Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wolviex
Dear BluErf, in the light of ICOM statute and passion of so many people to survive in hard museum conditions, your words seems to be a little harmful. In the light of all of this, Museums should be the ONLY place to keep objects (of course it is not so in reality). Museums definitely are not "orphanages". I feel the same passion as you, and I love "my" objects with the same love as you, and I'm not the only one. Among the collectors and museum workers you will find the same passion but ignorance as well, so I don't think that discussion: what is better - Museum or collector's house, is really necessary!.
|
I apologise for unwittingly hurting curatorial staff who are passionate about what they are doing. A very sorry.
Though my post may seem anti-Musuem, it is actually not. I was trying to put forth a balanced view. I agree pieces fall apart while in Museum collections and in private collections. As Ariel points out, both paths have advantages and disadvantages. We might also say if not for the private collectors, where would the Museums get their pieces (or donated collections).
The last para from my previous post -
" All things are impermanent; all things that are made will eventually be unmade. It is the natural way of things. Clinging on otherwise is probably not going to change much, but it would certainly add more worry lines and white hairs to ourselves. We do what we can and let the rest take its natural course. "
- is actually meant for both private collectors and curatorial staff. The gist of the message is "do our (collectors and curatorial staff) best with what we have and let it be", and of course be happier. That's the most important part.
Hope this clarifies.
