I don think I am as well versed in exhibitions and art history as you but I can tell you something like the Hals exhibition (or dare I say, the Rembrandt Rothko) would have helped the me from five years ago along on my journey to like modern art. I used to love classical paintings and was indifferent towards modern art but now I have come around to a better understanding of the latter and loving some of it (color field as an example).Therefore, I think there merit in merely displaying that “artists like Hals have influenced contemporary artists”.Of course it probably best to go through different museums and exhibitions to get a understanding of the progression of art, but I feel like the connection is easy to lose along the way for many casual viewers, and these “tranhistoricals” might be something that could help them look at things in a different light.I suppose a generous interpretation of the Gonzalez Torres would say that it unfinished because it completed by the audience, but that would root it more in a history of audience activation and participation, which was otherwise fully absent from the exhibition, and might have been a more interesting and complex route to explore with the postwar work in the show.OK from your description of it what you says makes sense. Actually, I feel like the concept of finished/unfinished is interesting because what really considered unfinished? An actually unfinished piece presented at exhibit is still “finished” at that moment, if that makes sense.
I went home and got started on get my mom into a nursing home and I called the family. I finally got everything together. A couple days later I get a call from my mom’s nurse, she told me that I could pick my mom up. Sir David Attenborough presents the now extinct in the wild, Spix’s macaw. The Spix’s macaw was declared extinct in 2000 when the last known wild born male disappeared from its final refuge in Brazil. Fortunately this strikingly beautiful member of the parrot family survives in captivity.
Hear, hear, Everett. I cannot believe some of the comments made by Jack Hanna. Trying to make a proper scientific study of orca or other cetacean and pinniped behaviour in captivity is like studying people in prison and thinking that the results reflect normal human behaviour.
When we do use the term we should strive to do so with consistency in the stories we report across all our services, and in a way that does not undermine our reputation for objectivity and accuracy. It is also very important that we strive for consistency across the international and UK facing sites. If a BBC World story uses very measured language but a UK version does not, a user will rightly question the different approaches..