All (who responded): Thanks. In spite of William's comments (and in line
with those of Chris), I doubt that Francis Bacon would accept changes to one
of his portraits. But then, probably few of us would anticipate a flattering
portrait from him.
My conclusion at the moment is that if you're dead, your work is probably
safe; if you're sufficiently exalted in the art world, you probably
shouldn't expect to alter much; if you're determined (as is William) not to
alter a work, the work will be safe; I still view architects and playwrites
(playwrights?)
as vulnerable to expectations of revisons.
Geoff C
From: "Chris Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is art sacred?
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:04:57 GMT
What was the most recently completed commissioned painting or sculpture you
saw in an art museum?
I remember a portrait that Hockney did 40 years ago - but I really doubt
that
the Weisman's had much to say about changing the eyes or ears.
And regarding sculpture -- I can't think of anything other than what a
museum
commissioned for itself - and that would take us back to 1960 - and again,
I
doubt that the famous sculptor (Jacques Lipchitz) was asked to make any
changes.
So yes, "art is sacred", as Geoff put it.
The people who mostly make things on commission today are not recognized as
the kind of artists worthy of museum display.
____________________________________________________________
Click to become a master chef, own a restaurant and make millions.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijmPlSMPOWaIE6J98FIGijKPE
XDQvLWSecMIRXyEGYuz6U1F6/
