War on Culture/War on Memory: Q&A with Panelists and Director

I'd like to invite Tim to come and say a

few words but also all the other members

of the earlier panels

Damian if you could join us here for a

sort of we're going to do a kind of

Final Round Table So yeah thank you

[Music]

thanks Laurie

so so yeah I've obviously seen that film

a lot of many times now over the past

several years

um and it's always interesting what

has changed in the meantime and

obviously

I suppose the biggest thing is why we

hear it in terms of

um

the throughout the ongoing threat to

Ukrainian culture

but it's also you know uh

at a certain point the sort of

you know there are disappointments and

hopes and so I don't mean to go to the

disappointment straight away but the the

repetitions perhaps is the thing like

you know when Andrus shared that line

about the Klu Klux Klan and David Duke

that was always in the past and then

David Duke re-emerged you know just

before the Fox News right and then and

I'm trying to remember what else but

other things you know there's there's

Cycles as

a Miller and sashina and and like it's

so the the cyclical nature is so

disappointing but of course it's what we

have to keep

breaking I guess

um

and trying to

I guess move forward each time if we can

[Music]

um

yeah so yeah so I mean we'll you know

we'll discuss but yeah it's I suppose

it's

it's that thing I'm trying to keep a

balance to keep looking to the more

hopeful Direction

um

which I think look yeah I suppose this

is a general coming and I think this has

come up with a lot of people like the

sort of I guess the the faith perhaps

more in Civic Society

um is maybe something you know

I I it sort of at times you know like

for example you know you know UNESCO to

me is have been disappointing but it's

it's and and I think it's evident in

things like the former director General

now it runs like a Civic uh a cultural

heritage

Collective that looks to Civic Society

to provide

um I guess

action where where they aren't coming

from governments or from um yeah

particularly from governments I think

you know the sort of political

um barriers are still such an issue and

as is the case for Syria and as is the

case potentially for Ukraine in the

future you know

because I think the biggest

thing that needs to change is that you

know the the five permanent members of

the security Council

that the veto power has to be broken

um

and obviously that in this case is

primarily about Russia but I think it's

really the same for all of the five

permanent members that they just can't

have that level of control

um yeah so anyway that's that's my Pace

to start with

if I can add actually just something to

that um

as you say things are cyclical

um when I first saw the film

um I was terrified by the idea that

Canada which in which I believed so much

was in fact a country along with the U.S

somehow I expected it from the US but I

didn't expect from Canada to to not to

sign

and then since then of course the mass

Graves of residential schools in Canada

have come to the full

Limelight of of news media and and they

understand how much their team

um laundry there is in everybody's

backyard so it becomes so hard to to be

hopeful in light of the fact that so so

much is being hidden away but and also

so much even though we had the

technology to preserve we also have the

technology to destroy so it's this

constant push and pull between

um between this ability to actually be

um

cognizant of the value of these things

but also how fragile they are in fact

um and you know the ironies of well here

we we saw the Isis but before that with

with the Taliban you know who went and

destroyed every from a house to house

destroyed anything that seemingly was

not Islamic including TV sets and films

and the and the product music the rich

musical production of Afghanistan and TV

and they were against TV where they were

using TV to film themselves how they are

destroying it

so you have this Paradox in fact in

which Technologies is

anyway so this is something that it has

come to to my mind as you you mentioned

Duke you can also say something

I mean I know why you say it's cyclical

but cyclical and I'm not saying that

you're suggesting it suggested some kind

of Mystical Force that makes Humanity do

bad things every once in a while

and but it is also fair and when amila

was talking about you know Canada and

the United States are not signing the 48

genocide convention to we're not

agreeing to include the culture genocide

provision it is that they learn from

each other right it's not it's not

mystical right there's a for instance

this but from the Balkans to Ukraine

today right there's a running thread

where they learn from each other right

and and the problem with spy agencies

involved too but Putin learned from

Illusions right uh occupation of donbass

follows a pattern of the you know

Serbian taking up parts of Bosnia and

Croatia and then claiming the local

separatists wanted to join their people

and blah blah blah the whole thing and

of course Putin was it was his involver

