logoalt Hacker News

Aurornis • yesterday at 1:53 AM • 5 replies • view on HN

I have a friend in museum management and I socialize with their museum friends.

A frequent topic of discussion is how hard it can be to get things on display. Many people in museum related roles view their job first as protecting and preserving the displays at all costs, with presenting them to the public as an unfortunate necessity that they’re forced to do to get funding. There are some epic fights from people who don’t want the best or most valuable works to be put on display or loan because that risks damaging them.

I would have thought that high resolution copies and archives of art would be a dream come true for these people, but from what I’ve observed many of them oppose that as well. They feel it provides an inauthentic or incomplete sense of their valued works, while also diminishing their profession of preserving these items. When you view yourself as the gatekeeper for a special, irreplaceable treasure, anything that produces a facsimile of that treasure is an abomination that must be resisted.


Replies

shermantanktop • yesterday at 2:46 AM

Some professions seem especially prone to this priesthood mindset. Inward-looking, amplified self-regard, and dedicated to a mission that nobody asked them to take on, because the new mission is more gratifying and ego-boosting.

Some software engineers do this — devoted to some abstract notion of code cleanliness or architectural purity that has no obvious relationship to delivering working software that is useful to others.

➕ show 2 replies
keiferski • yesterday at 4:54 AM

It’s not a totally crazy idea to insist that certain artworks should only be viewed in certain ways. I’m reminded of David Lynch saying something similar about watching movies on your phone:

https://youtu.be/OQiQk8AJ0YI?is=Wiwxeok0Hg4jMdJu

Off the top of my head, I can think of at least a few artists whose works are somewhat belittled by being digitized and viewed on a screen: Monet and Rothko. Both have monumental size paintings that really don’t work if you aren’t there in person. But since the only way most people interact with them is via a screen, they are often criticized (Rothko specifically.)

So in other words, some art necessarily has a physical dimension which cannot be appreciated in a non-physical way.

➕ show 3 replies
cgio • yesterday at 3:36 AM

Then why scan them in the first place?

➕ show 5 replies
joshspankit • yesterday at 4:36 PM

I’m curious for your thoughts on my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49955346

conartist6 • yesterday at 6:23 PM

It seems to me that the scans are documents.

It doesn't seem outrageous to me though that there exists a category of documents more detailed and sensitive than "administrative" documents.