←back to thread

109 points colinprince | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
sharkjacobs ◴[] No.44506614[source]
What's the advantage of seeing an original piece of art over a serviceable replica? Especially in the case where the "original" is a print, one of dozens.

Obviously "serviceable" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, a replica might simply not be very good, might not capture some vital characteristic of the thing which makes it a great work.

But otherwise, it's basically that the knowledge of how important and significant this work is puts the viewer in a more receptive frame of mind, right?

To be clear, that's not nothing. I of course know firsthand how much that affects the impact of a painting, museums and galleries care a lot about how they display their collection. But is that it?

replies(11): >>44506633 #>>44506680 #>>44506682 #>>44506707 #>>44506729 #>>44506750 #>>44506787 #>>44507016 #>>44507110 #>>44507613 #>>44510823 #
1. sandspar ◴[] No.44506750[source]
For me it's just more fun to see the original. My museum hobby is pointless, basically, so I feel free to set myself little rules. Perhaps it makes sense to think of going to museums as a type of collection hobby. Collectors typically seek authenticity, even if it's a bit silly. A rare Magic the Gathering card is merely cardboard, but ah - it's the special cardboard! Or take birding: I can see a pileated woodpecker on YouTube any time, but to see one in person, what bliss!