in Russia is involved in Syria similarly

Colonial occupation and Extinction of

people entire peoples all over the world

the British Empire every Empire their

various ways the Ottoman Empire right I

mean there wasn't the Empire then it was

attitude but I mean it was part of this

colony listen they knew what they were

doing they knew how to do it right it

was established pattern from from the

conquest of Americas to

um you know um the occupation of

Afghanistan by the Brits or the attempts

thereof three times or so so then they

know what they're doing they follow

patterns this is actually at least

partly reason for this cyclical nature

of the things they learned I don't know

how I where Isis learned it but I'm sure

that you know they they paid attention

too yeah protect each other yeah

um Let me let me just follow up with um

something after after that comment

something I've been thinking about uh

listening during the day is um to ask

um those who have been working on

Ukraine especially you Igor and also

Damian what is it like to think about

this history in the midst of this

conflict what is it like to you know to

to think about the both the

methodicalness and also the

repetitiveness of these concerted joint

attacks on people and culture that are

inseparable as we've all established I

think today so I I'm just really

interested in some of your reactions to

what you've been hearing

thank you so much for this film in fact

it's

it will shoot at five six years ago yeah

yeah at least six years ago and but it's

so relevant

uh to the situation today and the

patterns of Destruction really are very

very similar and uh

it looks so desperate to me that in fact

we are having this meeting in the Getty

Institute which is famous for its

conservation Institute for example and

so many

resources human Financial intellectual

I've been invested in restoring

conserving just small objects so and how

easily for for years for decades and how

easily everything can be destroyed

and exactly in Ukraine we are quite

desperate as mentioned by team of the

international

organizations like UNESCO and some

others how Yuan for example

uh to stop destruction of culture

uh

the best way is to stop War

and there are a lot of

strategies how to do it for example

Ukraine asked to close to shut the sky

because if Sky if the space of Ukraine

could be protected people will be

protected cultural heritage protected

but somehow it's not so easy it is not

done and in fact

uh one of the outcomes of the war

any war and especially

today's current War

is not only culture but for example

climate

some so so many talks about climate

change but there were some estimates

that

all that fantastic sums of money and

Human Resources invested in

changing the situation with climate

change was immediately

uh destroyed by the war in Ukraine

because of all that

situation so it seems so fragile I mean

our cultural heritage our climate and so

so

non-protected

in the face of War so it's very

important to raise awareness because in

the film I see

so many familiar persons we work with so

the global the world is big on the one

hand but on the other hand not many

people are involved in protection of

cultural heritage especially in times of

conflict

in times of armed conflicts and the more

there is awareness the

more we can be effective in

preventing this cultural damage during

the

conflicts

I also think

I mean I draw two themes from the film

to what we're saying today and that's

first of all that um cultural heritage

workers themselves are being targeted I

think more than ever they're under

greater threat than ever and I think

that applies to cultural heritage itself

too

um

specifically you know drawing lines to

the access to

the videos that we saw of this

destruction I mean the fact that Isis

was advertising this destruction

themselves it shows that there are new

mechanisms in which Heritage can be

manipulated

a little bit of a wrench here

uh look at

Dragon it was a particularly interesting

example in this respect in Dresden Dave

decided to keep or to restore the old

Parts but also to keep the old communist

part in Dresden which is actually in

some ways really beautiful in its own

particular way uh who decides which

monuments stay and which go in time of

War if we see what's happening in

Ukraine for instance many Soviet

monuments are being destroyed uh whether

or changed when we look at the baltics

the destruction or poll inference

there's a destruction of

deliberators right uh monuments to the

liberators who do who decides the winner

decides what what is supposed to be a

valuable Monument what is not supposed

to be the valuable monument and so forth

I'd like to you know these things get

complicated after a while and I'd like

to hear what you think about these

things

yeah I mean I guess yes I generally I

suppose policies change and yeah I guess

generally it's who who's who's the

Victor and or who's in power at the time

um

uh

yeah I mean I think

yeah I mean I'm not well I'm not an

expert so I'll just say what's my

opinion there's a difference between a

