4 ms·
>Technically speaking, not factoring time on loan to exhibitions, Women of Algiers has only been on public view for the last ten days. What is that supposed to
by cge 11y ago
>Technically speaking, not factoring time on loan to exhibitions, Women of Algiers has only been on public view for the last ten days.
What is that supposed to mean? That's essentially saying that, except for a very common method of having art viewable by the public in museums, it wasn't viewable by the public. That seems like a completely pointless observation.
- iaw 11y agoI took it to mean that the author of the article was incapable of researching how frequently the painting was on loan to exhibitions.
- frandroid 11y agoThe point is that works of art by great artists are world heritage artefacts, and shouldn't be held in private hands. Who knows if the new buyer will even loan the painting out?
- aaronbrethorst 11y agoHow would they have ever ended up with that designation unless there was a private market to determine 'proper value,' thereby conferring notability on the artists?
- rquantz 11y agoI hope you're being sarcastic. Therefore I will respond in kind: yes, the only way to determine the value of a work of art is by finding out how much some rich person is willing to pay. That is a very reliable indicator. In case you're not being sarcastic: there are ways that things can be valuable that have nothing to do with capital. Pig.
- dang 11y ago> Pig. Personal attacks are not allowed on Hacker News, even when someone's views appear porcine.
- rquantz 11y agoI appreciate that you guys are trying to reach out and explain things like this. On the other hand, I'm well aware that personal attacks are not allowed. I guess my attempt at humor with regard to whether the GP was being sarcastic or not fell flat, which is also something I know tends to happen around here. On the other hand, sometimes it doesn't, and sometimes it's worth it. Pig just means "capitalist." I don't think many people here would be offended by that.
- dang 11y agoI missed the humor entirely. Sorry! But I suppose other readers did as well. This stuff, as we all know, doesn't come across reliably on the internet.
- rquantz 11y agoI suppose it should have been accompanied by a hail of emojis :) Oh well, I'm sorry too. I've been commenting here for more than four years, and as far as I know that's my first flag, so I'll take it as a new experience.
- anigbrowl 11y agoMarket value is not the only means of determining aesthetic value.
- glenra 11y ago90% of the art in the collections of most big museums will never be seen by anybody. Held "in private hands", there's arguably a better chance people will eventually get to see it than if it sits in storage indefinitely - the fate of all but a tiny fraction of artefacts held in major museums.
- WalterBright 11y agoI would think that the risk of concentration of the artifacts in one place would cause concern. Consider what happened at the Library of Alexandria.