The whole idea of fully focused, rapt attention is a modern construction
November 27, 2024 12:28 AM Subscribe
I remember going to the Uffizi 20 years ago, and tourists were walking around like zombies taking video footage of the entire experience, not pausing to look at the work. I’m in favor of tolerating hybrid spectatorship, where you look at the work and maybe take a photo as well. Obviously, going too far in either direction is also not great: If you’re only experiencing something through mediation, why are you there? And the “slow looking” movement comes across as pretty conservative—it’s excessively reverential and technophobic. I want to make a case for both being possible, for being with your phone as a way of close looking. from Looking at Art Will Never Be the Same Again [The Nation; ungated]
A conversation with the art historian Claire Bishop about technology’s influence on museums and galleries, and her recent book Disordered Attention.
Claire Bishop, previously
A conversation with the art historian Claire Bishop about technology’s influence on museums and galleries, and her recent book Disordered Attention.
Claire Bishop, previously
Cellphones, cellphones, everywhere
And no one sees a thing.
posted by kozad at 5:08 AM on November 27 [8 favorites]
And no one sees a thing.
posted by kozad at 5:08 AM on November 27 [8 favorites]
I mean, if you're using the phone to look up the artist and find additional content, perspectives, criticism, it's pretty valid. Just walking through and filming everything seems pretty pointless, but I ran down my phone's battery in the National Gallery, whatever the one across from Air and Space is on the Mall in DC, just looking up the different artists and learning all kinds of neat stuff about painting techniques.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:14 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:14 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
I am imagining sort of the reverse of her point: a museum of hyper-attention, where you are ushered alone into the empty white space with a single picture on the far wall; there is nothing else to look at; there is no one else looking; and you are locked into this museum for hours.
posted by mittens at 5:30 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
posted by mittens at 5:30 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
A show that springs to mind is the MET Museum's Manus x Machina in 2016. The patrons that day were entirely present for it. Visitors had their phones in hand for photos but it was obvious that they were keeping in touch with each other as they split off to wander and then rejoin around certain exhibits. Additionally, the air con was set to “meat locker” and Eno's Ascent was playing from every corner of the atrium to create an incessantly rising sonic barber pole. I wasn’t all that interested in high fashion dress-making but it was the most exhilarating museum experience I've ever had.
posted by brachiopod at 5:45 AM on November 27 [3 favorites]
posted by brachiopod at 5:45 AM on November 27 [3 favorites]
I am imagining sort of the reverse of her point: a museum of hyper-attention
This almost existed during the pandemic. During their renovation, the Frick Museum rented the old Whitney Museum, painted the walls grey and installed masterpiece after masterpiece, often one to a wall. It was breathtaking. Interestingly, the very few visitors were mostly over fifty.
The Frick at Madison
posted by R. Mutt at 5:51 AM on November 27 [9 favorites]
This almost existed during the pandemic. During their renovation, the Frick Museum rented the old Whitney Museum, painted the walls grey and installed masterpiece after masterpiece, often one to a wall. It was breathtaking. Interestingly, the very few visitors were mostly over fifty.
The Frick at Madison
posted by R. Mutt at 5:51 AM on November 27 [9 favorites]
I was just in Rome, a place I've been many times before, but not for awhile. This time I was really struck by how (some) tourists were dressed and made up not for the occasion, or the terrain or activity, but how they would appear in front of an iconic artwork or site on Instagram. There were people "creating content" absolutely everywhere. Lots not doing that as well, obviously. But the difference between this visit and my list in 2017 was so striking.
posted by missmobtown at 5:57 AM on November 27 [3 favorites]
posted by missmobtown at 5:57 AM on November 27 [3 favorites]
Last time I went to MoMA was with my high school buddy, maybe around 2017. He was vociferous in bemoaning the instagramization of the experience, the young people mediating the experience through selfies. Other things he bemoaned during that day:
- The international professional organization he's a part of had a conference that day (his reason for being in New York), and they "wasted" all their time talking about sexual harassment issues instead of their core mission.
- Trans people complaining about Jeffrey Tambor (cis-male and sexual harassment-prone) on Transparent, when really, trans people should just be grateful.
So on and so forth. That experience soured me on my high school buddy (we've stopped talking), but I'm noting it here in that since then I've always linked the attention-in-museums question to conservatism. So it's a delight to read this more nuanced take.
posted by HeroZero at 6:24 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
- The international professional organization he's a part of had a conference that day (his reason for being in New York), and they "wasted" all their time talking about sexual harassment issues instead of their core mission.
