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** >