I never understood the benefit of public museums, especially in the internet age.

If you want to look at some artifacts without touching it, you could google it and see it.

Also in public museums a lot of artifacts get damaged due to visitors behaviors.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to keep the old artifacts at storage facility and release a high quality pictures of it instead of putting it in a museum?

Is there is a benefit for public museums?

  • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I live just a few miles from Crystal Bridges, which is world class art museum founded by Alice Walton. They don’t charge any admission since they’re funded by a pretty hefty endowment. It’s a really cool place.

    Seeing a photograph of a painting is a far cry from seeing the actual painting. If for no other reason than a photograph is two dimensional. It’s a little harder to appreciate art that someone made with their own hands two centuries ago when you can’t see the texture or the defects. Not even in a really high quality photo. It’s just not the same.

    And you don’t touch the paintings because there are security guards everywhere who have no problem reminding you to not touch the paintings.