[MD] Joshua Bell piece in the Washington Post

[Khaled Alkotob]

 Arlo, Ian, Ben

Which brings us to an argument I had with a local museum director. Of
course the local art scene is trying for more customers, and the
customers find their fix somewhere else.

Why do I need to go to a museum to appreciate these things when they can
be found somewhere else. If I go down to Tower Records, and spent an hour
flipping through music albums ( before the advent of CDs) and simply
enjoy the art work, is that a lesser quality experience than if it was
hanging inside their walls. Is there not talent involved in the creation
of these album covers?
Museums. in a way have become like zoos. They take things from their
element and put them in an enclosure and expect the visitor to enjoy the
full experience. Watching a couple of zebras chew their cud is different
tan being there and seeing a few thousands on the march.

As Arlo said, listening to that song at that moment in a pub, makes an
impression that can't be duplicated.

I remember a saxophone reverberating in the financial district in San
Francisco at 7:00 in the morning, that is still with me to this day.

Maybe the proper place for Mr. Bell to play IS the train station. Just
because it's unexpected and he is reaching people he would not normally
reach.

Khaled


> [Ian]
> it's the cultural context of the "performance", whatever peoples 
> actual "tastes" for a given musical genre.
> 
> [Arlo]
> A painting hanging in a museum is not a simple "art object" 
> suspended  in isolation awaiting an unsuspecting subject. The museum
itself 
> provides a whole host of contextual cues, from Khaled's pointing out 
of "validation" (if its hanging in a museum, it MUST be good), to 
> the anticipation and expectation of the experience carried through 
> echoey 
> wooden floors, and quiet hushed talk to spotlighting and museum 
> guards.