The original discussion was about a kinetic painting, then it branched to
accommodating people who learn by touch.  The comment about licking was
the devil's advocate looking to spark some creative thought.  The problem
(opportunity) we were discussing was that some museums appear to attract
a clientele that only includes those who are at the top of the social
darwinist ladder.  I am begining to think that all the others are being
excluded by design.  Is art (and museums in general) only for the upper
middle class/upper class Caucasin segment.  It that what the artists who
created the art have in mind?  Are the graet unwashed masses the social
darwinists, like Hank decry, uneducatable? Maybe we need to make more of
an effort.

On Tue, 27 Feb 1996, Henry Grunder wrote:

> Lighten up, Dave. Christopher Whittle may be onto something
> when he suggests facilitating museum patron licking of
> paintings. I would suggest steering them towards those with
> cadmium and other heavy metal pigments. And, as I recall, some
> dandy arsenates have been used historically. The world is
> overpopulated, and this might be a useful form of demographic
> Darwinianism.
>                      **USUAL DISCLAIMERS**
>