I really don't object to politics in art per sey, but I do have a problem with using tax dollars to do it (left or right). No one should be taxed to advocate a position, especially one with which they do not agree. Doesn't mean the work shouldn't exist. On the contrary, sometimes its even more important. Now what someone puts in their own gallery in their business is their choice. Once public money is introduced, it should either be balanced or left out.
Anyone that's ever dealt with a rich lady in mink knows they are almost never a push over. They just never hear a word that often a director must use with them. How often do you really think they hear the word, "no"? Probably far less than the most spoiled grandkid.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: museum collections?
From: lookaround360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, January 25, 2011 10:20 am
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
OK everybody run out and rent "The Art of the Steal" You want to know
about the good, the bad, and the ugly(rent that one too!) Its about the
Albert Barnes Collection - wicky that.
Mark you are only about half right - not bad for most of us! A friend of
mine, who was the director of a very good regional art museum, used to
rant about the rich ladies ( "in mink muffs") on the museum board.
Believe me, these were no Liberals. Conservatism isn't a characteristic
of most art - it wouldn't be good art if it didn't push against the
status quo. Anyhow, have a look at Futurist art to see conservative of
the nasty, mis-guided kind.
AZ
LOOKAROUND - Since 1978
http://www.panoramacamera.us
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [SPAM] RE: museum collections?
> From: mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Tue, January 25, 2011 10:56 am
> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
> <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Lea I think the biggest mistake you are making is in your definition of museum. Museum is defined by wiki as an institution that houses and cares for a collection of artifacts and other objects of scientific, artistic, or historical importance and makes them available for public viewing through exhibits that may be permanent or temporary. Well that really hasn't for the most part been my experience at museums, though I am living in a place now where that is the case and based on my personal experience has been the exception.
>
>
> My experience tells me a gallery is owned by a private individual with a profit motive. A museum is a gallery that is often owned by the public, paid for by taxpayers, but really displays what the executor likes, what's politically acceptable, and the work of those politically connected. You rarely see the oversized toilet display at small museums because if it ticks off the wrong people the museum is defunded and the person running it making the decision is out of a job. You will see paintings of a member of the board that went to art school, regardless of how bad they may be. Make a large donation to the museum, and you will likely find your work is accepted. You might see politically inspired works, but they are almost always liberal. I don't remember ever seeing a work of art hanging from a museum that took a conservative position. I did see a painting once that showed a computer with just the corner of its monitor left visible, as I realized the blue background was water and that it had just been tossed overboard for the computer life on the bottom.
>
>
> Should it be that way? No and hopefully my experience is just that my experience. Yet we live in the real world, not the world we wish it would be.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: museum collections?
> From: Lea Murphy <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, January 25, 2011 6:42 am
> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
> <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Jame
>
> I see (indeed saw them when I saw the show in person) those things you mention. I just don't see how or why that image landed on a museum wall. A gallery wall I could understand but not a museum wall.
>
> As one who has photographed weddings I can assure you that peeved looks between wedding party participants isn't all that abnormal, nor is a pregnancy, even one revealed last minute.
>
> One assumes that since this is in a museum it was photographed by an artist, not a wedding photographer. That makes me wonder two things: was this staged (doubtful based on _expression_), was the artist running around making images in the middle of wedding preparations of a friend, grabbed this image, threw it in her portfolio and voila now the joke's on us.
>
> Agreed, there's much to question in this picture. But there's much to question in a lot of pictures that don't end up on museum walls.
>
> Maybe sometimes the question simply is: how the heck did that end up here?
>
> Lea
>
> the most wonderful things in life aren't things
>
> On Jan 24, 2011, at 10:38 PM, David Schenken <jds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > An interesting series of comments about museums and art and how it got
> > there.
> > Nobody seems to be talking about what they see in looking at the photo -
> > some technical stuff but not what they SEE.
> >
> > I see a set of four people, three of which are interacting in a really
> > strange manner.
> > These folks are identified as 'bridesmaids' so we assume (???) that they are
> > friends or at least friendly.
> > Not in this picture. The lady to the far right is really angry / disgusted
> > at the lady on the left.
> > Miss center can't yet make up her mind about what just happened and it must
> > really have been recent to get that difference in expressions. Perhaps they
> > have just noticed that Miss left is three months pregnant and that might be
> > inappropriate for this wedding gathering. Perhaps it is the identity of the
> > father that's the problem.
> >
> > We have a mystery here waiting for a story to be told.
> >
> > And then there's that really mysterious lady in the background. Not in the
> > same kind of dress - so not a bridesmaid.
> > Perhaps she's the matron / maid of honor and has been left out of the
> > 'festivities'.
> >
> > This whole drama is being played out in the woods - not the usual venue for
> > wedding.
> >
> > Anyway, that's what I see looking at the image. I'm sure more would come
> > out looking at the real image in the large so that more detail would be
> > apparent.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > James
> >
> > Original Message ----- From: "Lea Murphy" <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
> > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 8:22 AM
> >> Subject: Re: museum collections?
> >>
> >>
> >> This is a link to one of the images I was really wondering about. How this
> > ended up on a museum wall I'd love to know.
> >>
> >> http://collections.kemperart.org/Obj651$6
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > your kids . my camera . we'll click
> > www.leamurphy.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
