The purpose of the selfie is to prove that you exist; instead it gives proof that you do not respond to the world around you in real time. In which case, of course, you do not exist.
1
Yes, I'm painfully aware that the Equal Rights Amendment failed, but would it be asking too much to have a Federal law passed specifically excluding refusal to pose for selfies as grounds for divorce based on 'irreconcilable differences'? At least give civilisation a break. What's left of it.
I see countless tourists on the Brooklyn Heights Promenade trying to take their selfies while still getting some bit of the skyline in their shots. So I reach out, take their phone or camera, and do the honors for them, being sure I get some of the skyline in, to give context to their photos. Not shooting at arm's length also allows one to frame the tourists in, I hope, an esthetically pleasing way. I hope when they get home they appreciate my efforts. Whenever I travel I take photos of the scene in front of me, never a selfie.
1
Art is what we decide it is. When art becomes a trophy for collectors then why not make it the same for the spectator. Art is so pretentious anyway. Chill out. It's canvas stretched on wood and painted. So much of it is hugely overrated anyway. That art has become an alternative currency is often lost on the critics.
1
Since I have to work 7 days a week to pay my bills, I do not get out much into the social scene. The first time I saw one of these selfie stick devices was just the other day at the San Francisco cable car stop. I had heard of them but didn't really understand what they were. Now I know!
Just one was bad enough; a whole bunch of them inside a small space would certainly be dangerous. I cannot imagine trying to see art in a museum with those things allowed. I will make sure to ask about that before going to my next museum...
Just one was bad enough; a whole bunch of them inside a small space would certainly be dangerous. I cannot imagine trying to see art in a museum with those things allowed. I will make sure to ask about that before going to my next museum...
5
Its not so much that they might damage the artwork. For sure they will damage the experience of those who come to a museum because they love art (rather than themselves).
8
Having looked through these comments, I am genuinely amazed by the number of people who apparently can't enjoy themselves in a museum if OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING IT WRONG. Of course it's irritating if someone else is blocking your view for a significant time, talking loudly, or otherwise physically interfering with your experience of your art (and so I think the selfie-stick ban is probably reasonable), but otherwise people would be well-advised to pay more attention to the art they're supposedly there to see and less to judging the motives or psyches of the others around them. If you really want to get indignant about the narcissism of New Yorkers, there's no need to go all the way to the Met.
4
Actually, I found myself in a well known New York museum yesterday and was amazed at the number of people just standing in front of well known works of art, taking selfies. It was incredibly selfish as it made it impossible for others to just enjoy the artwork. It has totally gotten out of hand. I'm not sure museums are the appropriate environment for a camera as it destroys the enjoyment for other visitors. We all pay an entry fee and should be allowed to enjoy the experience without the intrusion of constant picture taking, with or without a selfie stick.
18
Is your problem with selfies (whether by stick or not) or all museum photography? I do not see the harm in regular nonflash photography of artwork. I was just at the Art Institute of Chicago (who mentions a ban on selfie sticks on their website) and it honestly never crossed my mind to take any sort of selfie with the art. As an art lover, however, I do really enjoy photographing pieces that speak to me. I think it can be done reasonably. I would politely wait until others were out of my way, used an actual camera rather than a phone so I could zoom in just on the piece and I photographed only where it was allowed, and only the pieces I liked best. I wasn't walking around with my nose stuck to the camera trying to photograph any and every piece. I was always mindful of others and stayed back and zoomed in. You would've probably never have even noticed me if we were in an art museum together.
Most people don't use actual cameras though which means they have to stand close with phones and I agree selfies of any kind are a pain in a busy museum as yes, people are blocking the art. But all photography and photographers are not the same. Frankly I kept getting stuck behind a woman who perhaps was an art student who kept standing on top of the descriptions of each and every piece copying them down by hand word for word. I'm not sure she ever saw the actual art. That was far more bothersome than anyone with a camera...
Most people don't use actual cameras though which means they have to stand close with phones and I agree selfies of any kind are a pain in a busy museum as yes, people are blocking the art. But all photography and photographers are not the same. Frankly I kept getting stuck behind a woman who perhaps was an art student who kept standing on top of the descriptions of each and every piece copying them down by hand word for word. I'm not sure she ever saw the actual art. That was far more bothersome than anyone with a camera...
3
I stopped taking photos of locations and attractions once the internet was established and pictures of anything are available online, usually at a much higher quality than I could produce. As for myself or other family member, we don't need to be in them because we know what we look like and we know we were there.
6
Those who take photos in their vain attempts to possess the ephemeral miss the entire point of it.
6
While I am not in favor of the selfie-stick, I admit to liking to take an occasional picture in front of something I really like. In fact I often offer to take pictures of others in front of something they care about (e.g., Mona Lisa, Venus de Milo, etc...)
Your assertion about possessing the ephemeral is frankly wrong. Sure if some celebrity was going by and you were selfie-ing the moment, you probably missed some ephemeral experience. But if you are taking a vacation to see the Louvre or Rijksmuseum, and capture a couple of those moments in your camera you capture it for posterity. You could keep seeing the picture and remembering there are beautiful things in this world and you had your opportunities to enjoy them. You might even remember the goofy guy who practically forced you to pose for the picture with your camera and thank him for making the effort to make this memory available to you.
I am all for elitism and refinement, but folks here seem to be getting a bit too carried away in our judgment of others who are acting human. Not everyone who takes a picture in front of a masterpiece is a narcissist, while someone who thinks taking such pictures is so "common" could very well be a big, honking, snobby narcissist. So maybe we all should be just as careful swinging judgments around as we are those selfie-sticks.
Your assertion about possessing the ephemeral is frankly wrong. Sure if some celebrity was going by and you were selfie-ing the moment, you probably missed some ephemeral experience. But if you are taking a vacation to see the Louvre or Rijksmuseum, and capture a couple of those moments in your camera you capture it for posterity. You could keep seeing the picture and remembering there are beautiful things in this world and you had your opportunities to enjoy them. You might even remember the goofy guy who practically forced you to pose for the picture with your camera and thank him for making the effort to make this memory available to you.
I am all for elitism and refinement, but folks here seem to be getting a bit too carried away in our judgment of others who are acting human. Not everyone who takes a picture in front of a masterpiece is a narcissist, while someone who thinks taking such pictures is so "common" could very well be a big, honking, snobby narcissist. So maybe we all should be just as careful swinging judgments around as we are those selfie-sticks.
3
How about an autonomous micro-drone flying over and recording the visitor seeing the sights in the museum? That should be fine, wouldn't it? The selfie-stick is too low-tech, that is the problem.
3
A camera mediates your response to a work of visual art, changing the light, color, texture, dimension, mood, etc. A camera can't capture what a piece says to you, uniquely, in that moment. Taking time to look at one painting for 10 or 20 minutes allows a story to emerge from a still image, one that is your story and the artist's and the community around you, all at the same time. Like live music.
This miracle of our eyes and imagination seems lost on museum goers whose main desire is to curate their life with representations of "I was there", as opposed to truly being "there". Some picture-takers lack the patience or ability to engage with the art, or notice how their camera-on-a-stick or off-a-stick, intrudes on others. A competitive crush of iPhones in front of a work of art is quite depressing to those who just want to look.
Which isn't to say it's not a basic human behavior. And often, practicing artists may want pictures to benefit their study and process. Could museums implement days where cameras are allowed, other days where it's not?
A hyper-desire for selfies in front of the creative output of someone we don't really know, and whose work we're not really seeing, deeply diminishes our ability to look outside ourselves, and let the wider-world enrich us and make us wise. Instead of taking something, let the art work give something to you.
This miracle of our eyes and imagination seems lost on museum goers whose main desire is to curate their life with representations of "I was there", as opposed to truly being "there". Some picture-takers lack the patience or ability to engage with the art, or notice how their camera-on-a-stick or off-a-stick, intrudes on others. A competitive crush of iPhones in front of a work of art is quite depressing to those who just want to look.
Which isn't to say it's not a basic human behavior. And often, practicing artists may want pictures to benefit their study and process. Could museums implement days where cameras are allowed, other days where it's not?
A hyper-desire for selfies in front of the creative output of someone we don't really know, and whose work we're not really seeing, deeply diminishes our ability to look outside ourselves, and let the wider-world enrich us and make us wise. Instead of taking something, let the art work give something to you.
9
Narcissism takes so many forms. Whoever looks at all these selfies anyway?
4
Yes, I was horrified at the moronic behavior that such "technology" encourages during my recent trip in Venice. Much of our new technology encourages narcissism and a sheer disregard for others. If your travel is all about you "being there" (in the photo), then clearly, the purpose and treasure of that travel has been completely lost on you. Even worse than selfie sticks: the selfish people carrying their iPads taking photos en-mass at a public event. They are like locusts blocking out the sky! In any case our society has truly been reduced to an absurdity. Selfie stick users simply want to be a Kardashian.
6
Hoping to see them banned on airplanes and in all stadiums and concert venues too. Can't tell you how many of these selfie-absorbed dummies I have seen(I live near a major tourist attraction)nearly run over in traffic while trying to take their own picture.
9
Whether they belong in museums is a separate argument entirely. I can see the stick being intrusive. But I think labelling of a selfie stick as a "narcissistic" contraption, misses the point of the benefit they provide. The first time I saw one, I thought it was the most ridiculous thing I'd ever seen. And yet, when I traveled solo to Paris (and with a friend in Italy), I realized how truly useful this sticks could be. We all want pics in front of the world's great aesthetic treasures. This isn't about simply taking a pic of our own mugs. However, unless you're in a large group, you'll have to continually stop and bother strangers to take your picture (many of whom don't want to be bothered, and many of whom cannot frame up a decent shot to save their lives, even using the simplest mobile phone camera). The selfie stick avoids all that. When I traveled solo to Paris, I remember having to wait 15 minutes to find someone willing to take my picture in front of Notre Dame Cathedral, as the light was quickly fading. And even when I finally did, it wasn't a terribly good picture. The selfie stick could've saved me.
4
"We all want pics in front of the world's great aesthetic treasures."
Sorry, not me. I'd rather have the whole experience in my memory, not on my cell phone.
Sorry, not me. I'd rather have the whole experience in my memory, not on my cell phone.
6
To Robert Dee, who writes: "We all want pics in front of the world's great aesthetic treasures. This isn't about simply taking a pic of our own mugs. . . "
With all due respect, sir, no. Many of us do not want that. Really.
Suppose, instead of "having to wait 15 minutes to find someone willing to take my picture in front of Notre Dame Cathedral, as the light was quickly fading". . . Suppose you had simply enjoyed watching the light change and fade over Notre Dame?
What a spectacular memory in and of itself, no camera necessary.
With all due respect, sir, no. Many of us do not want that. Really.
Suppose, instead of "having to wait 15 minutes to find someone willing to take my picture in front of Notre Dame Cathedral, as the light was quickly fading". . . Suppose you had simply enjoyed watching the light change and fade over Notre Dame?
What a spectacular memory in and of itself, no camera necessary.
6
The pretension of some folks who act as if we can't live in the moment yet also wish to preserve mementos from our vacations is mind blowing to me. Personally, Robert, I agree so much with you. I'm on a solo trip myself right now and as I read this article it occured to me, as it did you, hey this could come in handy. I'm stunned by how many seem anti photo. Frankly I don't believe it either. I think if we asked the same people if they would photograph other big life events such as weddings, graduations, etc they would say of course. Why the pretension against vacation photography when big vacations are just as much of an important and memorable life event to many of us, I don't know. I think of trips I've taken and by six months to a year later I'm not going to remember half of what I did, photos help keep the memories fresh. Perhaps it's a new form of narcissism for people to claim they're above photography? ;)
3
this reminds me of the movie "Caddyshack" when Rodney Dangerfield arrives at the Clubhouse in his Rolls with his guest Mr Wang. They get out and immediately Mr Wang begins to take pictures with his camera of everything. Rodney turns to him and shouts: "Hey, Wang, it's just a parking lot!" I can understand how this craze got started in Asia.
3
While everything has been previously said on the topic, mostly pointing the accusatory finger at every of the narcissistic loners caught into an odd spiral potentially apt to damage other bystanders' own experience and effort to make room for themselves when struggling to appreciate a great piece of art in somewhat bearable conditions but also, the institutions who, borderline complacent are at fault for their lax politics...
This is by most standards looking at framed artwork through the wrong end of the stick, and in the most perverse way downplaying on the social contract that prevails into public spaces and especially inside of crowded museums which call for the most salubrious behavior from everyone. Hence, we are being reminded here of basics-101-precepts in terms of -looking at art- namely #1, turn around and engage in a mentally challenging face-to-face contest instead of exposing your back to it so to flash a dead eye and a giddy smile at the social camera (Iphone and its likenesses included) along with the stream of bedazzled faces watching you going at it)...