monument with sort of

um Factory main Monument tool a saw a

Liberation Soldier solid Soldier you

just love Soldier and you know Aleppo

which contains three thousand years of

civilization contains records that can

be studied or the museum in Sarajevo the

building

um you know contains stuff from which we

can learn and so it doesn't mean that we

can't learn from those monuments the

Soviet soldiers and I've traveled all

over Eastern Europe and I know what they

look like right because there are other

records right and so it's cultural

holiday I mean the monuments are the

focal point because well they operate in

space and everyone looks at them This Is

How They design but they're not they

never stand alone there's a whole

discourse as they were behind it and so

removing I don't know a monument to a

confederate general does not raise the

memory of of the Civil War and slavery

right it just removes it from the focus

right and and those monuments are not

I guess they contain some kind of con

information that has to be interpreted

in a particular context but that's not

the only source for that information in

fact it's a minor source and that that

Source only can have value in the

contract that is already familiar so

while yeah I don't think that things

should be destroyed just like that but

at the same time not all monuments have

the same value moral or historical

and thank you for that comment I think

that's particularly important

um especially because you know the focus

on monuments is useful it's a it's a

it's a way to to

um sort of hone the lens in on what's

happening but modern archeology is less

interested in monuments in themselves

and much more interested in the regional

and in fact as you've said you know the

monument only has significance both in

its territorial Regional interaction and

also in its social and political

significance so it's very helpful to to

remember when we focus in on monuments

that it's that it's serving that purpose

rather than being the thing in itself

we'd like to open uh the field to the

audience for questions at this point so

let me

um let me uh do that

oh I have a few kind of question

comments and I think uh one of them may

I just

um say that we're very short of time so

one one question per person would be the

best thank you okay that makes sense

um so my question is how does one wage a

war without destroying culture when

culture itself can potentially be

unlimited to Encompass every single

building that anyone built to Encompass

every bridge that somebody built to

Encompass every Library

um this thought is partly inspired by

Dairy darn's archetype fever where he

says that the kind of paradox at the

heart of the archive is that the only

reason why the archive exists is because

things could be destroyed if things

could not be destroyed if everything was

um

uh immune to destruction there would be

no point to the archive if you could

have an eternal City where everything is

preserved which seems to be the

objective here then what's the point of

culture so it's all encompassing but it

kind of annihilates itself and then

how's that relate to State politics how

does that relate to war waging

well I think

I mean it's a very sort of

a question just to Wrangle it in a

little I think that's the point of why

for example that

emila

talked about in her presentation in the

film about the RN Oriental Institute in

that it was

you know if you're gonna choose a

building that at archive and a library

together uh

have so much

um density of

of meaning and information and

everything in them and so like that's

why

yeah I would you know if you were going

to try and protect something first and

if you're going to attack something

first that's what you go for

um

so I'm just trying to find a way into

the question why I mean Wars have

different uh objectives so the the war

in Russia I mean war in Ukraine Russian

invasion has genocidal intent a certain

attack that genocidal intent as bad as

the war in Iraq

um was and and I remember it as being

there the intent was not to destroy

Iraqi memory right it destroyed many

other things and it was horrible but the

military operation does did not

include planning to destroy those sites

and so you know of course I I would like

no war to ever occur again but at the

same time not all wars are the same

and militarily strategically and also

politically

so you know

thy way of being bossed in by virtue of

being bosom it's easy to recognize to us

genocide and a genocidal intent and so

bombing Oriental Institute and bombing

of museums and you know in Ukrainian

Villages that's we know what it means

there's no question about it

okay I'll put my 10-minute speech in a

question here

um if you were asked at an interview

them after seeing the movie is this

movie

uh optimistic or pessimistic what would

you say I have my own answer but I want

to hear what you guys say

well mine is that it's um

it uh it's both it's both I suppose yeah

I mean it's meant to be like I suppose

you know sometimes people talk when I

when I talk about the film it's like

