The politics and ethics of relocated art

At the end of Word War II, Soviet occupation forces removed countless art objects from German soil. Some of them were returned during the 1950s, but most either disappeared for good or were stored away secretly in cellars of Soviet museums. The Cold War then covered the issue with silence. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, museums in St Petersburg and Moscow started to exhibit some of the relocated art for the first time in half a century. The unusual quality of the paintings-mostly impressionist masterpieces-not only attracted the attention of the international art community, but also triggered a diplomatic row between Russia and Germany. Both governments advanced moral and legal claims to ownership. To make things even more complicated, many of the paintings once belonged to private collectors, some of whom were Jews. Their descendants also entered the dispute. The basic premise of this article is that the political and ethical dimensions of relocated art can be understood most adequately by eschewing a single authorial standpoint. Various positions, sometimes incommensurable ones, are thus explored in an attempt to outline possibilities for an ethics of representation and a dialogical solution to the international problem that relocated art has become.

Identity, difference, and the dilemmas of inter-Korean relations: Insights from northern defectors and the German precedent

Questions of identity have become increasingly central to the study of foreign policy and security, particularly in constructivist debates. But very few of the resulting insights have been applied to the Korean situation, where discussions about security and inter-Korean relations remain dominated by strategic and geopolitical issues. The main task of this article is to address this shortcoming by examining the experience of North Korean defectors in South Korea and the precedent of German unification. Both of these domains of inquiry reveal that identity differences between North and South persist far beyond the ideological and political structures that created them in the first place. Born out of death, fear, and longing for revenge, these identity patterns lie at the heart of Korea's security dilemmas. Unless taken seriously by scholars and decision makers, the respective tensions between identity and difference will continue to cause major political problems. (Key words: Inter-Korean relations, North Korean defectors, German unification)

Kierkegaard as a paradoxical therapist

The essential problem that Soren Kierkegaard is concerned with in his authorship is that of becoming a Christian. It is argued that Kierkegaard's authorial strategy reflects the principles of paradoxical psychotherapy. These principles indicate that both the psychological problem and its solution involve an ironic process. In the Kierkegaardian frame of reference, the situation of the immature self is paradoxical, and so is the pathway to full selfhood. The philistine and the aesthete attempt to secure autonomy and personal freedom through an external orientation. But the way to the self is inwards. Consequently, these personalities get caught in an ironic process. The further they push outwards, the further they move away from the locus of genuine selfhood and freedom. This immature form of life can only lead to a loss of self and the associated experience of despair. Paradoxically, Kierkegaard advocates the choice of despair as the way to find oneself in God.