This is by most standards looking at framed artwork through the wrong end of the stick, and in the most perverse way downplaying on the social contract that prevails into public spaces and especially inside of crowded museums which call for the most salubrious behavior from everyone. Hence, we are being reminded here of basics-101-precepts in terms of -looking at art- namely #1, turn around and engage in a mentally challenging face-to-face contest instead of exposing your back to it so to flash a dead eye and a giddy smile at the social camera (Iphone and its likenesses included) along with the stream of bedazzled faces watching you going at it)...
4
The people who use selfie sticks in crowded areas, without regard to other people, are no doubt the same ones who use oversize umbrellas on Manhattan streets on rainy days.
4
Perhaps a "selfie" should be renamed a "selfish". That term clearly indicates a d lack of concern for other museum -goers who often must navigate around the camera extender. The "I" or "We" provide visual evidence of our self-importance. If Rembrandt were alive now, would he take "selfless" or reach for his brush?
We certainly live in a society which increasingly enables to isolate ourselves from our fellow human beings. Just try holding a door for a stranger and see IF you get ANY reaction, positive or negative.
Perhaps museums should have a separate pay-what-you-wish room where they post reproductions of famous paintings which have facial cut-outs for those who want to pose for posterity.
We certainly live in a society which increasingly enables to isolate ourselves from our fellow human beings. Just try holding a door for a stranger and see IF you get ANY reaction, positive or negative.
Perhaps museums should have a separate pay-what-you-wish room where they post reproductions of famous paintings which have facial cut-outs for those who want to pose for posterity.
2
At least they're going to museums.
6
Sorry, I delete sent "selfies" I actually do not take pictures of where I am, it makes the moment more magical, and not some potential free graphic for an ad company. I'd rather hear you describe what was happening. I learned that with my eye on a camera when Queen Elizabeth toured the National Gallery in Washington in 1976, and when the picture of me with JP 2 passing by in St. Peter's showed my eye glued to a video cam. What would I prefer? a selfie, or being able to tell people how exciting it was in the events leading up to the photo op? Another example of "social" media making us sad examples.
4
I was at MoMA yesterday, Saturday, with friends. It was overcrowded, and most members of the throngs were busy taking photos of artworks and themselves in front of those objects instead of looking at them. While I didn't spot any selfie sticks, the rampant posing was disruptive to those few of us trying to look at the works displayed.
If I want to see digital images of art, there are a near infinite number available on museum and other websites. If I want to see the real thing, please, selfie aficionados, get out of the way, you're blocking the art as well as the passage ways.
It is ironic that those caught up in the need to post, self-promote, tweet, and so on still feel the need to document their experience at the museum, because they have abandoned the traditional experience of looking at genuine art objects in person in favor of creating digital images. The number willing to ante up the $25 admission fee for the privilege was surprising.
In the "old days," museums prohibited photography of works that they didn't own, since they didn't have permission to grant reproduction rights. I believe the Met still does this and tries to enforce the rule. MoMA clearly doesn't anymore, or the guards were simply overwhelmed. (A person whose hand was on the wall right atop a logo emblazoned there, an object on display, was not spoken to.)
If I want to see digital images of art, there are a near infinite number available on museum and other websites. If I want to see the real thing, please, selfie aficionados, get out of the way, you're blocking the art as well as the passage ways.
It is ironic that those caught up in the need to post, self-promote, tweet, and so on still feel the need to document their experience at the museum, because they have abandoned the traditional experience of looking at genuine art objects in person in favor of creating digital images. The number willing to ante up the $25 admission fee for the privilege was surprising.
In the "old days," museums prohibited photography of works that they didn't own, since they didn't have permission to grant reproduction rights. I believe the Met still does this and tries to enforce the rule. MoMA clearly doesn't anymore, or the guards were simply overwhelmed. (A person whose hand was on the wall right atop a logo emblazoned there, an object on display, was not spoken to.)
17
These are not people who go to see a museum; they are people who go to see themselves in a museum.
26
...and that's bad...because....?
2
I love selfie sticks. I'm a nut for photography, and I'm well past the point where I care if people think I'm lame for using one. I have been photographing my life for years and I always love going back and viewing the images. Especially pictures of my travels!
That said, the big museums in New York City are far, far too crowded for selfie sticks. The Met, the American Museum of Natural History, The Guggenheim.....they are beyond JAM PACKED every time I go. We have so many tourists in the city, it can be overwhelming. I've seen tourists using selfie sticks on the subways during rush hour! Every single tourist brings a selfie stick to NYC it is truly out of control.
That said, the big museums in New York City are far, far too crowded for selfie sticks. The Met, the American Museum of Natural History, The Guggenheim.....they are beyond JAM PACKED every time I go. We have so many tourists in the city, it can be overwhelming. I've seen tourists using selfie sticks on the subways during rush hour! Every single tourist brings a selfie stick to NYC it is truly out of control.
6
I'm looking forward for the hand-less selfie stick attached to the head/hat invention. When hordes of frenetic horned selfie stick dorks roam our planet we will have finally reached the apex of our species and can begin the long slog back down to amoeba. Don't forget to send me the royalties.
10
The new Barnes museum in Philadelphia sets the record on required distance from the art, almost in reverse. Where CAN you stand?
There is very little space in each small room (gallery is hardly the right word).
And the numerous, rude, often downright nasty guards, ever-vigilant, repeatedly tell you to walk and stand only in the tightly lined spaces.
This is hard to do, especially entering a room via a door at the room's corner, and the whole experience is frustrating and unpleasant. Spoils the visit, interrupts the concentration on the art.
One wonders if the almost exclusively minority guards are unconsciously at war with the elite white visitors paying the high admission.
Not anxious to return. There are other, better Renoirs.
There is very little space in each small room (gallery is hardly the right word).
And the numerous, rude, often downright nasty guards, ever-vigilant, repeatedly tell you to walk and stand only in the tightly lined spaces.
This is hard to do, especially entering a room via a door at the room's corner, and the whole experience is frustrating and unpleasant. Spoils the visit, interrupts the concentration on the art.
One wonders if the almost exclusively minority guards are unconsciously at war with the elite white visitors paying the high admission.
Not anxious to return. There are other, better Renoirs.
I guess you never went to the original Barnes? These rules aren't new. I don't know why you felt you had to make it a black versus white issue, either.
1
Actually the board makes the rules and the security people carry them out. The rules date back to the foundation/will of Dr. Barnes. I have visited and found that they limited the number of visitors by timed entry. Yes, some rooms were tight, and I only got yelled at once as I watched my stance and the lines. It was orderly but not oppressive. No mugging tourists with cameras was the best part, along with the art, which was the star. Your class warfare speculation was tasteless.
5
What is the obsession to record ourselves?
As we record more and more of our activities recording itself becomes our prime activity, and then recording ourselves recording that, and so on.
Real life finally meets Jorge Luis Borges's garbage heap:
“Two or three times he had reconstructed an entire day; he had never once erred or faltered, but each reconstruction had itself taken an entire day. ‘I, myself, alone, have more memories than all mankind since the world began,’ he said to me. ... And again, toward dawn: My memory, sir, is like a garbage heap.” “Funes” (1942)
As we record more and more of our activities recording itself becomes our prime activity, and then recording ourselves recording that, and so on.
Real life finally meets Jorge Luis Borges's garbage heap:
“Two or three times he had reconstructed an entire day; he had never once erred or faltered, but each reconstruction had itself taken an entire day. ‘I, myself, alone, have more memories than all mankind since the world began,’ he said to me. ... And again, toward dawn: My memory, sir, is like a garbage heap.” “Funes” (1942)
8
Why are you comparing your life to this author's? Each experience os personalized, and how we communicate it is up to us. You have just as much validation to judge as they do to encorporate themselves into the experience. You, however have no right to stop them from the experience. That would be worse than only having it YOUR way...
My family and I visited the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC. It was our first visit, although some of my family have been to Poland, and have made a pilgrimage to the sites of six death camps there.
If you've ever been to the Holocaust Museum, you understand what an emotional environment this is, even for a non-Jew like me. It feels sacred, a place to remember all the countless millions of innocent victims.
At one point, visitors enter the doors of a train car. . . But we can keep going, we can cross through. I thought of all the people who had been herded into "cattle cars" like this and then locked in, for days, with no food, water, or heat. Whose next destination was Auschwitz.
Suddenly, behind me, I saw a woman standing in the cattle car posing for a picture. Her arms were poised model-like, one hand on each side of the door, and she flashed a bright smile as her companion took pictures.
To this day, I wonder. . . What was she thinking???
If you've ever been to the Holocaust Museum, you understand what an emotional environment this is, even for a non-Jew like me. It feels sacred, a place to remember all the countless millions of innocent victims.
At one point, visitors enter the doors of a train car. . . But we can keep going, we can cross through. I thought of all the people who had been herded into "cattle cars" like this and then locked in, for days, with no food, water, or heat. Whose next destination was Auschwitz.
Suddenly, behind me, I saw a woman standing in the cattle car posing for a picture. Her arms were poised model-like, one hand on each side of the door, and she flashed a bright smile as her companion took pictures.
To this day, I wonder. . . What was she thinking???
21
She wasn't thinking. At all.
4
You ask what that couple was "thinking."
The simple answer is - they were not thinking.
This is an affliction for so many - especially notable among our young - who have been anesthetized by the choice of embracing their ignorance and allowing themselves to be addicted to the electronic fantasy world of social media that promotes the lie that living in such a world is adequate substitution for real human interaction and emotion.
The simple answer is - they were not thinking.
This is an affliction for so many - especially notable among our young - who have been anesthetized by the choice of embracing their ignorance and allowing themselves to be addicted to the electronic fantasy world of social media that promotes the lie that living in such a world is adequate substitution for real human interaction and emotion.
8
After getting smacked in the head and arm by other peoples' selfie sticks at the Louve last summer, I am in most decidedly in favor of a ban on these things in museums and other similar public spaces.
14
If you don't have anyone taking pictures of you and have to do it all yourtself now, why not call it a Lonely stick...or just a lonely.....
4
...or, think of it as the "pathetic" stick.
2
We are so full of ourselves. We need to stick these sticks.
11
I've been a photographer for over 40 years. Like a lot of photographers, I went through a phase of always carrying a camera, of feeling I had some sort of right to photograph anything I judged worthy of my time and film, and I had the hubris to believe that carrying a camera was some sort of license to step outside the bounds of good manners and privacy. Fortunately, that period was short. I believe there are times and places where a photograph is a great idea, however I also believe it is very important to put the camera away, and simply enjoy the moment. One of the dangers of photography is the self-inflicted wound of not being present. I see so many people with their cell phones missing an experience of simply being in a place and a time. Several years ago I was in a cafe in St. Petersburg, Russia. i watched a group of American teenage tourists walking past me. They were a tight group and each individual was snapping photos of each other with their cellphone or listening to music through their headset. It looked like a tiny bubble of America walking down the street. I though it was very sad. These kids were definitely in a Russian city, but their minds were still on Main Street back in the USA. I wish someone would have told them to put away the cellphones and music, listen to the city, and experience what was outside their bubble. Of course, there would be times to take some good photos, but there are also times to simply let the moment happen without recording devices.
27
I wish all camera use was prohibited in museums. It is annoying and intrusive.
27
I prefer museums where visitors can have an experience, not just document an experience. Or be almost run over by other visitors trying to document their selfish (oops, I mean "selfie") experiences.
Want the perfect selfie with any art? Find the image online, and simply insert yourself via any of the many available apps for this.
But no one's face, however gorgeous, ever adds anything to art.
Want the perfect selfie with any art? Find the image online, and simply insert yourself via any of the many available apps for this.
But no one's face, however gorgeous, ever adds anything to art.
11
Without a single incident we are now so worried about 2 foot sticks with cameras attached. Maybe we should ban shoes because someone might step on my toe and I will sue.
I can swing a 3 foot umbrella but not a 2 foot selfie stick? How does that make sense.
Stop worrying about things that are never going to happen. You're wasting your energy on something worthless.
I'm coming for you Hirschorn!
I can swing a 3 foot umbrella but not a 2 foot selfie stick? How does that make sense.
Stop worrying about things that are never going to happen. You're wasting your energy on something worthless.
I'm coming for you Hirschorn!
1
Bob, you lost me.
Unless you are fighting off art attackers, why would want to swing a "3 foot umbrella" inside a museum in the first place?
Unless you are fighting off art attackers, why would want to swing a "3 foot umbrella" inside a museum in the first place?
4
Never took a selfie and hopefully never will. The last thing I want is to ruin a beautiful picture of [insert the object of the lens' eye, from Yosemite Valley, the sun rising over the Atlantic, the Statue of Liberty, to any of my beautiful children just living life, etc.] with my mug. If I am to be in the picture, let someone else take it. It's not about me.