it's meant to be sort of um a bit

crushing because like

like it's there's no point trying to be

better on the bush about it

um

yeah I don't know yeah I I it's I

suppose it's trying to be realistic and

but certainly not sugar coating anything

um

yeah

anybody else

well as I said I think it's both

optimistic and pessimistic it's there

are ways out of this but also they're

hard ways

but that's describe just about anything

right now yeah I think it's educational

primarily and in being educational it's

really not I think meant to take sides

between optimism and pessimism but

simply to

to tell us what we where to look for

um intervention points and and what to

look out for so I that's how I see it I

mean I see it really is something

it is pessimistic Isis would have won

the end of the movies right there but

what happened in every case every case

every case in some fashion or whatever

so societies take two steps forward and

one step back in this whole process of

you look at your room with what your

film was saying and what this whole

seminar is saying he said over the last

things have happened

and uh your film shows that yeah there's

a lot of Destruction there will be more

destruction again but Ukraine is going

to be built there's no doubt

by Russians can't stop that and so I'm

optimistic foolishly just overhaps but

I'm optimisticated yeah I agree yeah I I

my pessimism comes I guess like in yeah

like to distill mine is what I said

before about the United Nations and and

related to that the fact that Assad

still is just living the high life which

if we want to think about Putin ever

coming to justice that Assad I think

really needs to come first and partly

because as um Sasha pointed out I think

that you know

or someone in Putin was so in up in a

started

before this and I mean I was still I was

still insisted it's really about

patterns of behavior it's about breaking

up the patterns of behavior that that

are discernible and where we know we can

intervene I mean it's you know whether

it's optimistic or pessimistic it's like

asking a film about love story whether

it's going to be a successful love story

or not I mean it's a love story for the

time being whether they will get

divorced in six months we don't really

know but but they probably will and they

probably will yes but um but you know

for for as long as as there is a

something that we can we can you know I

and and I think Tim did really a great

job here that he pulled all the

historical and Geographic

um

all these different factors and showed

actually how we can look at the patterns

and how how much

we can come out of here thinking well

you know we we can act the next time in

this in this way rather than sit still

and you know and again I mean I I'm you

know I'm not I I'm here speaking also

from personal perspective I mean I lost

my sister in this so you know it's it's

it's there is a certain loss of

much more than just uh uh uh you know a

a brick

um that that needs to be uh factored in

as you think about this

these realities which which are

everywhere restoration does not exclude

loss of all states I guess restoration

or rebuilding can mitigate the laws but

it does not

negate it anyway

and it's also the film even its title

brings to discussion another topic

because because reconstruction

destruction of memory for example

rebuilding or trying to

to get rid of this traumatic memory what

do we have because even in Ukraine today

for example we have a lot of discussions

in in the damaged cities or towns and

monuments in central squares what to do

with them for example to reconstruct to

rebuild immediately or to leave

something for the next Generations like

to preserve this traumatic memory and

the balance should be found because

local communities usually try to get rid

of this traumatic memory they said we

would like everything to be

reconstructed but of course

something should be left and we have

some

International practices during the

second world war for example in in

Warsaw they have some preserved facets

of the building something so this

distracted memory also should be somehow

preserved

for for the educational purpose and

pessimistic scenario or pessimistic

moments can be

used for optimistic scenario final

finally I think that that brings us also

back to the very complex questions about

culture that both the audience and the

panels have raised today about the you

know about the constantly transforming

and dispersed nature of what culture is

and I was very interested that you

showed one slide of some contemporary

artists kind of playing with the

fragments that they had to play with to

think with and I think it's uh if we had

more time I would love to hear a lot

more about what what contemporary

artists writers Etc are doing with this

question because I think that's part of

the dynamic process that you're talking

about in terms of what Ukrainian culture

finds in itself in the future as it

moves forward so

um

but we are pretty much out of time and I

want to oh there's one more question in

the audience go ahead we'll have one

more question

[Music]

