Are museums obsolete?

[Architect]

Or mostly obsolete?

Consider the Google Art Project. Extremely high resolution pictures of art. I remember being in the Louvre and so of course had to stop by the Mona Lisa. It was a mob scene. It's a rather small painting anyhow and behind thick glass, I couldn't get past the Chinese tourists to get close enough. It was underwhelming anyhow. What was fun though was seeing all these less famous pieces I was familiar with.

But seeing this stuff online would be a better experience all together. I can simultaneously look at contextual information on the web. One exception might be large pieces, you need to see them in person maybe.

 

[Duxwing]

Or mostly obsolete?

Consider the Google Art Project. Extremely high resolution pictures of art. I remember being in the Louvre and so of course had to stop by the Mona Lisa. It was a mob scene. It's a rather small painting anyhow and behind thick glass, I couldn't get past the Chinese tourists to get close enough. It was underwhelming anyhow. What was fun though was seeing all these less famous pieces I was familiar with.

But seeing this stuff online would be a better experience all together. I can simultaneously look at contextual information on the web. One exception might be large pieces, you need to see them in person maybe.

Other exceptions include: sculpture, installation art, and art intended to be seen from many perspectives. Seeing the picture itself is nice, too.

-Duxwing

 

[Etheri]

Or mostly obsolete?

Consider the Google Art Project. Extremely high resolution pictures of art. I remember being in the Louvre and so of course had to stop by the Mona Lisa. It was a mob scene. It's a rather small painting anyhow and behind thick glass, I couldn't get past the Chinese tourists to get close enough. It was underwhelming anyhow. What was fun though was seeing all these less famous pieces I was familiar with.

But seeing this stuff online would be a better experience all together. I can simultaneously look at contextual information on the web. One exception might be large pieces, you need to see them in person maybe.

As you mentioned : Large pieces (The lamb of god / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghent_Altarpiece came to mind) look pretty lame in comparison to their real life equivalents. I remember some big 3x4m and larger paintings in paris. Can't watch those on a 16" laptop screen.

Then there's also reliefs and sculptures. I mean...
Pictures or movies of versailles aren't quite the same as actually walking around there, being able to look up at the ceilings. Being able to see all the gold weaven everywhere. Noticing how the architecture is elegant and aesthetic yet insanely inpractical at the same time...

I'll probably be trekking into nature this summer. I've seen plenty of pictures of the area, and the pictures are amazing. These detailed photographs being avaible online does not lessen my desire to go see for myself, if anything, it makes me want to go more quickly. Some things are simply more imposant when they're right in front of you?

 

[Chad]

I never acutely been to a proper art museum (I have been the gallerias but I am sure this is not what you are talking about).

I have however been to many historical/anthropological museums and these are experiences in themselves. I could see pictures of on the artifacts on my computer but this is like watching an movie on my computer vs. at an IMAX theater. Both can be fun but there is not real comparison between the two.

I assume that art museums would be a similar experience most of the time the experience is worth more then the some of its parts.

 

[Mr Write]

If we reduce artistry to its essence, it might lose much of its mystical quality that many find desirable in their art. It might also incongruent with preconceptions of "how art should be appreciated".

Hell, we can't even convince people to stop using physical books. Even the programmers insist that their literature be printed on dead trees.

Bah.

 

[Architect]

But 99% of art isn't even shown, it's warehoused. We will never have the floor space to display it. So aren't the virtual museums better than the real?

For example one of the SF museums is doing a show on the Terra Cotta . Except I understand they are only showing one or two warriors, which is ... neat, I guess. The impact of this is that there are so many, so I'm not sure what I'd get from one or two.

What if they put the entire army up digitally with 360deg views and quick access? You could get an idea of the size of this thing. Or you could go to China, but I doubt they'd let you anywhere close to them.

 

[Kuu]

Other exceptions include: sculpture, installation art, and art intended to be seen from many perspectives.

* Agrees with duxwing.

* Runs to the decontamination chamber.

Pictures or movies of versailles aren't quite the same as actually walking around there, being able to look up at the ceilings. Being able to see all the gold weaven everywhere. Noticing how the architecture is elegant and aesthetic yet insanely inpractical at the same time...

I have however been to many historical/anthropological museums and these are experiences in themselves.

I assume that art museums would be a similar experience most of the time the experience is worth more then the some of its parts.

One has to consider that a museum is not merely a space to observe art, but a space to observe art communally and publicly, and as such has a social function that up till now is irreproducible in a virtual venue. It's a public space, which serves several functions, only one of which is the storage and display of art. The experience of meeting and being in a pleasant public space is as important if not more than the art itself. A museum is actually one of the few places where it's socially acceptable to be introverted in public! (And a classic introvert meetup/date location too)

But 99% of art isn't even shown, it's warehoused. We will never have the floor space to display it.

Never? There's plenty of space in the world. There's millions of empty office buildings all over. It's a matter of social priorities...

 

[Mr Write]

Virtual museums sound terrific to me, but I'm a typical INTP brain on a stick.

How does the INFJ take to the idea?

 

[Nezaros]

If we reduce artistry to its essence, it might lose much of its mystical quality that many find desirable in their art. It might also incongruent with preconceptions of "how art should be appreciated".

Hell, we can't even convince people to stop using physical books. Even the programmers insist that their literature be printed on dead trees.

Bah.

My attachment to paper books is fairly incongruent to the rest of my personality, but I keep it because... Well, there's something more satisfying about flipping through pages and seeing your progress through a novel. And I am the kind of person who would buy books just so I can place them on a shelf.