I took my daughter to one of Derek Jeter's last games at Yankee Stadium for a birthday gift. She had never been to a MLB game and was overwhelmed with the experience. After the game, many fans clustered behind the Yankees' dugout taking cell phone pictures. Not one was done in the name of selfie. Everyone was having fun asking others to take their pictures, with the dugout and the infield of Yankee Stadium as the back drop. We did the same (asked someone to take our picture) and eagerly took pictures of others. Everyone helping others out in this fashion added to the experience of the game - we talked, laughed and enjoyed the moment together. That all would have been lost if we had all resorted to "the stick."
I took my daughter to one of Derek Jeter's last games at Yankee Stadium for a birthday gift. She had never been to a MLB game and was overwhelmed with the experience. After the game, many fans clustered behind the Yankees' dugout taking cell phone pictures. Not one was done in the name of selfie. Everyone was having fun asking others to take their pictures, with the dugout and the infield of Yankee Stadium as the back drop. We did the same (asked someone to take our picture) and eagerly took pictures of others. Everyone helping others out in this fashion added to the experience of the game - we talked, laughed and enjoyed the moment together. That all would have been lost if we had all resorted to "the stick."
7
People seem to be less interested in actually doing things than they are in documenting them. I guess if it isn't on facebook then it didn't really happen...
13
Setting aside the subject of the selfie itself, please consider the effect of bright lights on photographs and etchings and engravings. If photocopiers and direct sun can badly damage the quality of a work, so can the even brighter shock of a flash camera.
7
I went to the Louvre and got a picture with Mr. Van Gogh while being very discreet. Now the photograph is on my wall and bring back lots of memory and thrill during the time in Paris.
JUST DON'T FLASH at the artworks.
Photography is fine, since i paid to come in the museum (not including air tickets, hotels, expensive food :)
JUST DON'T FLASH at the artworks.
Photography is fine, since i paid to come in the museum (not including air tickets, hotels, expensive food :)
What else do you believe your admission ticket entitles you to do?
3
Selfie sticks don't hurt people - people hurt people! :)
2
Selfie sticks are terrible things in museums, but even worse is people talking on their cell phones in the gallery. I was recently at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, iand a self-important man in a suit was pacing back and forth blabbing into his cellphone about IPO this, IPO that, strategy this, strategy that, blah, blah, blah, blah, and it was the first time in my life I decided that violence might actually be justified.
19
Doesn't anybody just "remember" things...?
12
If people just remembered things we wouldn't need cameras. Do you own one?
So. "Biking Bob, I am curious.
How do think people "remember" how to tie their shoes?
I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by using a sell phone camera to snap a "selfie," that is for sure.
How do think people "remember" how to tie their shoes?
I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by using a sell phone camera to snap a "selfie," that is for sure.
Before cameras, people indeed had memories of their experiences. Perhaps the origin of art, or diaries and journals...and a desire to write precious memories down. If all the cameras of the world suddenly vanished, humanity would carry on and be the better for it.
1
How about banning GoPros from public places while we're at it? I haven't seen them in museums yet--just a matter of time I am sure. They are just as invasive as Google Glass (which happily to me are disappearing from our public landscape).
2
Never apologize for a selfie. The history of art is full of them. Rembrandt alone did a dozen or more, and we crowd into galleries to compare the minute differences between them all.
It's far too easy, though, to imagine someone swinging a stick around and accidentally putting it right through a painting. This ban is reasonable.
It's far too easy, though, to imagine someone swinging a stick around and accidentally putting it right through a painting. This ban is reasonable.
7
I've visited plenty of museums and I don't think I have one picture of myself inside a museum. I don't think it even crossed my mind to have a picture taken in front of a work of art. "In my day" you went to the gift shop at the end of your visit and bought postcards of the masterpieces that moved you most.
I miss the days when you went to a museum to experience the art - not figure out the best way to post yourself on FB for everyone to see.
I miss the days when you went to a museum to experience the art - not figure out the best way to post yourself on FB for everyone to see.
17
A photo of any kind is a visual method of communication. The purpose of the photo, or what I want to communicate is "why" I take the photo.
So, be telling me, do the people taking selfies in museums actually look at the art?
5
It's too bad that we can no longer trust the our fellow museum goers. Back in the day we use to often help tourists take a photo in front of a famous background. No stick required, just a favor.
4
Like everyone else, I've seen the proliferation of selfie activity in public places. The urge to document is admirable, but I've noticed that the photographers invariably shoot pictures of the least interesting thing in the area.
2
"Like many people, I've often been conflicted about the choice between taking pictures during a journey and fully immersing myself in that journey by not worrying about taking pictures -- only grabbing them when some particularly beautiful or profound view presents itself."
I completely understand this quote from a previous commentator. The first time I visited Paris, some 30 years ago, I walked around 'framing' and taking pictures non-stop. On day three, my camera broke. For a while I was disconsolate; then I realized that the picture would always be in my mind's eye and walked around the city actually looking at it, rather than looking at it as one giant photo op.
I completely understand this quote from a previous commentator. The first time I visited Paris, some 30 years ago, I walked around 'framing' and taking pictures non-stop. On day three, my camera broke. For a while I was disconsolate; then I realized that the picture would always be in my mind's eye and walked around the city actually looking at it, rather than looking at it as one giant photo op.
11
Late last December, I took my son to the Museum of Natural History. We paid the traditional visit to the paleontology galleries after going through less crowded areas of the museeum: All the selfie sticks carriers were concentrated in the paleontology galleries (as the image in the article). The long legs and short arms of humans are distinctive for a primate, and the selfie carriers that congregated around the dinosaurs may be an indication that evolution needs to reverse to accommodate the selfie age.
5
Admittedly, it is (mostly) a generational thing, with this internet narcissistic generation invading museums of art like plagues of locusts. Yes, I understand the boards who say any publicity is good publicity, and tolerate the "selfies". So call me a curmudgeon from another generation who remembers music from a turntable and stylus (and 8 track tapes), and a time when you could quietly ponder a great work of art. So now one is forced to go to websites with authorized images of the great paintings and sculpture to quietly enjoy or risk being trampled by rude tourists (heavily from Asia it must accurately be said) with their cameras only interested in the snap and not the art.
Ban both these sticks and the taking of pictures, period. If these tourists object, it means they were never really interested in the great art in the first place, as many of us suspect.
Ban both these sticks and the taking of pictures, period. If these tourists object, it means they were never really interested in the great art in the first place, as many of us suspect.
7
Count me as one of those who is often irritated, if not outraged, by the plague of cell phone picture takers.
In museums those taking picture of the art, much less of themselves in front of the art, interfere, if not actually destroy, the viewing pleasure of others of us. In museums specific times for picture taking should be set aside, so the rest of us can time our viewing.
Even out of doors, in areas heavily frequented by tourists, for example Harvard Yard in Cambridge MA where I live, it can be difficult to pay your way along the paved pedestrian paths. I just keep on my own path and if I walk right in front of a photographer, they can just take another when I've gone by. I don't feel any need to let others' often mindless and heedless narcissism interfere with my path through the world. Of course, I give way on busy sidewalks and don't push my way through crowds, and when film was expensive, one waited for a photographer. But cell phone photographers….
In museums those taking picture of the art, much less of themselves in front of the art, interfere, if not actually destroy, the viewing pleasure of others of us. In museums specific times for picture taking should be set aside, so the rest of us can time our viewing.
Even out of doors, in areas heavily frequented by tourists, for example Harvard Yard in Cambridge MA where I live, it can be difficult to pay your way along the paved pedestrian paths. I just keep on my own path and if I walk right in front of a photographer, they can just take another when I've gone by. I don't feel any need to let others' often mindless and heedless narcissism interfere with my path through the world. Of course, I give way on busy sidewalks and don't push my way through crowds, and when film was expensive, one waited for a photographer. But cell phone photographers….
17
Have you seen anyone using a selfie pole on the NYC subway at rush hour? How about using the selfie pole in a really dangerous neighborhood, with bad guys in the background. Certainly, it must extend above the bed, when you're having a secret tryst. I understand the NBA will introduce selfie poles as part of the all star game dunking contest. Finally, how long before Billy Crystal would have come out as host of the Oscars carrying his own selfie pole. All the cast of SNL should carry selfie poles for one whole show.
7
So now the new museum signs will say, "Speak softly and do NOT carry a big stick."
13
How about, "Speak softly and do NOT be a ..."
7
I recently traveled abroad with a friend who acted as the designated photographer. Neither of us is very interested in looking at our old selves, and 95% of the photos were of just the lovely scenery. She's a painter with a great eye, and the shots were beautifully composed. Afterwards, when I shared the photos with someone who wanted to see them, due of the professional quality of the images he accused me of sending him stock photos from a website! Apparently when he asked to see pictures of our trip he was expecting to see us standing in front of the tree, the mountain, the car, the museum, the hotel, the hiking trail. Sad. And weird!
The selfie and its logical extension, the selfie stick, are symptoms of a fundamental change in the way people relate to the world around them. It's a wonderful and important step to ban the selfie stick in museums, even if the underlying impetus -- to be cognizant of one's surroundings and the ramifications of one's actions -- is becoming more and more archaic.
The selfie and its logical extension, the selfie stick, are symptoms of a fundamental change in the way people relate to the world around them. It's a wonderful and important step to ban the selfie stick in museums, even if the underlying impetus -- to be cognizant of one's surroundings and the ramifications of one's actions -- is becoming more and more archaic.
23
Whatever happened to asking a fellow tourist passing by to snap a quick pic for you? That was always a pleasant part of vacationing or sight seeing, and one could return the favor, for them or for someone else later on. Sometimes one struck up a conversation (even if it was just "Where are you from?" and pleasantries). Later at home when you saw the picture, you would think of those people, and briefly wonder about them and their lives.
Now you don't have to have a courteous interaction with your fellow traveler or museum-goer; selfie taking involves annoying rather than briefly bonding with the people around you.
Seems like "selfie sticks" solved a problem that didn't really exist and created new ones.
Now you don't have to have a courteous interaction with your fellow traveler or museum-goer; selfie taking involves annoying rather than briefly bonding with the people around you.
Seems like "selfie sticks" solved a problem that didn't really exist and created new ones.
12
Enough already of all these selfie-addicts, in museums & elsewhere! Sometimes one just wishes technology hadn't come up such a thoughtless banalization of image reproduction for little purpose other than self-promotion.
17
If the following dangers, from the article, are credible:
"If people are not paying attention in the Temple of Dendur, they can end up in the water... We have so many balconies you could fall from, and stairs you can trip on"
then let's not ban the selfie stick. Let's just wait for such people to fall off balconies and stairs. Maybe museums can help them by applying slippery grease on strategic areas. Maybe the museums can fund research projects which use state of the art machine learning algorithms to identify and predict those areas where these obnoxious people tend to congregate. And they can combine such locations with the maximum amount of danger involved, height of the fall, number of steps, crocodiles etc., to come up with optimized guidelines for the application of grease.
"If people are not paying attention in the Temple of Dendur, they can end up in the water... We have so many balconies you could fall from, and stairs you can trip on"
then let's not ban the selfie stick. Let's just wait for such people to fall off balconies and stairs. Maybe museums can help them by applying slippery grease on strategic areas. Maybe the museums can fund research projects which use state of the art machine learning algorithms to identify and predict those areas where these obnoxious people tend to congregate. And they can combine such locations with the maximum amount of danger involved, height of the fall, number of steps, crocodiles etc., to come up with optimized guidelines for the application of grease.
4
Yes and they are a.ready walking into lampposts. Tripping over curbs and walking in front of traffic because they cannot take their eyes off their phones for a second
3
ha ha ha. Good times. Good times indeed.
1
Up next: the National Selfies Museum then the National Selfies Wings of the Library of Congress... followed by journeys to the moon to store the world's precious and ever-growing Selfies Archives.
2
What I suspect many of us find disturbing is not the act of selfie-taking per se but what it represents: a self-absorbed approach to the world that tends to be lacking in awareness and aliveness. Personally, I find the example given in the article of the photographer of the dancer in a kimono much less invasive and more enlivening than the vision of being surrounding by a bunch of mindless selfie-snapping narcissists. If an activity wakes people up in a space devoted to waking people up--like an art gallery--I'm all for it. If the activity, like selfie-snapping, puts people to sleep, that seems to be a problem.
12
Jeff Koons and selfies: both are shallow and self-aggrandizing, a perfect match.
2
I was in the Louvre sitting in front of a gigantic Rubens, all alone, in a vast room. I heard noises behind me and turned so see two Chinese tourists making gestures for me to vacate the bench given that I was interfering with their photo of the Rubens. I said "NO!" They were shocked. I turned around and continued to do that which I had come to Paris to do, view the art.