- Trans people complaining about Jeffrey Tambor (cis-male and sexual harassment-prone) on Transparent, when really, trans people should just be grateful.
So on and so forth. That experience soured me on my high school buddy (we've stopped talking), but I'm noting it here in that since then I've always linked the attention-in-museums question to conservatism. So it's a delight to read this more nuanced take.
posted by HeroZero at 6:24 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
I can only look at something for so long without doing anything else, despite being a trained artist. The point for me of looking at a work of art is often the experience of the intense moment, and it is the return to the work of art rather than the extended contemplation that offers the most rewards. To that end, I do take photos, imperfect ones that remind me of the feeling I had.
Yesterday, for instance, I visited the Metropolitan Museum for the sole purpose of seeing the new Tiffany windows, and I took a few snapshots to remind myself of the occasion, then sat and looked at them peacefully for fifteen minutes or so. People took lots of selfies. Others peered at the informational video display, or examined the windows closely. Meanwhile, I sketched six quick vignettes of parts of the windows in my sketchbook, to enable me to see better, and then I went away. I belong to the Metropolitan, though I live in another city, so that I can do things like that. The hours-long museum visit is a waste of attention for me. I want to look at two or three things, and then go sit outside looking at the fountain and considering the pigeons.
I visited the Whitney yesterday too, and spent a few minutes sitting in the Wanda Gag exhibit (a small room's display of some works in the collection). One lithograph in particular moved me deeply, but again there is only so long I could sit and look at it. Yes, I took its photo, and I have looked at the photo from time to time since then.
Museums are odd places. Many of the works in them, like the Tiffany windows, are meant to be singular rather than part of a crowded environment. And I admire the proficient selfie-takers for the artists and curators of themselves that they are. There is nothing like watching people in the Cloisters herb garden pose repeatedly against the backdrop of leaves and flowers to make one appreciate the relentless endeavors of humanity.
Lovely interview.
posted by Peach at 7:08 AM on November 27 [13 favorites]
Yesterday, for instance, I visited the Metropolitan Museum for the sole purpose of seeing the new Tiffany windows, and I took a few snapshots to remind myself of the occasion, then sat and looked at them peacefully for fifteen minutes or so. People took lots of selfies. Others peered at the informational video display, or examined the windows closely. Meanwhile, I sketched six quick vignettes of parts of the windows in my sketchbook, to enable me to see better, and then I went away. I belong to the Metropolitan, though I live in another city, so that I can do things like that. The hours-long museum visit is a waste of attention for me. I want to look at two or three things, and then go sit outside looking at the fountain and considering the pigeons.
I visited the Whitney yesterday too, and spent a few minutes sitting in the Wanda Gag exhibit (a small room's display of some works in the collection). One lithograph in particular moved me deeply, but again there is only so long I could sit and look at it. Yes, I took its photo, and I have looked at the photo from time to time since then.
Museums are odd places. Many of the works in them, like the Tiffany windows, are meant to be singular rather than part of a crowded environment. And I admire the proficient selfie-takers for the artists and curators of themselves that they are. There is nothing like watching people in the Cloisters herb garden pose repeatedly against the backdrop of leaves and flowers to make one appreciate the relentless endeavors of humanity.
Lovely interview.
posted by Peach at 7:08 AM on November 27 [13 favorites]
And the “slow looking” movement comes across as pretty conservative—it’s excessively reverential and technophobic.
There was a time when an overly STEMmy alum of a polytechnic would come across as conservative for NOT engaging with art in a reverential and tech-free manner.
posted by ocschwar at 7:09 AM on November 27 [4 favorites]
There was a time when an overly STEMmy alum of a polytechnic would come across as conservative for NOT engaging with art in a reverential and tech-free manner.
posted by ocschwar at 7:09 AM on November 27 [4 favorites]
I feel like art is always at a much greater risk of being ignored completely than of being looked at wrongly. Within the limits of rules and norms that don’t disrupt the experience of others and don’t put the art itself at risk (see for example bans on selfie sticks) people are entitled to the experience they want to have whether I would find it fulfilling or not.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:24 AM on November 27 [8 favorites]
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:24 AM on November 27 [8 favorites]
I was just at the Uffizi Palace last month. The experience was almost entirely ruined by the crush of tourists. They do timed tickets, you have to buy a ticket a month+ in advance. Even then it's another 30-45 minutes to get in the door. Then you get there and you literally cannot walk down the galleries. Because it's full of people standing still, staring at their phones.
