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Change Over Time University of Pennsylvania Press

Bamiyan, Vandalism, and the Sublime

Change Over Time , Volume 5 (1) – Apr 23, 2015

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-pennsylvania-press/bamiyan-vandalism-and-the-sublime-fEPV0Mzg2j

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of Pennsylvania Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 University of Pennsylvania Press
ISSN
2153-0548

Abstract

In 2001 the Bamiyan Buddhas, towering fifteen-hundred-year-old sculptures long the centerpiece of Afghanistan’s cultural heritage, were blown up in a very public fashion by the Taliban. I work to understand the event—were the Taliban <i>vandals</i> and was this an instance of <i>vandalism</i>?—and to determine the meaning of the now-empty niches and the sculptures’ remains. I argue that the act and its result prompt a powerfully emotive experience in which reason is rendered null, and that this experience is captured by (part of) Edmund Burke’s thinking about the sublime. I consider the possibility that, as some seem to suggest, the altered site itself might be understood as an artwork. I urge that this is misguided. Finally, after clarifying the concept of vandalism, I argue that though the Taliban were not vandals, the result of their act is well understood as vandalism nonetheless. Thus I suggest that careful thinking about the event, perhaps the most infamous example of art desecration in recent history, issues in paradox. And while I hint at a way out of the cognitive impasse, I argue that as it stands the Bamiyan episode, which occasioned a colossal loss of meaning and value, defies understanding.

Journal

Change Over TimeUniversity of Pennsylvania Press

Published: Apr 23, 2015

There are no references for this article.