28
It's sad that we've reached a point in so-called civilization where people have such a weak sense of self (and such a huge sense of entitlement) that if they don't have a photo of themselves doing something, it's as if they never did it.
Further, in a museum setting, selfie-seekers physically block other people from being able to see the art. I'm not in a museum to wait around for the selfie-hordes to decide when they'll get out of the way to allow me to view the art - it is disrespectful of other people's time to stand in front of the art to take a selfie. Museums are crowded enough as it is.
Some of us are still able to go to museums and look at the art: to FOCUS on the art. And in doing so, we can LOSE ourselves in the art. Taking a selfie in a museum is the antithesis of this experience; it demands an exquisitely narcissistic mind-set that sees the amazing creations of artists across the centuries as mere "wallpaper" for documenting one's own minor peregrinations.
If you NEED to take a selfie to confirm your existence, please stay home, and get out of the way of those who are actually there to see and appreciate the art.
Further, in a museum setting, selfie-seekers physically block other people from being able to see the art. I'm not in a museum to wait around for the selfie-hordes to decide when they'll get out of the way to allow me to view the art - it is disrespectful of other people's time to stand in front of the art to take a selfie. Museums are crowded enough as it is.
Some of us are still able to go to museums and look at the art: to FOCUS on the art. And in doing so, we can LOSE ourselves in the art. Taking a selfie in a museum is the antithesis of this experience; it demands an exquisitely narcissistic mind-set that sees the amazing creations of artists across the centuries as mere "wallpaper" for documenting one's own minor peregrinations.
If you NEED to take a selfie to confirm your existence, please stay home, and get out of the way of those who are actually there to see and appreciate the art.
26
This is pretty unbelievable--narcissism knows no boundaries. It used to be that tourists photographed the works of art or sculptures (if permitted)--just the works, to include in their digital photo libraries.
But Ellen DeGeneris's proclamation of the "selfie" at the Oscars a few years launched this--I can't call it any other adjective--obnoxious habit of photographing oneself or with friends every where the photographer goes.
Which really includes everywhere now. I think FaceBook, with its one-upsmanship culture had really turned what was once a charming memory into a nonstop cascade of self-congratulatory poses designed to show the world how much money one has (to travel to famous places) or how lucky one is or how cool one is.
I'm glad museums filled with precious objects are banning the sticks. Too bad they can't ban the entire habit itself.
But Ellen DeGeneris's proclamation of the "selfie" at the Oscars a few years launched this--I can't call it any other adjective--obnoxious habit of photographing oneself or with friends every where the photographer goes.
Which really includes everywhere now. I think FaceBook, with its one-upsmanship culture had really turned what was once a charming memory into a nonstop cascade of self-congratulatory poses designed to show the world how much money one has (to travel to famous places) or how lucky one is or how cool one is.
I'm glad museums filled with precious objects are banning the sticks. Too bad they can't ban the entire habit itself.
12
And just remember that after using the Kardashian stick in the venues you are visiting you visit a nearby restaurant where everybody sticks their face in their own smartphones trying to determine how many likes they have been gifted with since their narcissistic photo opportunity at the museum was posted and while ignoring any opportunity to actually discuss their art experience with others at the dinning table.
5
@JoeD: you got it. Welcome to those in love with self all day, all the time, totally oblivious to the needs of others or their feelings. The New Narcissism is leading to ever worse drivers whose entitled cutting you off as if you were a leaf in the way of their roaring engines is leading to needless accidents. America is suddenly among the most selfish, self-absorbed set of citizens in the world.
5
Christine -- the narcissism you refer to is neither new, nor is there anything "suddenly" about it. Re: Christopher Lasch's [The Culture of Narcissism] written in 1979, and he was a bit late to the fair. Example: look at the history of the conquest of the West, the railroads, etc.
We are merely commenting on the most recent manifestation on an individual level. Technology has always, and everywhere, attached itself to narcissism, whether we be Americans, Germans, Japanese, whatever.
We are merely commenting on the most recent manifestation on an individual level. Technology has always, and everywhere, attached itself to narcissism, whether we be Americans, Germans, Japanese, whatever.
1
How about this-just be normal and ask someone to snap a photo of you. This whole selfie stick thing just reinforces the current reliance on technology and devices, that we cannot seem to be without for even a second, which is creating a vast chasm amongst interpersonal relationships and the ability to say hello to the person standing right next to you.
3
Just the two words alone, 'selfie stick', make me cringe.
11
Thank you Metropolitan, the adults have spoken.
13
It is a little silly that so many people do not want to interact, with the art they are witnessing, the destinations they are traveling too nor the people they may not know who are around them. Instead it's take a quick shot of themselves, to show that they's seen something been somewhere, almost to prove to themselves that they had an experience ... oh yes, and don't forget, most importantly post it on social media, so "friends" and strangers can validate your life for you.
12
Well that should drive away kids. Another bright idea from the get off my lawn crowd, which I am embarrassed to say sorts by age.
2
Or it might cause (your?) kids to finally grow up and act like socially appropriate adults finally at 28 years old.
4
The first and last time I was nearly kicked out of the Whitney was when I made a call on my cell phone. I thought at the time, one can converse with a friend while looking at the art, so why not quietly on a phone?
Now I realize that it is simply a question of respect and deference to the artwork and those around you. Cell phones are banned with good reason.
Selfies are no different, really. Instead of engaging with and reflecting on a physical reality, you are using a technological device to interact with a digital virtual world of your own self-reflective imagination. You then puncture that visceral experience for others around you.
Now I realize that it is simply a question of respect and deference to the artwork and those around you. Cell phones are banned with good reason.
Selfies are no different, really. Instead of engaging with and reflecting on a physical reality, you are using a technological device to interact with a digital virtual world of your own self-reflective imagination. You then puncture that visceral experience for others around you.
13
People who feel the need to use selfie sticks are, for the most part, acting in an anti-social way and depriving themselves of a nice experience, i.e. meeting another art-loving person. Save the $ on the stick and try asking a stranger to take your picture, it's more rewarding. Gives a chance to crawl out of the insulated smartphone world they live in.
9
I am happy that I have seen the museums (most) that I wanted to see. I need not go again. Only once did they stop me from taking pictures and that was part of the permanent collection of the National Gallery and was next to a traveling exhibit. But I will be happy to avoid these rules in the future.
1
I wish photography were banned in all museums. If you want a picture of what you've experienced go to the gift shop and buy some post cards or a book. Put the camera away and just take it in while you're there. It'll be better for you and for everyone around you. I almost can't stand going to museums anymore.
17
And those books have far better photography than anything you take while in the museum!
2
I wish other institutions would ban this item as well. We went ice skating at Rockefeller Center this winter, and morons with selfie sticks were a literal danger to themselves and others. People who were not remotely skilled ice skaters were waving these sticks around on crowded ice, surrounded by children and other wobbly beginner skaters, completely oblivious to their surroundings. The folks who stopped their entire party in the main ice lane for regular photos, blocking the circuit for the rest of the 150 skaters, were bad enough. The sticks took the obsessive selfishness to a whole new level - sometimes they were videotaping, so they would have the sticks held out around them for whole circuits of the ice. I narrowly missed collisions a number of times and I'm reasonably sure of myself on skates. Kudos to these museums for taking a stand that will improve the experience for many other visitors!
18
Disney World has solved this problem. There are designated "Picture Taking Spots". Others have commented that art museums should ban photography--and provide reproductions in designated areas for those less interested in looking at "art" than they are at looking at themselves.
Crowded museums of any kind offer an unpleasant experience. If "selfies" must be part of going to a museum for some, then providing special tours with stops for "selfies" would seem to be the crowd-pleasing and revenue raising answer.
Crowded museums of any kind offer an unpleasant experience. If "selfies" must be part of going to a museum for some, then providing special tours with stops for "selfies" would seem to be the crowd-pleasing and revenue raising answer.
4
Then there is the problem of theft, is there not?
The incidence of snatch and run with a persons cell phone has become significant. How much easier will it be with the phone dangling on the end of a four foot stick?
But I must admit, having just heard of these things recently, I'm more envious of the folks that thought this up and sold the first one. More utilitarian then a pet rock, with more ubiquitous appeal then a hola hoop, too bad it is as easy to duplicate but I'm sure someone is making a fortune.
The incidence of snatch and run with a persons cell phone has become significant. How much easier will it be with the phone dangling on the end of a four foot stick?
But I must admit, having just heard of these things recently, I'm more envious of the folks that thought this up and sold the first one. More utilitarian then a pet rock, with more ubiquitous appeal then a hola hoop, too bad it is as easy to duplicate but I'm sure someone is making a fortune.
3
Most people don't know that camera flashes can damage painting and drawings. Think about the old hose with its pealing, dull paint. The same thing can happen to priceless paintings. No one should use a flash inside a museum. Unfortunately, most people ignore the no flash rule, even after being reminded by a docent.
Selfies cause inconvenience to the other patrons. Why, you ask? Because one is not enough. People monopolize a great painting in order to get the perfect selfie. What is wrong with asking another patron to take the photo for you?
Selfies cause inconvenience to the other patrons. Why, you ask? Because one is not enough. People monopolize a great painting in order to get the perfect selfie. What is wrong with asking another patron to take the photo for you?
2
Good points, Jeff. But great paintings are invariably monopolized by: groups on a tour with a docent explaining a painting; folks pausing to listen to the audio tour; and students on an outing. To optimize your viewing experience, go towards the beginning of a blockbuster show's tenure - or when no such show is on; go early in the morning; go on a day when kiddie tours aren't scheduled.
1
"Most people don't know that camera flashes can damage painting and drawings."
This is because it is a myth, or with today's body of knowledge, a lie. The director of conservation, Mervin Richard, was previously quoted by the Times:
"Mervin Richard, chief of conservation at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, which has long permitted flash photography, said he had personally examined studies of the effects of light exposure on art and concluded there was little risk. Fears that flashes damage art, he said, are left over 'from the days when people used flashbulbs, which could actually explode.'"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/arts/artsspecial/art-museums-photograp...
This the more egregious, as this fact is known for many decades, that (even non-UV-filtered) flash do not damage pigments more than normal light, the dominant exposure in museums. The 1995 report "Photographic flash: threat or nuisance?" by D. Saunders, the (London) National Gallery, cites pigment studies/measurements back to 1979, namely using powerful studio flashes, that are non-UV-filtered, unlike what today's visitor would carry around.
This is because it is a myth, or with today's body of knowledge, a lie. The director of conservation, Mervin Richard, was previously quoted by the Times:
"Mervin Richard, chief of conservation at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, which has long permitted flash photography, said he had personally examined studies of the effects of light exposure on art and concluded there was little risk. Fears that flashes damage art, he said, are left over 'from the days when people used flashbulbs, which could actually explode.'"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/arts/artsspecial/art-museums-photograp...
This the more egregious, as this fact is known for many decades, that (even non-UV-filtered) flash do not damage pigments more than normal light, the dominant exposure in museums. The 1995 report "Photographic flash: threat or nuisance?" by D. Saunders, the (London) National Gallery, cites pigment studies/measurements back to 1979, namely using powerful studio flashes, that are non-UV-filtered, unlike what today's visitor would carry around.
1
In my day, if you wanted a picture of yourself you had to draw it. You kids take your fancy cameras and sticks and get off my lawn.
9
When I read the headline, I thought the rule was imposed to preserve an appropriate, thoughtful mood. Museums are places where people contemplate thought-provoking works of art or relics from the past. Selfie sticks turn those places into something else. The effect would be like a football team holding a scrimmage in a yoga class. Has society gone so far backwards that people need a photo of themselves in front of places to know that they were there? Does everyone need an alibi in case they're accused of some crime that took place while they were viewing the "Mona Lisa"?
9
All museums should have one day a week in which no photos are allowed at all. Perhaps some people will wait to go on the days photos are allowed, and the rest of us will have breathing room.
6
I don't understand or perceive the conflict of using a camera to permanently capture in some media an image or experience. Photography has been a common feature of our culture for over a hundred years.
However, I question the need for a device to take a picture in an environment filled with human beings who understand and appreciate the practice. What ever happened to asking another visitor or patron to operate the camera?
However, I question the need for a device to take a picture in an environment filled with human beings who understand and appreciate the practice. What ever happened to asking another visitor or patron to operate the camera?
3
I'm definitely in favor of the ban (and maybe in other places that are either crowded or contemplative or both, too). If it's really important to have a photo, ask a passerby. Another question to ask is whether you actually need to be in the photo--if you are photographing a work of art, the photograph might be enhanced by your absence.
6
I must live within a bubble. I had no idea this device existed. Nor did I have any idea that selfless were such a large part of emerging culture. I wonder: Some years ago (way before the digital age) I wanted a photo of myself to send to a friend in another state. So I set my film camera on a tripod and, using the self timer, I took the photo. Was that a selfie?
