Tom Melly wrote:

> andrel wrote:
> 
>> I do not like the idea of voting. In a 'real' museum you have the
>> curators who are responsible for the collection. They choose what
>> is interesting, either in itself or in combination with other work.
>> I would definitely prefer a small group of curators, and at least
>> one of them should have some arts background (I mean knowledge of,
>> not necessary an artist herself).
>>
> 
> With variations, I have to say I largely agree... That said, I don't see 
> why the curators shouldn't be a large and expanding group with a 
> suitable admission policy, neither too hard nor too easy.
Technically you can have hundreds of curators, each with her own
selection. For a visitor it would be a disaster. All these rooms with
partly the same images. About 10 curators with each a specialist
subject would be the most I could handle as a visitor, I think.
There is also the problem of having to keep all these people
up to date with the complete set of available images and animations.
I suppose there could be temporary exhibitions by invited persons.
And possibly exhibitions dedicated to one person. I guess there
could be e.g. a Giles section. Thinking about that somewhat longer,
that would be partly a copy of his own site. That will probably be
true for many artists, so perhaps it is not necessary.

Post a reply to this message