A couple of weeks ago we heard the announcement that the museum in Madrid, Reina Sofia, had lifted its three decades ban to photograph Pablo Picasso’s famed work, Guernica. The news got us thinking about the reason for such bans, and thereafter the lifting of the same.
As big supporters of availability of digital resources on art for all, our interest was piqued, so we had to look into it!
The famous 1937, 26-foot long work by Picasso, made at the height of the Spanish civil war, has generated much literature and documentaries. One of the best ones we saw was by the British historian and commentator, Simon Schama, in 2006 for the BBC, aptly titled – Power of Art. The title pretty much explains what this work meant at the time of a major political and social conflict, and what it has invoked thereafter.
In 1992, the Reina Soifa Museum acquired the work, and promptly imposed a ban on photographing by visitors. Museums often ban use of flashlights and undue light exposure to a work to preserve it. This has been true for many such institutions.
So, why revise the position now?
In the present times, when a big part of visiting a place is dictated by the ability to take a selfie for social media, indeed for most people, if there is no social media post, the visit might as well not have taken place (!), the museum must have struggled to explain such an imposition, especially when photography was allowed in other areas of the same museum.
In addition, museums around the world are struggling with decreasing funding, and inflating costs. There is an increased pressure to drive footfall through innovate measures and bring art closer to the people.
Museums often exhibit ‘blockbuster’ artists to drive footfalls and ticket revenues. For example, when Glasgow Museum of Modern Art hosted a solo show of Banksy earlier this year, it attracted a whopping 180,000 visitors during its 10-week run. It did enforce the no-photograph / video rule though!
Such measures continue to confound us, where museums would understandably want to protect the art in their care, while also hoping to drive public attendance and engagement. It is noteworthy to mention that the Banksy-show was for a limited period, and the museum could hence probably balance both objectives.
The other end of the spectrum is the recent collaboration between Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art’s (the Met) and the Korean electronics giant Samsung. Purchasers of their top-of-the-line Frame model can now view some of Met’s storied collection, by turning the Frame screen into a ‘digital canvas’.
An interesting move for sure, both for the company and the museum, allowing works to be digitally available, while at the same time controlling the lighting and exposure with professional documentation.
So, where does this leave us the news about Guernica? It shows us that there is a need to push for easy digital access of art, and that museums, and art institutions need to continuously re-think public engagement to keep works relevant and available, without compromising their responsibility towards preservation. A fine balance indeed!
Comentários