2
The Wand of Narcissism. Got a good chuckle from that.
4
normally extend to other people. This is why using them while driving is generally banned--or should be. Hands-free--whether for talking or shooting selfies--doesn’t matter; because, whether you have a selfie stick, or are holding any device at arm’s length, your mind is then extended “out there”--and not where it should be.
I believe that there is much more potential for injury, discourtesy and damage or other things/people, than what is covered by this article. For instance: using a selfie stick while driving around mountainous landscapes; swinging them around while walking on city streets or in malls; leaning over balconies for that “perfect shot”; etc. And what about the legal ramifications of a sophisticated photographer who takes successive photos and later creates 3-D versions of artwork or monuments--perhaps for sale?
The point about “your space” and “my space” is well taken. Just go to any theme part. As you are starting to walk, there is a family taking a picture; so, you stand back. And then, you realize that they are disorganized: someone needs to straighten their hat; a child has a runny nose; someone steps out of view, etc. After waiting several minutes, you decide to walk in front of the photographer, since they left no room behind them. Well, that’s when he/she snaps the perfect close-up photo of your derriere. So, they scowl at you, as you walk away, for ruining their Perfect” Family Portrait.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
I believe that there is much more potential for injury, discourtesy and damage or other things/people, than what is covered by this article. For instance: using a selfie stick while driving around mountainous landscapes; swinging them around while walking on city streets or in malls; leaning over balconies for that “perfect shot”; etc. And what about the legal ramifications of a sophisticated photographer who takes successive photos and later creates 3-D versions of artwork or monuments--perhaps for sale?
The point about “your space” and “my space” is well taken. Just go to any theme part. As you are starting to walk, there is a family taking a picture; so, you stand back. And then, you realize that they are disorganized: someone needs to straighten their hat; a child has a runny nose; someone steps out of view, etc. After waiting several minutes, you decide to walk in front of the photographer, since they left no room behind them. Well, that’s when he/she snaps the perfect close-up photo of your derriere. So, they scowl at you, as you walk away, for ruining their Perfect” Family Portrait.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
6
At the age of 80 I decided recently to spare my relatives and friends from wading through all my photos and get rid of the meaningless ones myself. The shots without me or someone else in them were kind of meaningless and I threw out tons of them. Those shots, and better ones than the ones I took, were available online if one only googled whatever location I had photographed. The ones which were personal - were the ones which were irreplaceable. It's not just about being a narcissist - it's also about being intimate.
4
Is it that difficult to ask someone to take a picture of you? I've been asked many many times -- frequently in languages I don't speak. I pride myself on my aura of curmudgeonliness, but even I am willing to take nineteen seconds out of my day to snap a picture of someone.
3
I'm with the museums banning these silly things. It's part of the same self-indulgent mentality that makes a $10,000 photo shoot of a wedding seem like chump change. We should not be encouraging narcissism, cheap or obscene.
7
It was so nice viewing the Basquiat exhibit at the Art Gallery of Ontario yesterday sans selfie-taking hordes (as photography was not permitted).
3
The level of narcissism with all these selfies it is out of control. Nothing wrong with taking pictures of you to remember. But the continuous Trashdashian of narcissism is sickening. Invading the space and ruining experiences of others never are considered.
Part of the problem with all this technology usage is the lack of respect to others as well as lack of been in touch via talking in person etc.
Part of the problem with all this technology usage is the lack of respect to others as well as lack of been in touch via talking in person etc.
3
Having just walked around Times Square to show my wife the "sites," I was amazed at the proliferation of the "selfie stick." What a great idea. But, not havin' one, we had to resort to the time tested "askin' a fellow tourist" to take our photo. And then we had to "talk' to them. Ugh. And then they ran away with the camera. "Hey" I yelled after them, "e-mail me the pics?" (That didn't happen and I ain't worried that it would). But the deal is the selfie stick is just one more tool we have so as not to interact with "other" people. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
1
We used to joke about gaggles of Japanese tourists with their Nikons, taking a million pictures and never actually BEING in the place they were visiting. Now, everyone's a Japanese tourist, more interested in a picture of themselves in Paris than in Paris. And the selfie-stick? Don't get me started....
7
Hooray. People who wanted their picture taken on vacation used to engage in the delightful social phenomenon of asking a stranger to take the picture. Who knows...it might even lead to a face-to-face encounter with someone you don't know and who is...wait for it...different from the people with whom you surround yourself everyday. Oh, horrors!
5
Anyone taking photos in an art museum probably doesn't belong in an art museum. Most museums now have online catalogs of their works, which makes photo taking for learning purposes pretty much unnecessary. Photos should be allowed by special permit only.
5
It is called “memory shots.” People like to photograph themselves with a famous backdrop. The Statue of Liberty, the downtown skyline from the foot of Montigue Street or Old Fulton Street. Photography is different with the digital camera. In the 1950's when I was first interested in photography my older brother bought me a 35mm camera and as I got older I carried a bag with a big Nikon, a flash gun, filters, various lenses a folding tripod, etc. Now I have a Nikon that does everything and fits in a shirt pocket and it is no deal to get close to my wife and take a selfie. Museums should provide a space where there are photo backdrops of certain galleries where a guard will be glad to snap a pix which can be viewed then and there and no one will be the wiser and the art remains safe.
As to those who sit and sketch that is one function of the museum to educate artists. When my granddaughter was 6, we took her to the Met where there was a sketch artist, and old man, who she watched and asked how he could do that. He said patience, patience and patience. My granddaughter, now 19 has studied art, is a fine sketch artist and wants to be a professional artist and for her sophomore year she is studying in Japan and her drawings as quite impressive and no doubt requires patience.
As to those who sit and sketch that is one function of the museum to educate artists. When my granddaughter was 6, we took her to the Met where there was a sketch artist, and old man, who she watched and asked how he could do that. He said patience, patience and patience. My granddaughter, now 19 has studied art, is a fine sketch artist and wants to be a professional artist and for her sophomore year she is studying in Japan and her drawings as quite impressive and no doubt requires patience.
14
Selfies, cell phones, whatevers, are nuisances and should be banned from all museums. concert halls, and restaurants at a minimum. If you are so implressed with yourself, carry a mirror. And by the way, cars too.
11
“If people are not paying attention in the Temple of Dendur, they can end up in the water with the crocodile sculpture"
Excellent! Darwin would argue that this is natural selection in motion.
Excellent! Darwin would argue that this is natural selection in motion.
9
There is no good reason for people to be so offended by this. This sort of nay saying to any new form of social interaction really baffles me and irritates me. Get over it and let people enjoy their photos!
2
This is not social interaction. It is self agrandizement. The operative word here is SELFIE. And by the way, I do not want to dodge their poles or be inadvertantly in their picture.
4
This "selfie" business is all the media's fault. In their pursuit to avoid large issues their master don't want them to cover we get trivialized "news". Some kid takes his/her own picture and calls it a childish name where it should have ended as no big deal. But the media had just had to make the word "selfie" a social event. As long as the irresponsible media continues to make the word selfie a celebrity we will have to put up with a new self centered generation.
4
I guess damaging priceless paintings and disruptive the pleasure others take in viewing wondrous pieces of art takes a back seat these days to selfish yahoos who feel the urge to snap a photo of themselves anytime, anywhere.
And you wonder why some of us have real fears for our civilization and planet when we have so many that mindlessly snap selfies share the same mentality of those who think nothing of driving in earth-killing SUVs, living in McMansion homes or voting GOP, Libertarian or any other backward political party.
All of which can be succinctly put in the following:
The needs of the one always outweigh the needs of the many.
And you wonder why some of us have real fears for our civilization and planet when we have so many that mindlessly snap selfies share the same mentality of those who think nothing of driving in earth-killing SUVs, living in McMansion homes or voting GOP, Libertarian or any other backward political party.
All of which can be succinctly put in the following:
The needs of the one always outweigh the needs of the many.
7
Does Noah Rastheta (see excerpt from article, below) realize he is making the same argument that is made against gun control? And we see how well that works! The point is, we cannot separate the user from the device or tool.
Noah Rasheta, whose photographic accessories company, iStabilizer, has produced 150,000 selfie sticks since 2011, said, “It’s not the product that’s at fault, it’s the behavior of the people using it.”
Noah Rasheta, whose photographic accessories company, iStabilizer, has produced 150,000 selfie sticks since 2011, said, “It’s not the product that’s at fault, it’s the behavior of the people using it.”
1
So to a generation today, museums containing their wondrous works of art are now mere background material for some narcissistic need to take selfies every time they turn around?
Museums are a place we go to look at the art, enjoy the beauty of it. They're not just some backdrop for your Facebook or Instagram accounts. Try for a little less narcissism and you might enjoy your surroundings more. The rest of us will enjoy not having to see you take pictures of yourselves every step you take! Sometimes it shouldn't be all about you.
Museums are a place we go to look at the art, enjoy the beauty of it. They're not just some backdrop for your Facebook or Instagram accounts. Try for a little less narcissism and you might enjoy your surroundings more. The rest of us will enjoy not having to see you take pictures of yourselves every step you take! Sometimes it shouldn't be all about you.
5
Personally, I think that comments are just a digital, intellectual (or anti-intellectual?) selfie.
The age of narcissism is upon us in all of its forms. ...and the decline of civilization continues.
The age of narcissism is upon us in all of its forms. ...and the decline of civilization continues.
1
I don't think I would agree. Lots of times, the comments are better than the article. Many people claim that they never even read the article but go directly to the comment section. Unfortunately, on the other hand, it is too often painfully obvious that a commentor has not read the article and is simply regurgetating apocryphal misinformation for a political agenda with the view that telling a small lie often enough will make it true.
2
Was a time when you would see a pair of tourists in NYC and they would take single shots of themselves but what they wanted was a shot of the two of them.
I would see these folks aound town and I would always ask, "would you like a picture of the two of you?" The smiles of appreciation were enormous, there was a quick conversation with strangers from across the planet, and always a warm, "thank you" after the pose and the picture.
Brief encounters of this type are less and less common and I miss those moments.
I would see these folks aound town and I would always ask, "would you like a picture of the two of you?" The smiles of appreciation were enormous, there was a quick conversation with strangers from across the planet, and always a warm, "thank you" after the pose and the picture.
Brief encounters of this type are less and less common and I miss those moments.
4
Bravo for you, Victor. We always offer, too. Recently we took some shots of a family from Miami - originally from Ecuador - visiting the Bay Area. The kids had selfie sticks but their photos weren't as good as ours. They were thrilled when we texted the Mom our shots.
2
Look at us! Aren't we awesome! Aren't we rich enough to travel! Aren't we self-absorbed! I say keep the sticks, but use them the way the nuns used to......
9
As vicious and pointless corporal punishment devices? Or as a method for instilling fear in those who resist the arrogance of fundamentalism? Please be more specific about the perfidious violence you are advocating.
1
It's the Me Generation, Part 2.
8
I watched a couple use a selfie-stick to photograph themselves in a hiking sort of park yesterday. There were people around who surely would have taken their picture for them, if they'd asked, and no one would have run away with their phone. When you're on vacation, that can make for a nice conversation starter, too.
8
Art gallery, shmart gallery, isn't it always everywhere about ME 24/7/365?
6
"Institutions including the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden have begun to adopt rules against this enhanced form of picture taking."
NY Times - I absolutely love that you have coined the phrase "enhanced form of picture taking." Well done.
NY Times - I absolutely love that you have coined the phrase "enhanced form of picture taking." Well done.
2
It`s not the stick. It`s the self important twit with the "I must be connected to my 500 friends at all times" attitude and their ever present stupid phone.
No not a smart phone because there is nothing smart about a device that renders the user oblivious to most everything around them. I pass people everyday with their heads constantly down, looking for validation in an electronic connection while I partake in the world around me and all it has to offer. Cell phones are prohibited from being used in my home. These public places should do the same. Times do change. Once people checked their coat and hat at the door. It`s time to check the phone.
No not a smart phone because there is nothing smart about a device that renders the user oblivious to most everything around them. I pass people everyday with their heads constantly down, looking for validation in an electronic connection while I partake in the world around me and all it has to offer. Cell phones are prohibited from being used in my home. These public places should do the same. Times do change. Once people checked their coat and hat at the door. It`s time to check the phone.
17
Whenever I read stories about Uber, AirBnB and such things, young people are always quoted that it's all about meeting other people. Travel is about meeting other people, the cab you take is about meeting other people, the place you stay is about meeting other people.
So why can't they just ask someone to take their photo? Think of the people they'll meet!
So why can't they just ask someone to take their photo? Think of the people they'll meet!