It's great all those people want to see the art! What's not great is they aren't looking at the art. They're looking at their shitty phone screens trying to line up the perfect shitty photo of the Birth of Venus. Sweetie, there is a fantastic digital image of the Birth of Venus for you to enjoy any time. Your camphone photo with bad lighting and a weird angle is shitty. Put the phone away, look at the painting with your eyes, appreciate seeing it for real. Then get out of the damned way.
I have more sympathy for the folks taking selfies, putting themselves in an image with the famous painting. I've come to laugh fondly at the terrible mob at the Mona Lisa doing this. It's just so camp! And it's human, I get you want to show your friends back home you were there. That's cool. It's all the folks thinking the way they are going to engage with art is to line up a perfect (shitty) camphone shot of it alone that kill me.
I would 100% support a no-photos policy for art, just to keep people moving. A lot of museums used to do that, or would charge extra for a photo pass. They've given up on it, no doubt because policing it became impossible in the age of phone cameras.
posted by Nelson at 7:40 AM on November 27 [11 favorites]
It's great all those people want to see the art! What's not great is they aren't looking at the art. They're looking at their shitty phone screens trying to line up the perfect shitty photo of the Birth of Venus. Sweetie, there is a fantastic digital image of the Birth of Venus for you to enjoy any time. Your camphone photo with bad lighting and a weird angle is shitty. Put the phone away, look at the painting with your eyes, appreciate seeing it for real. Then get out of the damned way.
I have more sympathy for the folks taking selfies, putting themselves in an image with the famous painting. I've come to laugh fondly at the terrible mob at the Mona Lisa doing this. It's just so camp! And it's human, I get you want to show your friends back home you were there. That's cool. It's all the folks thinking the way they are going to engage with art is to line up a perfect (shitty) camphone shot of it alone that kill me.
I would 100% support a no-photos policy for art, just to keep people moving. A lot of museums used to do that, or would charge extra for a photo pass. They've given up on it, no doubt because policing it became impossible in the age of phone cameras.
posted by Nelson at 7:40 AM on November 27 [11 favorites]
I love having a camera with me in museums for saving names or artists I hadn’t encountered before and details that stand out to me—usually weird little birds from antiquity through the renaissance. The Prado’s ban on photos bums be out, but I get it. The world’s dozen big-name art museums are overwhelmed.
I recently spent a blissful Sunday at the Boston Museum of Fine Art—a fantastic museum—and left with dozens of photos, which have inspired more hours of discovery since.
posted by Just the one swan, actually at 7:46 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
I recently spent a blissful Sunday at the Boston Museum of Fine Art—a fantastic museum—and left with dozens of photos, which have inspired more hours of discovery since.
posted by Just the one swan, actually at 7:46 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
rant aside, I do use my camphone to remember what I've seen too. But for that a quick snapshot is enough: get a photo with the work and the placard in frame. You can do that without distracting yourself or impeding other people.
Aaron Straup Cope did interesting work at the Cooper Hewitt on this "remember what I saw" problem with The Pen, from the 2015ish era. A custom electronic device, a simple pen-shaped thing you could point at artworks and it would remember them. Then at the end of the visit you could get a little custom website with a journal of what you'd seen. It had (has?) a lot of other affordances too, and some interactivity. I like Aaron's work and writing. I used The Pen and found it mostly a success although a little awkward, as all digital tech in a museum seems to be. I suspect were someone starting today they'd never build custom hardware but instead try to figure out how to leverage the phones in everyone's pockets.
posted by Nelson at 7:59 AM on November 27 [7 favorites]
Aaron Straup Cope did interesting work at the Cooper Hewitt on this "remember what I saw" problem with The Pen, from the 2015ish era. A custom electronic device, a simple pen-shaped thing you could point at artworks and it would remember them. Then at the end of the visit you could get a little custom website with a journal of what you'd seen. It had (has?) a lot of other affordances too, and some interactivity. I like Aaron's work and writing. I used The Pen and found it mostly a success although a little awkward, as all digital tech in a museum seems to be. I suspect were someone starting today they'd never build custom hardware but instead try to figure out how to leverage the phones in everyone's pockets.
