Broken artwork and the challenge of protecting masterpieces.
Comment: Curry - your comment really is off topic as this is about preserving OLD Art. The artist's of the 15th Century were NOT creating modern art as that mode of art is contemporary to this Century. Your ideas on modern art are very closed. I am sure because of the diversity in this genre there is at least one artist or one piece that you may actually enjoy --
Comment: Curry - your comment really is off topic as this is about preserving OLD Art. The artist's of the 15th Century were NOT creating modern art as that mode of art is contemporary to this Century. Your ideas on modern art are very closed. I am sure because of the diversity in this genre there is at least one artist or one piece that you may actually enjoy --
Comment: With regard to contemporary art, I have decided as a result of this exchange, that such art is not necessarily to be enjoyed, but merely to be tolerated. However, I am fairly certain that this is not an original conclusion. Comments?
Comment: With regard to modern art, I have discovered through this exchange that such art is not to be enjoyed, but merely to be tolerated.
Comment: I would hate to be the worker that had to make that call. "Hi boss, hey, you know that man with the wings over the door to the fine arts display?"........
Comment: Just imagine how difficult it would be to make that phone call. "Um, sir? Hey, you know that guy with the wings over the door?".....
Comment: To curryjm:
the article started with:
"Sometime in the late 15th century, the Italian sculptor Andrea della Robbia created a terra-cotta relief sculpture of Saint Michael the Archangel."
15th century is NOT "modern art" it's an irreplacable piece of your history. go be a jerk over on the viedo game forums, and leave this one to people with enough class to realize what a loss this was. Did you even read the article?
Comment: Hey fatmando, you apparently did not read the entire article. See the second to the last paragraph that starts with the sentence: "The dangers may be worsened by the push for new, younger members (especially at contemporary museums), which often raise money and draw crowds at after-dark events that combine drinking, dancing and gallery hopping." By the way, it's video, not "viedo". If I'm a jerk, then you must be illiterate.
Comment: Curryjm,Modern Art is just a new style.I feel arts value is judged by creative the artist was with it.
Comment: I think that Museum curators need to do a better job at overseeing what is being done as well as how it is being done, in regards to all exhibits in their care. Security is a neccessity. Deliniation lines such as "Do Not Cross beyond this point" or "Do not Touch" may also help. I have recently noticed at an exhibit showcasing some of Maya Lin's work in San Diego, that those signs were not around all of the displays. Security was there, but what would stop an enthusiastic patron from accidently touching a displayed work on a busy day when these safe gaurds are not always present?
Comment: Unfortunately, today's society has no respect for each other, let alone priceless art work. Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but "curryjm" needs to learn some tolerance for differences in opinion and artistic expression. Since you cannot depend on the public to observe common courtesies (such as obey "Please Do Not Touch" signs, etc.), museums have no choice but to hire security guards to protect their collections. This costs money so remember that next time you visit a museum and see that the admission price has increased.
Comment: I exercise my tolerance by staying out of museums. I only made this comment because I was recently at a wedding reception at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago. I had to be there, you know. I would never have considered going to such a museum on my own. My god, they pass-off huge displays of gross pornography as art at that museum! I was astounded and disgusted.
Comment: Dear curryjm, Please continue to exercise your tolerance by staying home rather than going to Museums. Museums and most other public places are much more enjoyable w/out ignorant, intolerant, blowhards that think their narrow opinions are at all relevant and should be held by everyone. Next how about exercising your tolerance by staying out of comment forums as well? Thanks.
Comment: My most effusive apologies to you, dear str30312. I must have touched a nerve. Perhaps you are a contemporary artist yourself? I fault only the Chicago Museum of Contemporary Art for their poor taste in art. Artists will continue to produce bad work, as long as someone continues to buy it. Don't worry; I will stay out of that particular museum in the future so that the exquisite works there may be more enjoyable for you.