52
Would you give your iPhone to someone in the middle of a crowded museum to take your picture? "Back a little further....further...further..." and they're gone. Good luck with that one...
Alan: yes I would. Absolutely. How far do you think someone in a museum who stole your phone would get? Especially in a crowded museum? I'll wager that your scenario is one that has never happened.
1
Regardless of any personal preference, this is still quite a bit safer than what's happening at ski resorts, when skiers/snowboards use these devices to take video of themselves going down the slope. It's one thing if they happen to be expert riders/skiers, another when they clearly are not. The distractions create too many close calls.
All issues with selfies aside, I'm surprised these devices are let into galleries to begin with. Here in the DC area, allowed items have been pretty restricted for years.
All issues with selfies aside, I'm surprised these devices are let into galleries to begin with. Here in the DC area, allowed items have been pretty restricted for years.
4
Here's an idea:
As our culture increasingly asks if our experiences are excessively contaminated by electronic devices, why doesn't an innovative museum set aside a celebratory event like one day a month banning ALL electronic devices?
I wonder what that would be like?
As our culture increasingly asks if our experiences are excessively contaminated by electronic devices, why doesn't an innovative museum set aside a celebratory event like one day a month banning ALL electronic devices?
I wonder what that would be like?
6
After hours of soul-searching I may have come up with a logical solution to the use of selfie sticks by visitors to our museums.
Why not hire additional staff who will then carefully photograph visitors for a small fee?
The proceeds will then go towards hiring the additional help and providing them with the opportunity to purchase a franchise, similar to taxicab drivers who purchase their medallion.
The cost will vary depending upon how many non-selfies (new dictionary entry?)
are taken and the time of day. There will be a discount for seniors, students, newly-married couples, and those who are reconciling rather than divorcing.
Btw, Valentine's Day photos will cost you double!
Why not hire additional staff who will then carefully photograph visitors for a small fee?
The proceeds will then go towards hiring the additional help and providing them with the opportunity to purchase a franchise, similar to taxicab drivers who purchase their medallion.
The cost will vary depending upon how many non-selfies (new dictionary entry?)
are taken and the time of day. There will be a discount for seniors, students, newly-married couples, and those who are reconciling rather than divorcing.
Btw, Valentine's Day photos will cost you double!
4
Virtually every selfie I've seen is of the person taking it. 99% of the photo is head and shoulders with 1% being an out-of-focus background. How anyone can tell if any one photo was taken in Rome, Paris, Budapest or Des Moines ten years from now is a mystery.
7
“It’s not the product that’s at fault, it’s the behavior of the people using it.”
Hahahahahahaha. Regardless of how this is viewed, banning selfie sticks results in no such behavior. Banning the behavior does not.
Hahahahahahaha. Regardless of how this is viewed, banning selfie sticks results in no such behavior. Banning the behavior does not.
3
While I have seen few selfie sticks used in the US, they were carried and used frequently by most of the younger tourists in Paris this past fall - to the point that we worried about getting hit by one.
I have always wondered about the purpose of traveling simply to have one's photo taken in front of every site. Who wants to see endless photos of the same person(s)?
I have always wondered about the purpose of traveling simply to have one's photo taken in front of every site. Who wants to see endless photos of the same person(s)?
11
me, me, me. look at me!
pretty boring.....
pretty boring.....
11
My wife and I tour the Greek Islands last summer and took hundreds of pictures of ourselves in the breathtaking surroundings. Many of these shots wouldn't have been possible without a so called "selfie stick" (I call it a handheld monopod). I get tired of asking strangers to take our pictures and often there's no one available. When retracted we used the stick to steady the camera in shots without us or simply to hold the camera. Wonderful and useful invention.
4
Frankly, I think most of us would rather see only the photos of "breathtaking" vistas and not those of self-absorbed couples using such vistas as a cheap backdrop....
6
Hey, some of us take pictures of the art because we like it and want to keep it, use it for a home screen, show it to friends, have a memento.
The misanthropes who think it is only about "selfies" have missed the bigger picture. I thank the NYT for making it clear that photography in museums is good for the patron and the museum both.
The misanthropes who think it is only about "selfies" have missed the bigger picture. I thank the NYT for making it clear that photography in museums is good for the patron and the museum both.
10
"... use it for a home screen ..."
Would you use a selfie as a background image on your computer?
Would you use a selfie as a background image on your computer?
1
You do know you can find better photos of almost every piece of art in any museum online, don't you?
4
What may be good for the "patron" taking a selfie in front of the Mona Lisa may not be good for the other "patrons" around him or her.
3
The important thing really, is that these folks have come to the museum/gallery because they know it is something important. Probably they want to share their experience with friends who are not there. Perhaps they want to show the pix to someone who can never get there but will be thrilled to know that their friend, son, grandchild, neighbor, whoever, DID get to make the visit & remembered their yearning to do the same. Yes, it may be annoying to some of the other visitors. I understand for some a museum is like a church is to others, but everyone is welcome there too.
Isn't the point of a museum or cultural attraction to see what's in there and not to look into one's phone?
9
Nothing really new here- this is emblematic of how people are choosing to experience nearly EVERYTHING these days. Every experience is defined by how it will add to the individual's facebook "resume". When will it end???
7
A hundred years ago or so I joined the Peace Corps and made a very conscious decision not to bring a camera. I didn't want a machine between me and the world and knew there would be so many things to photograph that I would never stop. So I left the camera at home.
10
Considering that many cultures view photo taking with suspicion that was a very wise and considerate decision.
2
Like many people, I've often been conflicted about the choice between taking pictures during a journey and fully immersing myself in that journey by not worrying about taking pictures -- only grabbing them when some particularly beatiful or profound view presents itself.
Taking selfies? This reminds me of what an old mentor once told me about public speaking: Always keep in mind that the person in the room most interested in what you are saying is you, by far. If you like looking at pictures of yourself, selfie stick away! If you take pictures to show others what you experienced, don't bore them to death.
Taking selfies? This reminds me of what an old mentor once told me about public speaking: Always keep in mind that the person in the room most interested in what you are saying is you, by far. If you like looking at pictures of yourself, selfie stick away! If you take pictures to show others what you experienced, don't bore them to death.
32
In the old days a "selfie" was something you did in private--. Then it went public. Now it's gone public in museums. What's next--wakes and funerals?
4
my first thought was that people wanting to sneak taking pictures in museums which prohibit taking them would have some problems.....
1
I could never figure out why some places ban photography. To improve sales of their picture postcards? These sticks are just another manifestation of the narcissism that seems to have engulfed certain segments of our society. Harmless but dismaying.
The good thing about museum goers doing nothing but trophy-photo hunting is that those of us who still enjoy communing with the art can stand one step further away from a painting than cell phone camera range, and just let the river of tourists flow by in front of us, never worrying that anyone will pause between us and the painting any longer than the time it takes to click the shutter.
2
How about getting rid of the audio tours as well? People with their heads down fiddling with the headphones, the controls, their cell phones; it's all obnoxious. Go study the art on line or go to the library if you want that kind of experience. Or do what the Peabody Essex Museum, Salem, MA did during the JW Turner exhibit last year; show a film prior to the exhibit explaining the featured artist's work. It was wonderful.
10
Even better would be to ban cameras altogether. Patrons who expect everyone around them in a crowded museum to stand out of the way of their photograph clearly miss the point of a museum. A museum visit is a series of ephemeral experiences with many works of art. A patron should be allowed to ignore or study a work for as long as they wish. Do you really need a photograph of a painting? Do you really think that anyone wants to look at your picture of some famous painting when they can look at a book or a website and see a far better-quality photo?
16
Good. Enforce religiously.
8
With people taking all these pictures,. who has the time or desire to look at them? Also I always thought a selfie caused you to go crazy.
1
I personally hate all selfies, let alone selfie sticks. I mean REALLY hate them.
On the other hand, unless there was a significant number of actual incidents of damage to museum property from the sticks, this is a pretentious rule, probably made by people like me, but, apparently, with their noses a little higher in the air. Museum's are tourists attractions and tourists (who no doubt spend millions there) should not be looked down on spending only seconds on some works and lingering at others and talking their picture with them (especially when you happily take their money). Most people are not so fortunate to spend such much time in a place like New York, no matter what their degree their love of art, to appreciate it like "Art lovers" do. They want a picture with them in front of their favorite painting. Shocker. Certainly, the stick infringes on personal space, but having another person take your picture infringes even more as everyone avoids getting into the shot. Instead of two feet or person space consumed, it is 8.
Banning it or not banning it doesn't matter much to me personally, the world will not end and there will be no fewer tourists, but lets not pretend this is about this art, not about the views and experiences of a higher class of patrons and donors to these institutions.
On the other hand, unless there was a significant number of actual incidents of damage to museum property from the sticks, this is a pretentious rule, probably made by people like me, but, apparently, with their noses a little higher in the air. Museum's are tourists attractions and tourists (who no doubt spend millions there) should not be looked down on spending only seconds on some works and lingering at others and talking their picture with them (especially when you happily take their money). Most people are not so fortunate to spend such much time in a place like New York, no matter what their degree their love of art, to appreciate it like "Art lovers" do. They want a picture with them in front of their favorite painting. Shocker. Certainly, the stick infringes on personal space, but having another person take your picture infringes even more as everyone avoids getting into the shot. Instead of two feet or person space consumed, it is 8.
Banning it or not banning it doesn't matter much to me personally, the world will not end and there will be no fewer tourists, but lets not pretend this is about this art, not about the views and experiences of a higher class of patrons and donors to these institutions.
12
So get a party balloon:
If 4 grams of helium occupies the same volume as 28.5 grams of air and you neglect the insignificant volume of the iPhone you will concur that it takes 4 grams of helium to lift each ounce of iPhone to a selfie-positive altitude.
Depending on ambient temperature and air pressure at the time of selfie-capture you will need a mylar balloon with about 24 grams of helium in it to provide lift for the 178 gram iPhone 6.
The ballon volume needed to create the desired amount of lift can be determined by using this simple formula:
V= 4/3 x (value of pi) x r x r x r , where r is the radius of the a circular ballon. Personally , I believe that three balloons would be better than one as they would provide better platform stability. Just add in the additional weight of that extra mylar before crunching the numbers.
But it's your selfie, so you decide what the proper configuration should be.
If 4 grams of helium occupies the same volume as 28.5 grams of air and you neglect the insignificant volume of the iPhone you will concur that it takes 4 grams of helium to lift each ounce of iPhone to a selfie-positive altitude.
Depending on ambient temperature and air pressure at the time of selfie-capture you will need a mylar balloon with about 24 grams of helium in it to provide lift for the 178 gram iPhone 6.
The ballon volume needed to create the desired amount of lift can be determined by using this simple formula:
V= 4/3 x (value of pi) x r x r x r , where r is the radius of the a circular ballon. Personally , I believe that three balloons would be better than one as they would provide better platform stability. Just add in the additional weight of that extra mylar before crunching the numbers.
But it's your selfie, so you decide what the proper configuration should be.
3
In my experience, a good many people who visit art galleries, museums and great churches like the Vatican are interested only in capturing as many images as possible on their phones and real cameras. They have no interest whatsoever in what they are capturing. It's a bit like collecting autographs, baseball cards and other paraphernalia--something beyond my understanding.
11
The last few times I was in a major museum, I was surrounded by people with their arms in the air taking photos of the art they weren't really looking at. I'm a painter. It made my heart sink. There must still be a lot of people who find really looking at art a deeply satisfying experience - aren't there? Could museums consider having "no photo" days so those of us who are there to actually look at something other than our digital devices could enjoy ourselves too?
13
More rules for the museum gestapo to enforce. "You are standing too close" "Stand behind the line" "no photos" "exit only"....They make a museum feel like a prison. That said, these sticks eliminated the human interaction involved in telling a stranger to photograph you in exchange for a photo with their "other".
There is reason why crowded Japan has has so many rules for polite behavior in public. There is a reason why the Wild West could afford to be so wild. Yes, museums are more crowded now. We should be respectful of each other's experience. You can buy postcards for cheap at the gift shop.
6
First how about no photos at all in museums. You cannot get near the Mona Lisa or Starry Night because of all the people taking pictures. Next why don't museums with some of these iconic works set up an area with a reproduction and let people take all the selfies they want. Sort of like taking a photo with a cardboard president in Washington? I suggested this to a guard near Starry Night at MOMA and he enthusiastically endorsed it since he spends most of his time preventing people from backing into it.
7
Oh, I am glad to read this! One factor not considered directly in the article is that popular museums have lots and lots of people trying to go through them. When all of those people are taking pictures of the art, pictures of themselves, stopping to listen to the guided tour, and all of the people behind them who have been waiting for hours push forward so that they can do the same - forget trying to contemplate the art.
