Clauses forbidding manipulation in any way of the image deriving from one’s museum/collection are a good idea, in my opinion, in order to protect the public image of the museum and its collection.

This thought occurred to me a couple of weeks ago, after seeing the face of the Venus de Milo replaced with someone’s own face. It was done without malice, and was for showing the ability of the person working with a photo manipulation program, but it was a shock, not just out of respect for the piece (as the Italians say, “peace to the soul of” artists such as Duchamp, for example), but also from the collection’s point-of-view.

I’m glad this issue has been raised.

Best regards,

Star

Starleen (Stella) K. Meyer, Ph.D.

casa/home: [log in to unmask]

uff/work: [log in to unmask]

http://www.museobagattivalsecchi.org

Per iscriversi alla nostra Newsletter in italiano: http://www.museobagattivalsecchi.org/newsletter.htm  

To sign up to our newsletter in English: http://www.museobagattivalsecchi.org/english/newsletter.htm 

Facebook: Museo Bagatti Valsecchi

 

 

========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).