I'd like to offer an observation on moving walkways in exhibitions from
the point of view of the observer, if I may, an observer who understands
well the necessity for protection of the object being viewed and for as
many people to be able to view an object as possible:
 
When I first saw Michelangelo's "Pieta," in 1964 or 1965, I was 9 years
old and still in my dinosaur phase.  Velvet ropes, I thought, were for
grown-ups, and I cheerfully ignored any such restraints, much to the
consternation of both my parents and museum guards (the guards a the Smith-
sonian were the nicest in retrieving me, btw).  I found restrictions on my
ability to move around and see an object, any object, frustrating.  The
glass wall and moving walkway in front of the "Pieta" were the most
frustrating of all, because not only was my time with the object limited,
but so was my point of view.
 
The next time I saw Michelangelo's sculpture, it was 1991, and I was in Rome.
Again, there were barriers, but no moving walkway.  I could spend as much time
as I liked with the object (and I did).  Nothing compares with the unrestricted
connection with such a great object.
 
In the 26 years in between, I had been to college, gotten a graduate degree
(1 1/2, actually) in art history, and become a rather jaded museum visitor
(MoMA's Picasso show did a lot to speed that process up).  But nothing--
nothing--prepared me for the kind of visceral intellectual experience one
gets when confronted with such great beauty.  I felt that even as a child
 
Yes, moving walkways have their place.  But the safety of the object can be
assured in other ways.  Aren't there also other ways of accommodating large
numbers of people?
 
Jenni Rodda
IFA/NYU  [log in to unmask]