We were in Paris in August and I swore to return in January or some other time when I could go through a museum without 20,000 of my closest friends. If you think you can appreciate ANY art with that many people trying to crush you to death, well, let me tell you that you can't!
They need to ban cell phones and cameras as well!
We were in Paris in August and I swore to return in January or some other time when I could go through a museum without 20,000 of my closest friends. If you think you can appreciate ANY art with that many people trying to crush you to death, well, let me tell you that you can't!
They need to ban cell phones and cameras as well!
5
I never even heard of one of these sticks! What a self-absorbed society we have become. "Experiences" now consist of taking photos of ourselves in various places and posting them on social media, like some sort of preening parakeet. After I read this story, I went to a website and re-read the myth of Narcissus. It is so apropos.
11
Using Selfie sticks in a museum full of priceless articles is an accident waiting to happen. People of all ages should be more careful but invariably they aren't. I remember years ago while visiting the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art I noticed a young teenage school group looking at Claude Monet's 'Garden at Sainte-Adresse (1867). One of the kids was jabbing the painting with a sharp pencil. I rushed over and rebuked her, telling her that the painting she was damaging with the point of her pencil was worth several million dollars and that her parents would have to pay to repair it. That did the trick. The whole group almost fainted.
10
The digital age has resulted in the ultimately vanity problem - "selfies" which also translates into selfish acts in museums and galleries resulting in overcrowding....this bad behavior is occurring all over the place - dressing rooms of clothing stores, in restaurants and school classrooms. I think this new policy is a positive step in the direction of curtailing this obsession with "self." Technology is both a blessing and a curse.
3
The Selfie Stick is the PERFECT symbol of the age - it's all about yourself, it's invasive of other's space, and it can also injure them.
18
Ban photography in museums.
4
No selfie stick... how about my pocket photo-drone?
30
Lol, that no doubt will be the reaction of some. Never mind "hmm...maybe it's time to pay more attention to the art". The thought process is more like "never mind that I'm crass and inconsiderate; no one's telling me what to do."
1
Slats...next up, my pocket laser guided missle to shoot down your drone.
4
Secretly, New York hipsters are grateful to have one more way to identify tourists. It gets scary when you can't tell.
5
Museums are temples of narcissism anyway, so no tedious moralizing please about the supposed decline of our civilization. Thanks to technology our obnoxiousness just has further reach now, and there are so many of us.
3
"Temples of narcissism?" I have always considered museums an opportunity to experience art by people who are - or were - mightily more talented than I am. But that's just me.
8
Your 2nd point makes sense. I'm mystified by the first one though. Can you elaborate?
1
"Museums are temples of narcissism anyway ..."
Could you expand on this thesis?
Could you expand on this thesis?
3
I was introduced to the selfie stick over New Year in Vancouver ,BC when I was almost struck by one that was wielded by a young woman who seemed oblivious to her surroundings. They and all cameras should be banned from museums where the environment can be controlled. It's one thing that the streets are jammed with people with their noses in an electronic device, but in a museum it is not acceptable.
6
Never mind selfie sticks, taking selfies or pictures inside galleries should be banned. it's utterly disruptive to the gallery goer not about to tweet his/her experience. "Being there" versus "experiencing the art" - 2 different things altogether. There's a reason why the gallery shop sells postcards.
9
After we've banned selfie sticks, let's focus on Segways.
5
When you are visiting a place that you wish to remember, it might be quite natural to want a picture of yourself, your family or your partner or spouse but the ability to take selfies has destroyed what I consider to be one of the great adventures in traveling, which is the ability to connect to the people around you. It might be another tourist or it might be a local, but a polite request to have a picture taken or an offer to take one for someone else can some times lead to so many great new friends or at least a moment of human connection. Selfies take away all that.
5
It's not just the selfies. I was in the British Museum and after I had worked my way through the crowd I finally got to see the Rosetta Stone. I spent a few minutes looking at it and being amused with the posted description that it was really just a multilingual notice from a bureaucrat. Then I noticed the flurry of picture taking - all on the opposite side of the stone from writings. People were coming up, quickly taking a picture, both selfies and with help and then running off. Not one of them bothered to really even look. They got their trophy shot and off they went. Kind of sad really.
12
No, the selfie stick does not solve any problems... Especially at a crowded attraction.
The device theoretically solves an age-old problem "what if there's no one around to take my picture?" Fortunately there are normally hundreds, if not thousands of people around you at these museums to take a picture of you.
This leaves only the negative side effects. Physically they are a hazard to the art and to other visitors. Symbolically they are another narcissistic tool, isolating a user who is attempting to "share" themselves with others.
The device theoretically solves an age-old problem "what if there's no one around to take my picture?" Fortunately there are normally hundreds, if not thousands of people around you at these museums to take a picture of you.
This leaves only the negative side effects. Physically they are a hazard to the art and to other visitors. Symbolically they are another narcissistic tool, isolating a user who is attempting to "share" themselves with others.
57
At someone with a selfie stick takes a snap and then moves on. I find the art students or amateur artists who commandeer the same spot for hours while they do their sketchings or whatever far more annoying.
2
Yes, but the art student or amateur artist is there to be involved with the art, and not themselves.
4
Well, they're actually appreciating the art. What are you diong there?
4
SO there are large numbers of people who apparently only exist when they are looking at their electronic devices and they range from annoying, to dangerous to others and themselves (as they walk into other people, traffic or light poles and the like). Blocking other's views of artworks is rude. The selfie sticks should be banned in museums, and someone should do a social media campaign against them. And just ban picture taking - unless there is specific permission and it's at an off tiem - and enforce it, with as much fuss as possible to embarrass the evildoers.
16
Unfortunately the mania for taking photos in front of works of art has largely destroyed the museum experience for someone who is interested in actually LOOKING at the art itself. The last time I was at MOMA I simply gave up. It was impossible to actually SEE the paintings (and this had nothing to do with a blockbuster exhibition). What I got to see were numerous people who simply moved in front of the painting (ignoring the fact others were trying to see it) blocking the view of the painting while they took (or had their friends take) their picture standing in front of the art. At no time did any of them actually LOOK at the paintings, but their mania to use the paintings as a backdrop for their new Facebook photos (or whatever) denied others the opportunity to see the art. Museums need to institute hours in which taking of photos is forbidden, so that people who want to actually have an experience with the art itself may be allowed to do so.
98
Perhaps if you actually wanted to see the works of art you could have gone to people's facebook pages?
2
The more things change, the more they remain the same…in the 70s, my aunt Barbara took my friend Karen and me to see the much-heralded Picasso exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art, and my aunt complained to me of how Karen—who was all about being in the right place at the right time—looked at the pictures with her back.
I frequently walk across the Brooklyn bridge, and actually prefer gloomy, rainy days when fewer tourists are out taking selfies. Few of them speak English, but that's a topic for another post.
I frequently walk across the Brooklyn bridge, and actually prefer gloomy, rainy days when fewer tourists are out taking selfies. Few of them speak English, but that's a topic for another post.
5
Try off-peak hours or join at the membership level that offers special viewing times.
2
It seems so sad, and I'm surprised it is not mentioned here, that the couple in the lead photo did not ask a Parisian passerby to snap their picture in front of the Louvre.
The selfie stick might suit snow boarders or surfers, but why not ask someone to take your photo. Who knows...you might make a friend and a new experience.
The selfie stick might suit snow boarders or surfers, but why not ask someone to take your photo. Who knows...you might make a friend and a new experience.
114
Yes, it's one more way to separate yourself from the world right in front of you.
13
This is the best comment, I've ever read anywhere about any topic.
Whenever i see someone taking a photo on behalf of someone else, theyre usually standing a good few feet away from the subjects. This creates an effective radius larger than that imposed by the "selfie stick"; if crowd control is really a concern here, i would think letting a stranger take your photo from five feet away would be a greater impediment to other's movements within a museum than an equally effective self-solution that imposes a smaller radial footprint.
1
Taking a selfie with the Mona Lisa when it is FORBIDDEN to take any pictures of the Mona Lisa.
7
While museums are caught between encouraging digital media and the safety of the art and visitors it seems to me the real question is, what is the museum experience becoming. I go to museums and what I see is something akin to a trophy hunt. People who just take pictures of the art, selfies with the art, pictures of their friends with the art. As they walk the galleries they are looking down into their phones. I stood in the European galleries at the Met one day and my unscientific survey indicated that the amount of time spent looking at the art (not counting camera time) was negligible. For those that are actually interested in studying the art, their experience is diminished by the hordes of people standing in front of the paintings taking selfies.
I suspect this was not quite the experience the museum was shooting for.
I suspect this was not quite the experience the museum was shooting for.
290
I absolutely agree!
It is about the unique experience of directly admiring and enjoying a piece of art. It is not about seeing it through your iphone camera or to tell your friends that you were there....
It is about the unique experience of directly admiring and enjoying a piece of art. It is not about seeing it through your iphone camera or to tell your friends that you were there....
1
It is not just in museums.
I was recently at a concert in a small theatre which featured a well known musician and his traditional jazz group.
A great many (younger) people crowded around the stage holding their smart phones high in the air to record the event. They were totallly oblivious to the fact that there were others in the theatre who were trying to enjoy the show. And forget about any courtesy to the musicians themselves who were trying to put on a performance. I am positive that not one of the unsmart smart phone users heard a single note of music, nor did they even know what they were listening to.
I sometimes really miss the 20th century insofar as respect and common courtesy to others are concerned.
I was recently at a concert in a small theatre which featured a well known musician and his traditional jazz group.
A great many (younger) people crowded around the stage holding their smart phones high in the air to record the event. They were totallly oblivious to the fact that there were others in the theatre who were trying to enjoy the show. And forget about any courtesy to the musicians themselves who were trying to put on a performance. I am positive that not one of the unsmart smart phone users heard a single note of music, nor did they even know what they were listening to.
I sometimes really miss the 20th century insofar as respect and common courtesy to others are concerned.
5
This is exactly the experience the museum was "shooting for." Quantity of visitors counts for more than quality of experience by any one visitor. Like all else in our capitalist society run and led by the rich and powerful, the rest of us are commodities to be quantified. Nothing more.
4
I applaud venues that have such rules about picture taking, screen-out cellular signals, and ask patrons to speak softly. With over 318 million people now in our country, quality of life issues need to be reassessed everywhere, now more than ever. Noise pollution seems to continue to only worsen, in all sorts of ways.
Places like museums, performance halls and theaters should be about LISTENING and OBSERVING, not talking, texting and taking photos.
Places like museums, performance halls and theaters should be about LISTENING and OBSERVING, not talking, texting and taking photos.
84
Thank God they are banning selfie sticks. Someone should have told Obama to nix the stick for his Buzzfeed spot. . .embarrassing to say the least.
19
I'm thinking you missed part of the intended humor there, Lise....
I gave up looking at pictures of myself a long time ago. But I do keep an old Polaroid of myself tacked up on my bedroom wall in hope of achieving a Dorian Grey result. The problem is the picture keeps getting lovelier all the time, while I do not.
75
I hear ya..
1
I think your picture is adorable A. Stanton.
2
Thank you very much Nancy. Her name is Sasha, and she is a very good girl.
1
Another triumph of the ME Generation's turning America into the Republic of Narcissism. Thank God the stewards of our pre-Boomer cultural heritage are cracking down on these magic wands.
25
It was bad enough before, with views of paintings blocked by iPads held up by people who only view paintings through them. Why doesn't this new generation of egoists just PhotoShop their heads onto the professional repros most museums post on line?
64
I wish people would get off their high horse about selfies. You know what art museums are filled with? Paintings of rich people who paid loads of money and spent hours sitting to have their portrait done (often featuring their nicest clothes and a flattering pose). If snapping a photo with your friends for a nice memento is narcissistic, I hate to think of what words you would use to describe wealthy folks who pay for portraits.
118
I am sorry the writer has such a low view of the art in museums. I suppose if I had so little regard for the art, I also would not mind the disruptive effect of people repeatedly using three foot extension to invade the personal space of others while they are trying to actually appreciate the art they came to see.
11
Art museums are filled with paintings of rich people etc... That is a gross generalization.
12
Except it takes some time, effort, talent and discernment to create fine art, whatever the subject. And having one's portrait made was a once per lifetime thing, generally undertaken in private -- not a once per minute annoying tic inflicted on fellow members of the general public.
14
Walking around beautiful Maclay Gardens yesterday in Tallahassee, FL, with Japanese magnolias and camellias blooming everywhere, the majesty of the experience was dimimished by couples everywhere taking selfies. It really shouldn't affect my experience, but it does. I imagine more of the issue is less of the potential for art damage (seriously? dangerous selfie sicks?) and more a desire to keep our tacky narcissism or of elite cultural venues.
20
Right, but what they were doing wasn't really narcissism. You were out on Valentine's Day. Those couples are just excited about their relationship. Doesn't it have its touching/human interest side?
