51–57 of 57 posts
Speaking as a semi-famous artist. Art is a feast. After the feast you poop. Then the collectors come and hoard the poop for all eternity, occasionally lending the precious stuff out to students.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Storage has other problems; A painting stored away in a climate controlled vault where no one can look at it is just a dusty canvas rectangle. A painting requires a viewer for it to become art.
A copy of the painting can serve for viewing nearly as well as the original. But a copy can’t answer some questions so preserving the original for future study (and new questions, ideas, and technology) is valuable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Storage has other problems; A painting stored away in a climate controlled vault where no one can look at it is just a dusty canvas rectangle. A painting requires a viewer for it to become art.
A copy of the painting can serve for viewing nearly as well as the original. But a copy can’t answer some questions so preserving the original for future study (and new questions, ideas, and technology) is valuable.
Maybe for a lay-viewer. As an amateur realist painter, even the very best prints seem to lose 75-80% of the mark-making and process clues that are easily observable in originals.
Trust with accountability and respect seems to go a long way some times but not others. Anyone have a theory why this system worked so effectively but other systems involving trust don't?
It is clearly the qualities of the participants that allows this to work out at such a wild unsecured risk. The group and individual personal characteristics of the participant cohort make up the dark matter of why this system can function without disaster. I know that goes against what people want to believe that we are all the same, but fact of the matter is that most people are in fact not at all the same outside…
Yet far fewer in number than the amount of muslims who've been shot dead by Christians and white supremacists even just within the last year, yet it's interesting that "muslims are violent" is the theory you latch on to. Why's that?
> It would surely show either that we are actually all the same, or that we are not all the same. Cue the subsequent rationalization and excuse making when the results contradict the cult doctrine.
"Liberals" don't believe we are all the same. Such an experiment would show the differences in culture, socialisation and upbringing that "liberals" very much believe in. Your ignorance of such things, or dismissal of them as "excuse making", shows that you lack the nuance needed to properly assess such a study.
Trust with accountability and respect seems to go a long way some times but not others. Anyone have a theory why this system worked so effectively but other systems involving trust don't?
Trust works well if you have decent people. Exactly what makes people decent is hard to say, but it is not unthinkable that students who got into Cambridge are a bit more decent than average.
My college does this as well. It's been happening since 1940 [1], so 79 years, longer than Cambridge. More info in [2]. The collection even includes some works by Picasso. It's very popular here — students camp out overnight to maintain their spot in line, and the art up for rental tends to run out quickly. [1]: https://www.oberlin.edu/news/art-rental-behind-scenes-look [2]: https://www.oberlin.edu/news/visionary-beh…