In the article, “The Power of Monuments,” the author, Ian Buruma claims that ‘cultural artifacts remind people the history behind the arts and it define their judgement in self. The author farther states that many people believe that destroying the historical artifacts will resolve the conflicts in modern day. Next, he suggests that destructing the arts will not erase the history because they are just pieces of art. Lastly, he however asserts that some sculptures are meant to be remove because of the terrible past or the imperfection of arts. The author shows different views of point and his suggestion in this article. In paragraph number four, the article says there is a belief that making a damage to the monument will clear the conflict that connected with that image. Destroying a monument for having horrible past is a bad idea because it does not erase the history. There is no point for making a mess just because the belief that people have to relieve their hatred on the sculpture. For instance, many people want to remove the statue of Robert E. Lee because of racism that does not fit in today’s society. However, even if they remove his statue, his story will always remain because the sculpture did not represent his story. Therefore, destruction does …show more content…
Ruining them will only takes away the beauty of art for having bad incidents in many hundred years ago. Besides, the author states that nowadays, many people do not consider them as a threat. For example, in England, there are Cecil Rhodes and Admiral Nelson sculptures that many people view as merely a threat but as an art. It is not likely that seeing their monuments will make a person go to Africa to take over their land. Ultimately, obliteration of monuments will only make disappearance of