posted by Nelson at 7:59 AM on November 27 [7 favorites]
I definitely took photos at the Uffizi, but am definitely not the guy who has to take photos of everything or experience the whole thing through my phone. I'm also not the guy who stares intently at art works for minutes at a time. Everybody gets to engage with art the way they want, and there is no "right" way.
posted by briank at 8:00 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
posted by briank at 8:00 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
I spent several weeks in Italy last year and gave all of the big museums and ticketed attractions a miss. Why stand in line to be herded through the Sistine Chapel when you can just walk into the Church of St Peter in Chains and spend as much time as you want staring at the Michelangelo altar there? Why get a timed ticket to look at the original David in a crush of people when you can go to the basilica Santo Spirito and spend all afternoon looking at the crucifix?
And yes in re the title of OP: with respect to almost all kinds of cultural productions, the notion of paying focused attention to them is a construction specifically of Victorian times and notions of cultural self-improvement. This applies to opera, concert music, ballet, painting, sculpture... to the elites who originally commissioned the works/patronized the artists, these things were all wallpaper. I'm sure there were some connoisseurs, who really appreciated fine brushwork or good orchestration. But the high-class twits who paid for all this stuff mostly were not that.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 8:01 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
And yes in re the title of OP: with respect to almost all kinds of cultural productions, the notion of paying focused attention to them is a construction specifically of Victorian times and notions of cultural self-improvement. This applies to opera, concert music, ballet, painting, sculpture... to the elites who originally commissioned the works/patronized the artists, these things were all wallpaper. I'm sure there were some connoisseurs, who really appreciated fine brushwork or good orchestration. But the high-class twits who paid for all this stuff mostly were not that.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 8:01 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
Oh and yes I did take some selfies with Moses at San Pietro in Vincoli.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 8:03 AM on November 27 [1 favorite]
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 8:03 AM on November 27 [1 favorite]
Everybody gets to engage with art the way they want, and there is no "right" way.
Sure, only I didn't get to engage with the art at the Uffizi the way I wanted. Or engage with some of it at all. Because a bunch of people were engaging the wrong way and crowding me out. Seriously, the crowds there were just out of hand. And this in early October, I can't imagine summer.
posted by Nelson at 8:43 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
Sure, only I didn't get to engage with the art at the Uffizi the way I wanted. Or engage with some of it at all. Because a bunch of people were engaging the wrong way and crowding me out. Seriously, the crowds there were just out of hand. And this in early October, I can't imagine summer.
posted by Nelson at 8:43 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]
Yes, at some point, it is no longer an art museum but a crowd museum. When it happens there is only one solution: don't go. The good news is that there are amazing museums everywhere, The fact that art galleries suffer from superstar syndrome means that the second-tier museums are often wonderfully quiet. I remember going to the Gustav Moreau museum in Paris and it was amazing - I shared the space with half a dozen visitors on a sunny fall morning. Again, in Prague there was a modern art museum which happened to be slightly outside of the city centre that was tranquil and blissfully uncrowded.
posted by storybored at 9:00 AM on November 27 [8 favorites]
posted by storybored at 9:00 AM on November 27 [8 favorites]
"The book is primarily an argument against people (and there are a lot in academia!) who still believe in fully focused attention—the idea that you can and should stand and be mesmerized by a work of art for a long time without any technological intermediaries."
If that were a test, a lot of ADHD people would fail it, including me. And there's nothing stopping that kind of audience from crowding the space in front of a work of art so that no one can get near it, either.
Perhaps the issue is the ongoing stampede of tourists everywhere in Europe, not so much how we're looking at art. Big backlash going on in Granada, Spain at the moment: for example, no new licenses for tourist rentals are being granted for now. But there are already more than enough short-term tourist apartments, the city is vying to be one of the official cultural capitals of Europe, and the local economy is heavily dependent on tourist traffic, there being a dearth of good jobs in Andalucia. So I'm not sure how far any set of legal measures will go to turn down the firehose.
posted by rabia.elizabeth at 9:00 AM on November 27 [1 favorite]
If that were a test, a lot of ADHD people would fail it, including me. And there's nothing stopping that kind of audience from crowding the space in front of a work of art so that no one can get near it, either.
