A Lesson in Art Appreciation

  More than a month ago GMA aired a video that not only shocked me but once I took in more details on the internet, absolutely outraged me. If you have just watched it above this entry I will explain briefly that a woman took her child into the art gallery portion of Overland Park Museum in Kansas then proceeded to sit down and let her child run all over the museum with some other woman’s kid until he ended up pulling down a sculpture worth $132,000 narrowly escaping getting crushed himself. She proceeded to saunter over where her child had moved away from what he’d done. When she finally made it over to where her child appeared to be in shock, but okay, he ran away from her!

     The gallery had it all on videotape, obviously, and she originally told them she would pay for the damages until she found out what it was worth! She sent GMA her own homemade video at a later time stating that she felt the museum was negligent in displaying a piece of art so expensive where children were allowed to visit! Then she said she was sure that her child could’ve been killed. I’ve looked at this from all sides, including what the artist must think of a woman who lets her child roam around in an art gallery, unsupervised and being quite capable of creating this kind of damage. (Parents, especially mothers, do know this about their children whether they’re willing to admit it or not.) Not once did she mention anything about the artist or the destruction of his work. In case someone may be rather misinformed (or perhaps uninitiated), I will say that when you go into an art gallery or salon you are looking at somebody’s hard work and also their property. If you have no respect for that, you shouldn’t be there. Most museums are not a child’s playground and I don’t consider this occasion a normal way for children to behave themselves anywhere, personally.

     My first reaction was this and I have not changed my mind yet: Why was she not directly supervising her child at close range? Are we all to believe that she didn’t know he was capable of doing this? These are the same questions that the art gallery officials must have asked because they charged her with negligence in supervising her child. She adamantly denies what is as plain as the video itself. By taking this stance she has inexcusably taught her child two things. One is showing no respect for other people’s property. Were they at home? Somebody’s house? The mall? (And would that make a difference?) The second thing she has taught him is not to take responsibility for one’s actions. That’s why he ran away from her!

     Since that time the museum settled this through their respective insurance companies so hopefully the artist has been compensated financially. There are two points I want to make in conclusion, however. First is the damaged art which can’t ever really be replaced. That art is the artist’s baby, Ms Negligence and it’s been destroyed. A price tag on it can’t replace it. Value of art is intrinsic and extrinsic and is not truly meant to be replicated. If the artist tries to recreate the piece of art it will be different. That may not mean anything to you but it will eventually to the artist. Second, if you can’t see value in the art destroyed as something reserved by the person who created it then I would suggest that you keep yourself and your child away from the places where fine art is displayed. Either that or start teaching your child how to act when you’re not at home. You’ll probably be spending more time in a doctor’s office, anyway, until and unless you start taking some responsibility for what he does. A child lives what he learns.