From: IN%"[email protected]" "Art Criticism Discussion Forum" 11-OCT-199
2
15:16:01.95
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
CC:
Subj: RE: Technology
Message-id: <[email protected]>
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by PSUARCH.Bitnet; Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:14 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 1187 for HRL@PSUARCH; Sun,
11 Oct 92 15:14 EDT
Received: by PSUVM (Mailer R2.08) id 2268; Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:08:21 EDT
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 12:02:36 PDT
From: Zachary Philip Matthews <zmatthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Technology
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
X-To: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <ARTCRIT%YORKVM1.BITNET@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 11 Oct 1992 14:40:58 -0400
The question of technological restoration brings up all kinds of lively
debate, but it is my feeling that the closer we can come to understanding the
original intent of the artist the better off we are. We may have become used
to the dark look of the ceiling of the sistine chapel, but if Michaelangelo's
intent was for a bright (more easily visable) color scheme - shouldn't we
trust his judgement! It makes me think of the temples and monumental
structures of ancient Greece and Rome. Our view of the pristine white marble
structures is definately skewed when compared to the bright colors that were
actually painted on the stone. In that case should we reproduce the original
look? somehow I cannot imagine archeologists climbing the walls of the
propylaea or the Parthenon with cans of paint!
-Zac Matthews_
2
15:16:01.95
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
CC:
Subj: RE: Technology
Message-id: <[email protected]>
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by PSUARCH.Bitnet; Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:14 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 1187 for HRL@PSUARCH; Sun,
11 Oct 92 15:14 EDT
Received: by PSUVM (Mailer R2.08) id 2268; Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:08:21 EDT
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 12:02:36 PDT
From: Zachary Philip Matthews <zmatthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Technology
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
X-To: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <ARTCRIT%YORKVM1.BITNET@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 11 Oct 1992 14:40:58 -0400
The question of technological restoration brings up all kinds of lively
debate, but it is my feeling that the closer we can come to understanding the
original intent of the artist the better off we are. We may have become used
to the dark look of the ceiling of the sistine chapel, but if Michaelangelo's
intent was for a bright (more easily visable) color scheme - shouldn't we
trust his judgement! It makes me think of the temples and monumental
structures of ancient Greece and Rome. Our view of the pristine white marble
structures is definately skewed when compared to the bright colors that were
actually painted on the stone. In that case should we reproduce the original
look? somehow I cannot imagine archeologists climbing the walls of the
propylaea or the Parthenon with cans of paint!
-Zac Matthews_