Comment: I worked for 12 yrs in museums; it was the highlight of my career. I am especially aware of the dangers that come to the exhibition pieces by public display. All the comments in the article are correct, but I would also add that specially trained security guards can go a long way to protect the objects. They must have the backing of museum management and mustn't be afraid to approach lager louts or big, unsophisticated oafs that come to a museum just to be able to say Been There! If they ask someone to back off from a piece and s/he doesn't do it, then they need to call several more security guards. It is not difficult to staff up a little, even though most museums are non-profits.
Comment: Most art can be protected, and viewed... it takes 'common' sense and money. You overbuild the platforms, you mount so objects can't even be knocked over (no matter how heavy), you encase to prevent thrown objects or slashing or climbing on... you mount them high and out of reach, or below a viewing platform, and you account for chemical environment. They just aren't trying hard enough, or creatively enough to provide secure venues, even from 'guards'. Yes, you don't want to lock them away, but more creative protection can be done without putting the objects 50 feet away from the audience.
Comment: The first thing museums must do is prevent people like "curryjm" from getting anywhere close to the exhibits. Second, they must hire professionals to do the actual installations.
When the San Francisco Legion of Honor re-opened a few years ago, after a major renovation, the first exhibit featured sculptures by Pablo Picasso. Every aspect of the display of this very valuable, and very delicate, artwork was done by professional contractors. My company did the installation of all graphics relating to the exhibit, ...signs, banners, placards, etc. Every step of the way, day and night, the exhibit curator was there, overseeing every detail. If all museums did it this way, damage would be minimized.
Comment: Hey Chuckle8, how would you like a knuckle sandwich?
Comment: Whether or not you care for a certain type of media is really not the point here. The point is that for the sake of a few dollars and not hiring the best techs they can get, they have accepted an unacceptable amount of risk especially when it pertains to irreplaceable pieces. Last I heard this was a free country and curryjim is entitled to his opinion, just as you are yours. Comparing the terra cotta piece to most of the modern school is a really stupid path to start down. Besides anyone that avoids museums really does not appreciate the effort that goes into one anyway. It would be better to confine your comments to the subject at hand, not your particular taste or lack there of for art, modern or otherwise. It all needs to be better protected and the exhibition of any piece must take into consideration all aspects of the pieces safety.
Comment: This article just demonstrates that museums are just as guilty as the world in general about the "status" of people that are qualified to actually insure that any piece is properly hung and protected. Since 1911 when the Mona Lisa walked out of the Louvre, you would think that there would be more respect and a higher level of concern as far as the skill of the people responsible for the display part of an exhibition.
Anyone that has associated with the museum pecking order understands that the people responsible for hanging and displaying very important pieces are at the bottom rungs in terms of status and pay. This is a horrendous mistake considering what is at risk. Every museum that has a staff of more than three should have a display engineer, there really is no excuse for ruining a priceless piece like the one over the door way, no matter how well they restore it, it will never be the same as it was before it fell, or as valuable. If you have people that decide it is a fake or genuine then staff that specializes in the safety of the collection seems like a no brainer. Really there is no excuse other than an act of nature that is excusable for destroying a priceless object, I assure you they just cannot get another one on ebay. Time to get a clue folks.
Comment: Unfrotuneatly some of the people working in museums have no understanding of technical issues such as structures, weights and integrity of mounts and protection of priceless works. And some have very little respect for other peoples work. When its viewed as just a 'job', rather than a proviledge and responsibility to be good stewards of the worlds resources, then this type of thing results. Maybe its time the high-brow crownd put down a little finger on the tea cup and spend so me dollars in the area of protection of resources instead of funding bad art.
Comment: Most modern art is crap anyway, so who cares if it is damaged or destroyed? I swear that some of these so-called artists create such detestable works that people are inspired to destroy the pieces.
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
STRATEGIES Isn't it ironic: Xerox is hoping it can profit by teaching companies how to reduce their printing.
Sponsored by
|
Sponsored by
|
Loading Menu