Perhaps the issue is the ongoing stampede of tourists everywhere in Europe, not so much how we're looking at art. Big backlash going on in Granada, Spain at the moment: for example, no new licenses for tourist rentals are being granted for now. But there are already more than enough short-term tourist apartments, the city is vying to be one of the official cultural capitals of Europe, and the local economy is heavily dependent on tourist traffic, there being a dearth of good jobs in Andalucia. So I'm not sure how far any set of legal measures will go to turn down the firehose.
posted by rabia.elizabeth at 9:00 AM on November 27 [1 favorite]
"...the idea that you can and should stand and be mesmerized by a work of art for a long time without any technological intermediaries."
Oh, I've recently tried the slow art approach, which is to just stand in front of an art work for say, ten minutes and just look and see. It was a good experience, because things happen with the eyes and the mind. The thing that befuddles me is the use of the word "should" in the quote, as if there is one correct way to appreciate art. I've done the opposite of slow too. My sister and I fast-stepped through the Uffizi years ago. It was hilarious.
posted by storybored at 9:16 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
Oh, I've recently tried the slow art approach, which is to just stand in front of an art work for say, ten minutes and just look and see. It was a good experience, because things happen with the eyes and the mind. The thing that befuddles me is the use of the word "should" in the quote, as if there is one correct way to appreciate art. I've done the opposite of slow too. My sister and I fast-stepped through the Uffizi years ago. It was hilarious.
posted by storybored at 9:16 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
a museum of hyper-attention single room, single artwork, but no locks or timers. It’s merely that no-one gets to enter more than once.
posted by clew at 10:29 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
posted by clew at 10:29 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
*scrolls past*
posted by y2karl at 10:30 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
posted by y2karl at 10:30 AM on November 27 [2 favorites]
This interview reminds me that the quickest way for someone to attain guruship is to take something that is obviously wrong, and quietly give "permission" for people to do it.
Think Dugin, or Gavin McInnes, or Tony Robbins, or any number of even more obvious trolls. It's always going to be easier to say, for example, "seeing your own addicted mind reflected back through a rectangle for the rest of your life is GOOD actually" than it is to attempt to shape giant forces which truly might be out of our control.
Like, we *really* might not win this one. We as a species appear to be unwilling & unable to address almost anything pertinent to large-scale survival -- and maybe that's because we're not supposed to survive.
I will NOT abide that when I am lost in masterworks, the right that I have to ponder these questions can be taken away by a loud, ignorant, selfie-stick waving mob of grinning idiots. I apologize for the tone, but that's what these people choose to be, and you see them everywhere in Italy and France and all of them seem to sprout out of the ground on the particular corner of New York where I descend the staircase to the subway, a multi-generational, multi-racial, sociographically-diverse coalition united by their singular pursuit of THEMSELVES at all times.
And it's our fault. The compassionate, the sensitive & the artistic in a thousand cuts allow ourselves to concede little victories, to say "this is just how it is now" or "we have to meet people where they are" or "attention is actually made up."
So slowly, a couple thousand years of cultivating an approach to living that stayed the hands of untold would-be conquerors is just washed into the sea, along with any notion of ideas or humanity in general mattering in any ways other than the immediate, prurient, hedonistic, obvious & stupid.
No, no, no, no, no. Paying attention to art is GOOD. STOP THIS NOW.
posted by mathjus at 11:34 AM on November 27 [9 favorites]
Think Dugin, or Gavin McInnes, or Tony Robbins, or any number of even more obvious trolls. It's always going to be easier to say, for example, "seeing your own addicted mind reflected back through a rectangle for the rest of your life is GOOD actually" than it is to attempt to shape giant forces which truly might be out of our control.
Like, we *really* might not win this one. We as a species appear to be unwilling & unable to address almost anything pertinent to large-scale survival -- and maybe that's because we're not supposed to survive.
I will NOT abide that when I am lost in masterworks, the right that I have to ponder these questions can be taken away by a loud, ignorant, selfie-stick waving mob of grinning idiots. I apologize for the tone, but that's what these people choose to be, and you see them everywhere in Italy and France and all of them seem to sprout out of the ground on the particular corner of New York where I descend the staircase to the subway, a multi-generational, multi-racial, sociographically-diverse coalition united by their singular pursuit of THEMSELVES at all times.
