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/> ---------------