Perhaps I betray my early scientific training, where the value of an
idea is not dependent on the person who puts it forward. I have never
been happy that the aesthetic value of an art object, or the
justification of placing it in a museum, should depend on the name of
the artist. Certainly it should not be exhibited under a name known to
be false, but should the object not speak for itself?

Of course I accept that in a history museum, for example, everyday
objects may be worth exhibiting only because of their historical
associations, and the accuracy of representational art may depend on the
circumstances of its creation, but is "fine art" not exhibited primarily
because it is in itself interesting, stimulating, provoking of thoughts
and emotions, etc.?

So my answer to this question, so long as the museum's legal title to
hold the object is still valid, would be "Change the label, keep the
object".

Leonard Will
--
Willpower Information       (Partners: Dr Leonard D Will, Sheena E Will)
Information Management Consultants                 Tel: +44 181 372 0092
27 Calshot Way, Enfield, Middlesex, EN2 7BQ, UK    Fax: +44 181 372 0094
[log in to unmask]           [log in to unmask]
--------------- <URL: http://www.willpower.demon.co.uk/> ---------------