This comment reminds me that the recent "Rembrandt/Not Rembrandt" show at
the Met, focusing on the complexities of discriminating among works by
Rembrandt himself, those done in his studio, those by his students, and
those purchased by Met patrons many years ago which have no links to
Rembrandt at all, suffered by not having a video to document the
investigative process.  Instead, the long labels were in constant battle
with the alluring paintings.  Further, the personae who worked so
assiduously over the past 25 years to establish these controversial
boundaries among the works in the Met's collection might have been
humanized and made me relevant through interviews, etc.

It's valuable to show that the museum is a product of biographical and
cultural creativities, economic pressures, etc.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Richard Rabinowitz              <> American History Workshop
[log in to unmask]                  <> 588 Seventh Street
718/499-6500 fax: 718/499-6575  <> Brooklyn, New York 11215-3707



On Thu, 4 Apr 1996, Adrienne DeArmas wrote:

> In a message dated 96-04-03 23:29:43 EST, [log in to unmask] (Jeanne Finan)
> writes:
>
> > agree with other comments on this
> >issue that sometimes the process is more intriguing than the actually
> exhibit
> >itself--or makes the exhibit even more interesting. Has anyone ever done
> this
> >before?
>
> Has anyone seen the Kimono exhibit at NMNH? The exhibit displays the  amazing
> work of Itchiku Tsujigahana and while the kimonos are phenomenal, it was the
> video about how he made them that was the best part. It was inconceivable,
> even with the process display within the exhibit, to imagine how this man
> created these masterpieces. The video turned an art exhibit into an
> anthropological one. Good Show!
>
> - Adrienne
>