Although this article does not touch specifically on our topic of Heritage, I think it does highlight the motivations and underpinnings of what drives museum collecting. Part of the struggle for museums when it comes to the subject of Heritage is the fact that what we value as great art and artifacts changes like any other taste. And just as tastes change, museums are constantly positioning themselves, attempting to acquire those prize names (Picasso, Michelangelo, DaVinci, Giacometti) which will put them in the highest class of museums. In a revealing statement LACMA’s director Michael Govan explains the changes within the museum’s collection stating “This isn’t a study collection, it’s a place to see the best paintings we can show so that visitors will be able to experience paintings as objects of enjoyment and culture. These galleries will also be a place where visitors can learn about the history of taste. As a result we’ve set the bar high.” This attitude towards the museum’s collection highlights the friction that exists within all large museum collections and the collecting of art as a whole. As countries fight for the return of what they deem their most prized possessions, to what purpose are they collecting these objects? Are these objects being collected with Govan’s rationale, as objects of enjoyment and culture or are they meant to educate?