oh sorry

oh okay so two quick questions and and

then we'll wrap up

it's kind of cultural Destruction has

been going on for a long time I mean

past the 20th century way before it's

just now we have ways of documentation

so question is

how different is it is this what we just

saw in your film is it particularly

different from what we've seen in other

parts of History

no not really I mean I think you know

and

yeah this is I suppose to like this is

as is I think Sasha said something and

in the film you know there's no we can't

stop destruction it's a human impulse

and you know Daniel liebskind I remember

said to me you know obviously on the the

path and I'm arguably the most uh

well-known building of antiquity that

the on the front of it is a is a is a is

a you know a a depiction of of a war

scene you know and so I think

destruction and

um human like the impulse for humans to

attack and Destroy is sort of bound up

with with architecture and with

Community

um so I don't think it's very different

I think it's you know the technology is

different but I think it but I think to

the point of the gentleman here like the

the real the sort of recognition is is

has increased you know there were

treatises in the 17th century and I'm

sure before about this sort of trying to

uh

Monitor and stop this sort of

Destruction but um

it's not really that different but yeah

I mean we maybe we have some realization

at the same time as obviously

um having a greater power to destroy and

at the same time as facing off against

as ihol said climate change destruction

which is you know outs gonna outstrip

anything else so why I think

just to know that Walter Benjamin said

that every monument of civilization is

also a monument of berberity right and I

would also think that this need for

preservation as part of General human

culture right is relatively new I know

king or emperor in the I know 15 16 17

or even 19th century was worried about

destroying the churches of the country

they were attacking they were just

replacing with the the new regime

churches which is what Putin is doing is

part of the Imperial project but I think

what has changed historically is as bad

I mean as limited as the genocide

convention was in the United Nations

after World War II with the United

Nations among other things there was

this development of a sense of belonging

to humanity right and therefore that

somehow and I mean we obviously believe

that somehow we benefit from Aleppo

being in existence and I have no I never

was close to Syria and could only see

Aleppo in the picture so to me it is not

destroyed from the point of view of the

picture so this idea that you know what

these things are destroyed we are all

effective regardless of our personal

biases or allegiances that's relatively

new and so we I think culturally uh

people experience it as a greater loss

than they did seven to 17th century we

could just wipe whole cities or

countries or uh tribes off and not to

Blink

um and if I can add a little bit to it

because I do pre-modern history

primarily I mean there is you know when

you look at the for example the

architecture of the um of

um of the Ottoman Empire and and before

I mean lots of it is recycled stuff so

you know there is a church that becomes

a mosque and then there is a mosque that

becomes a church and then there is a

synagogue that is put together from bits

and pieces from various other buildings

so there is a sense of continuity but in

a kind of Lego Lego way or in East Asian

station archaeologists always mentioned

well it periodically it needs to be

destroyed so as to be then presented as

new so in other words there is a kind of

recycling in internally of of structures

so that value is really on its on its um

Perfection and it's a good shape rather

than it's on its age

and then you you know I mean we I think

we cannot admit publicly privately I'm

speaking out loud and I'm sure that you

will all agree that we all you know

think don't equally put equal weight of

value to all buildings I mean because we

all desire some buildings to be gone you

know from our Public public space and

and there is actually an anecdote you

know in in Bosnia we were valuable uh

that who who Sasha talked about in his

travels to Ukraine when I was traveling

with developer through Bosnia to

um to look at the the the graveyards uh

we talked to one Imam of one mosque who

told us that he had been an Imam in in a

mosque in eastern Bosnia that was one of

the first to be blown up and and then he

said to us

thank God it was blown up it was such a

bad mosque this is the first comment he

made

I don't know what to do this information

but you know things are very complicated

we have relationship

but there are some that we can't in

other words we can't really think of

them all in the same in the same way and

uh you know Patcher to derida but I mean

I think not all archives are created

equal

just that one last comment and then

we'll close yeah yeah just a quick

question

um the inclusion of the clip of John

Kerry talking about like civilized and

uncivilized peoples and societies

um made me consider the role that the

west and the rest discourse might play

in these discussions of Destruction and

preservation of cultural heritage so I

was wondering if oh if and how like

orientalism and cultural imperialism

factor into these discussions

yeah I mean I think yes like

yeah the clip takes on a different

meaning certainly since it was included

I mean I I always like I suppose one

thing I do in the film is not to over

comment but I certainly am aware of the

irony well first of all that you know

John Kerry was talking about that in the

met and it was like it's in a certain

context and which I realized the irony

of the context and and the verbiage and

the fact that it's you know that's what

you say when you're the

uh Secretary of State

um yeah so none of that's yeah none of

that's certainly must on me and and

hopefully most other people but yeah

it's um

it's it's a wonderful It's a Wonderful

question but it probably would require

another day to fill out that that

question correctly so

um I want to thank all of our UCLA and

Getty Partners who have contributed

contributed so much to this day and uh

and also of course the the staff at the

my colleagues at the center whose work

just made this happen and above all of

course all our panelists were such a

brilliant discussion and interesting day

and Roman do you want to say anything in

clothing as well

I think that this was an extremely

important uh juxtaposition between uh

what is and what may be and the Maybe

sounded very pessimistic to me

ultimately what's happening in Bosnia

and uh I hope that this seems the same

situation in Ukraine is not as is not

quite analogous but I'm worried of what

may happen after all of this so uh

to to bring these examples together and

to really think with them so let's give

our panelists another round of applause

and

and thank you also to our wonderful

moderators and thank you to our audience

for your presence and participation

thank you

[Applause]