On January 25, Don Smith posted his "Museum of High Quality Reproductions."  I
forwarded that to a colleague, and I thought his reply would be of interest.
*********************************
 
Christina,
        Write this to your bb:
        I have no ethical problem with the presentation of reproduction
art, if this is so labeled, in a clear and coherent fashion.  Any attempt
to do otherwise would be unethical, illegal, tyrannical, and ultimately
destructive to the medium of museums.  For the public entrusts objects to
museums for preservation and showing to the public//audience.  The public
attends museums, and allows for the uneconomical existence of museums, because
of this unwritten contract based upon trust--the public trusts museums to
preserve objects and to show them in their original form--if this trust is
broken by either party, museums will cease to exist in short order.  {i.e.
if the public ceases to attend museums, the raison d'etre for museums will
disappear, and if museums begin to lie to the public, no one will ever really
trust any museum ever again---ergo museums will cease to exist}
        The ethical question is therefore based upon trust, and the legality
I believe is rather obvious.  The showing of false objects, pretended to be
authentic, is also tyrannical in concept, much like the foul art priests
you refer to.  By taking the {ahem} democratic power away from the people,
by deciding that they are too stupid to notice, or too ignorant to care or
understand, the museum officials act in a tyrannical manner.  This form of
elitism is repugnant and against all of the precepts of modern museums.
        However, if objects are clearly labelled, and the public is informed
of this before paying entrance dues, then there is little question that
such a museum would be interesting.  Legal problems will occur, however,
for the owner of a piece of art is like the publisher of a book by a deceased
author--the owner has clear rights over the object, and royalties must be
paid according to the desire of the owner.  Also, owners have the right to
reject the reproduction--in which case the artwork cannot be legally
 reproduced--some may argue this not right, but this does indeed exist for the
 publisher
of a book <also a form of art>.   All in all, I do believe a scale model of the
Louvre, including all the art, would be a hit this side of the Atlantic.
James Owens