And it's our fault. The compassionate, the sensitive & the artistic in a thousand cuts allow ourselves to concede little victories, to say "this is just how it is now" or "we have to meet people where they are" or "attention is actually made up."
So slowly, a couple thousand years of cultivating an approach to living that stayed the hands of untold would-be conquerors is just washed into the sea, along with any notion of ideas or humanity in general mattering in any ways other than the immediate, prurient, hedonistic, obvious & stupid.
No, no, no, no, no. Paying attention to art is GOOD. STOP THIS NOW.
posted by mathjus at 11:34 AM on November 27 [9 favorites]
See, you don't need to take a picture on your phone.. they also make great magnifiers, as I realised when I saw someone doing this with Hilliard miniatures.
Now I do the same with other small things – coins and such, or details on engravings. I zoom in, look, wiggle, look again, and walk away. It feels like just another way of looking, like raising my glasses and peering, rather than a crude capture.
posted by GeorgeBickham at 12:28 PM on November 27 [1 favorite]
Now I do the same with other small things – coins and such, or details on engravings. I zoom in, look, wiggle, look again, and walk away. It feels like just another way of looking, like raising my glasses and peering, rather than a crude capture.
posted by GeorgeBickham at 12:28 PM on November 27 [1 favorite]
Everyone is a be here now person until they see that installation of Michael Jackson with bubbles.
First - that statue is stunning in person in a way photos don’t capture. You think it’s just goofy pop art, but the eyes
But also - damn straight I’m getting a selfie of me and MJ+B. This moment can’t go undocumented.
posted by St. Peepsburg at 12:48 PM on November 27 [1 favorite]
First - that statue is stunning in person in a way photos don’t capture. You think it’s just goofy pop art, but the eyes
But also - damn straight I’m getting a selfie of me and MJ+B. This moment can’t go undocumented.
posted by St. Peepsburg at 12:48 PM on November 27 [1 favorite]
Lately, I'm being an annoyance by hovering for extended periods to take hundreds of photos of museum furniture and sculptures. I use them for photogrammetry; creating 3D models I can examine at home.
posted by brachiopod at 2:50 PM on November 27 [2 favorites]
posted by brachiopod at 2:50 PM on November 27 [2 favorites]
Took the family to the Boston MFA yesterday so the 12 year old would have a glimpse of the Salvador Dali exhibit. The younger two were not ready for a slow walk through an art exhibit, so it was not the greatest outing, and I hope to repeat it with just the eldest tomorrow. But anyway... some museum curators are geniuses. Utter geniuses.
The gallery for the exhibit was cramped. Not so cramped as to show the works in a cluttered disrespectful fashion, but there was not a single spot where an influencer could pose for a decent selfie in front of any of the works on display. Especially not given the level of crowding. And the cramped space encouraged a closer look at everything. Until yesterday I had no idea just how small Dali's paintings are. The Persistence of Memory required brush strokes of the kind people put in miniatures.
So, no idiots with selfie sticks that I could see. Just one guy with an SLR camera taking photos of everything and I was mostly impressed with the camera itself. Ultrasensitive sensor so he could take flash free photos in that dimly lit gallery with a freehand camera.
posted by ocschwar at 6:15 AM on November 28 [2 favorites]
The gallery for the exhibit was cramped. Not so cramped as to show the works in a cluttered disrespectful fashion, but there was not a single spot where an influencer could pose for a decent selfie in front of any of the works on display. Especially not given the level of crowding. And the cramped space encouraged a closer look at everything. Until yesterday I had no idea just how small Dali's paintings are. The Persistence of Memory required brush strokes of the kind people put in miniatures.
So, no idiots with selfie sticks that I could see. Just one guy with an SLR camera taking photos of everything and I was mostly impressed with the camera itself. Ultrasensitive sensor so he could take flash free photos in that dimly lit gallery with a freehand camera.
posted by ocschwar at 6:15 AM on November 28 [2 favorites]
No, no, no, no, no. Paying attention to art is GOOD. STOP THIS NOW.
Amen. Some modern constructions should become venerable traditions.
posted by ocschwar at 8:12 AM on November 29 [1 favorite]
Amen. Some modern constructions should become venerable traditions.
posted by ocschwar at 8:12 AM on November 29 [1 favorite]
« Older How much COF-999 would you need to reverse global... | Steve Albini Way Newer »
posted by The River Ivel at 3:24 AM on November 27 [5 favorites]