1
Not an oblique reference to Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch by any chance?
At a well known museum in the last calendar year, I observed a selfie taking person appearing to me to be struggling to "get it exactly right". We never spoke. Her eyes caught mine. She silently, looked kindly into them, and returning her gaze, and I gently took her cellphone from her hands. She stepped back and her face relaxed. I snapped a series of photos, and handed her her phone. One silent moment had passed. We exchanged smiles again, and I resumed my enjoyment and silent consideration of art. Life moved on around us, undisturbed.
136
I think you should write a novel
What a lovely post. I have often done, or received, the same, in museums and elsewhere. It's nice to interact occasionally with others in this way. No one has ever abused the privilege. One or two images with some special object are nice to have, but it's about the art not you. I'm glad museums are banning selfie sticks.
1
Next they'll be banning the selfie drone. Where will these restrictions on free expression end?
24
Lol. What about one's right to be both tech-savvy and purposefully, perpetually inconsiderate?
6
Your vision of free expression is my vision of invasion of my privacy, peace and quiet.
I am mystified by the rate at which social norms are disappearing in culture. I did not even know what a selfie stick was until I saw a clip of Presient Obama clowning around with one. I don't know how long they have been available. am I weird?
Question: Are the people who have medical clearances and carry their " service" dogs everywhere they go, ( most of whom have nothing wrong with them) banned from museums? I sure hope so.
Question: Are the people who have medical clearances and carry their " service" dogs everywhere they go, ( most of whom have nothing wrong with them) banned from museums? I sure hope so.
9
During a recent trip to Japan we visited the Ghibli Museum, created by famed animator Hayao Miyazaki. It's a truly original marvel from top to bottom. And guess what - one of the rules is no photography at all. Miyazaki wants people to experience the museum authentically and directly instead of being constantly distracted by taking photographs. It must kill all the parents who can't photograph their adorable toddlers playing on the giant, stuffed Catbus on the top floor, but the ban on photography makes the whole experience so much richer and less distracting for everyone.
130
And I feel oppositely. I think opening museums to photography, yes even selfies, brings a vitality. Perhaps we need a special time for those of a more meditative ilk and another for those who celebrate as they move through life.
1
Celebrate? My idea of celebrating the museum experience wouldn't be that. It would be more like coming prepared by reading up a little, sipping wine while enjoying the art and engaging fellow patrons.
6
I'm smarter than you because I don't take selfies.
I will not go to the museums because other people are taking pictures.
Tourists have destroyed New York.
I don't want all those narcissists taking pictures and including me because I treasure my privacy. That goes for all the other pic takers sans selfie sticks too!
Taking pictures of tourist attractions is the craziest thing I've ever heard. When I go places, I never include myself in the pictures I take. In the old days, this never happened.
Tripods are perfectly adequate and easy to set up in MOMA, the Met or on a 5th Ave sidewalk.
Step back, gather together and let me get a pic of whingers....you too Mr. Grimes.
I will not go to the museums because other people are taking pictures.
Tourists have destroyed New York.
I don't want all those narcissists taking pictures and including me because I treasure my privacy. That goes for all the other pic takers sans selfie sticks too!
Taking pictures of tourist attractions is the craziest thing I've ever heard. When I go places, I never include myself in the pictures I take. In the old days, this never happened.
Tripods are perfectly adequate and easy to set up in MOMA, the Met or on a 5th Ave sidewalk.
Step back, gather together and let me get a pic of whingers....you too Mr. Grimes.
15
This comment has made all of the other comments so much more enjoyable. Thank you!
"Tourists have destroyed New York."
No, billionaire developers and the politicians they own have destroyed New York.
No, billionaire developers and the politicians they own have destroyed New York.
4
Buzzy, your comment needs to be a Times Pick, for sure.
How about no taking pictures at all? People taking pictures significantly detract from other museum goers' experiences. And they can simply buy post cards, which are, no doubt, much better reproductions than their own photos. It's always such a joy to go into a special exhibition in which no photos are permitted. I simply do not understand why museums allow photos.
89
If only… but museums have really cut back on the postcards they sell and often sell postcards of only 3-4 paintings or even include postcards of paintings at other museums instead of postcards of works in their actual collection! It mystifies me why -- it must be a budget thing, although surely postcards are not that expensive to produce. And it is way too expensive to always buy a catalogue, though I do do that sometimes. That's why you'll see people like me occasionally photographing a painting and the plaque next to it -- we really want to be able to remember it well and look at it again, and we know the museum shop will not have a postcard of it.
1
Labeling the selfie stick as the "wand of narcissism" is so poignantly accurate it's ridiculous, as are the throngs of celebrity worshippers, gossip mongers and techno zombies who use them to capture that special moment of trivial pursuit they're so enamored with. Thanks to the advent of the smartphone and the Internet contemporary culture is reverting back to our "simian" past with reckless abandon and gusto. And we owe it all to a chimp named Sultan. Pathetic!!!
16
As a graduate school art student in NYC in the 1970's I joined a group of five friends on a cold january afternoon doing an very crude project of counting the amount of time a person actually spent looking at an individual work of art. We spread out in different sections of the museum and counted (wrist watch or the highly accurate Mississippi method.) After a few hour our "research team" adjourned to an upper east bar to count up the tally. The results: Seven seconds on the nose. It was depressing as hell for a bunch of young painters to imagine that one's best effort's might be reduced to a seven second micro-moment. Message loud & clear.
3
Excellent crack-down on selfie sticks on museum floors. I'm wondering when the same rule will apply to our sidewalks. In early February I visited Venice, Italy. It was almost impossible to make your way through the narrow walkways and over the footbridges without getting your head wacked by a selfie stick!
31
I was there for Canival. Talk about narcissism. My jaw dropped when I saw two iPhones on the end of selfie sticks smooching on the Ponte di Rialto.
2
How about using a photo drone - no stick to clobber people and artwork. Another thought is the NSA must love this, all these facial photos posted on the internet to add to their data base of facial features to track everyone in the USA.
5
“It’s not the product that’s at fault, it’s the behavior of the people using it.”
Selfie sticks don't kill people, people kill people.
Selfie sticks don't kill people, people kill people.
9
Watch, next we'll have an "Open Carry in Museums" campaign.
3
Eagerly awaiting the first selfie stick assault and murder, self-documented.
1
I thought the purpose of going to an art museum was to view and experience the art collection, not for selfie photo ops to prove that you were there and in front of the Picasso etc…..and of course you are not posed actually looking at the Picasso, you have your back to it. I find cameras for selfie photos is very distracting & annoying in a museum or gallery and wish they were not allowed. Mostly I wish that these people would spend some quiet time and actually experience the art, they might enjoy it and find some meaning. Life is not being on The Kardashians. Museums & libraries should be quiet places, as they always have been for good reasons.Take a selfie pic on the steps going in to the museum but please allow yourself and others to enjoy the art, who knows it just might change your life in a wonderful way. Enough of this cultural narcissism already.
260
Museums can ban cameras easily. Yet they choose not to. Why? They know it would kill traffic. They still are profit driven entities in the final analysis.
2
Going to an art museum to view and experience art? What an interesting notion. The last time I was at the Met, I thought the crowd was there to see me!
1
I love Selfies. Definitely an art form coming to the fore. I wish the NYT allowed for Selfies on its Comments. I have some great ones!!! Truly artistic.
This is really getting out of hand with these selfie sticks (no pun intended). I just returned from a trip to Machu Picchu where, to my utter amazement, I spotted a gnome using one.
8
I feel fortunate to have visited Machu Picchu in the 70s where our experience was nearly silent and we could appreciate the genius of the ancients among a handful of quiet decorous people instead of the uncivil tourist hordes of today. Must be a nightmare.
2
Maybe museums should use some of their wandering employees as "selfie-helpies"... they'd go around and assist those who must have their picture taken in front of the art. The person assigned to the Mona Lisa would have to be a full-time selfie-helpie. No sticks would be required, but the selfie-helpie should be a tall person, because everyone knows we look best when photographed from above.
5
It could also be a source of additional revenue. "Get your photo taken with the Mona Lisa, twenty five cents!"
2
One remembers a wonderful and civilized time not long ago when the only photos in a museum were those on display. I've been to many museums without once snapping a photo . I wish more visitors could say the same. It's now become a boorish rush to hold something electronic up before the objects others are futilely trying to view through a moving forest of waving arms.
22
I have an even better idea. Ban all photography, period. An art museum is there as a repository of art, for people to pause from their daily grind and savor and appreciate. Taking "selfies" relegates the art to the background of one's (presumably fabulous) life. Get over yourselves! Look at the art, enjoy it, contemplate it, think about it, learn from it. But don't turn it into your own personal wallpaper.
45
I agree. When I went to the Louvre years ago, one of the difficulties with seeing the Mona Lisa was that so many people were taking pictures of it - not even looking at it. Flash photos were supposed to be banned, but people were still taking them. Nothing would make me happier than to see all cell phones and cameras confiscated at the door. They are distracting for those who actually want to view the art. If you need a picture of a piece you saw, buy a postcard.
4
There are a lot of things about which one could say "it's just another product" that we wouldn't want in art museums. They shouldn't let me bring my own camp chair into the gallery either, no matter how nice a "product" it is. As with a tripod, you're staking an intrusive claim to the shared public realm beyond the personal space you inhabit. Or I'm pretty sure if I brought a pool cue or baseball bat to a museum, I wouldn't be allowed to carry them into a gallery. At least I hope not.
But for the grumpy people disdaining those who take normal selfies, lighten up. I've dreamed my whole life of going to France but never got to. My teen daughter got to go to Paris last year on a student exchange program, and yes, she took a beaming selfie in front of the Mona Lisa. I have never seen her look happier. I at once got over my snobbery about people who can't just go to museums to look at art (most people fly through so fast they aren't really looking at it anyway). And I cried because, well, there she was. It marked a dream fulfilled.
But for the grumpy people disdaining those who take normal selfies, lighten up. I've dreamed my whole life of going to France but never got to. My teen daughter got to go to Paris last year on a student exchange program, and yes, she took a beaming selfie in front of the Mona Lisa. I have never seen her look happier. I at once got over my snobbery about people who can't just go to museums to look at art (most people fly through so fast they aren't really looking at it anyway). And I cried because, well, there she was. It marked a dream fulfilled.
4
Obnoxious behavior is ok if it fulfills your 'dream'? And everyone else be darned, eh?
9
Great. So if we, the collective we on an individual basis, feel a twang (or a hurricane) of sentiment because it is our child (dog, favorite car...fill in the blank), then our own need (sic) to express that twang or hurricane of emotion justifies intruding both on the public space and other individuals in that space.
To sum: any suggestion of limitation -- call it restraint -- on the manifestation of that sentiment is therefore unreasonable. On the face of it. And only grumpy people would suggest such a limitation.
We want what we want when we want it. Arguing against that in the modern world is like arguing against Sunday as a legitimate day of the week.
Got it.
To sum: any suggestion of limitation -- call it restraint -- on the manifestation of that sentiment is therefore unreasonable. On the face of it. And only grumpy people would suggest such a limitation.
We want what we want when we want it. Arguing against that in the modern world is like arguing against Sunday as a legitimate day of the week.
Got it.
7
Ah, yes, let the public shaming begin. Because of course we should feel no emotions about interacting with art at a museum, only the cold detachment of our superior contemplation.
In terms of whether my view of a painting is blocked, I don't really see the difference between standing in front of an art work facing it, and standing in front of it with your back toward it. Your unkind remarks are uncivil; you deliberately phrased them so as to belittle my feelings, and not to press a point of etiquette.
If I'm a six-foot tall connoisseur of art and I stand in front of a painting gazing raptly for 20 minutes, I'm going to block more viewers than a quick selfie.
But to acknowledge that wouldn't be as gratifying as congratulating oneself on one's superiority—and disregarding my point about remaining within one's person space, which normal selfie-taking does.
In terms of whether my view of a painting is blocked, I don't really see the difference between standing in front of an art work facing it, and standing in front of it with your back toward it. Your unkind remarks are uncivil; you deliberately phrased them so as to belittle my feelings, and not to press a point of etiquette.
If I'm a six-foot tall connoisseur of art and I stand in front of a painting gazing raptly for 20 minutes, I'm going to block more viewers than a quick selfie.
But to acknowledge that wouldn't be as gratifying as congratulating oneself on one's superiority—and disregarding my point about remaining within one's person space, which normal selfie-taking does.
1
Remember the good old days, when we had friends willing to indulge the desire to create photographic proof that we, like Kilroy, were there?
Seriously, I have always been baffled by the need some people feel to capture their own mugs in the frame of travel photos...perhaps it is a side effect of sitting through one too many slide shows as a child--listening to the next-door neighbor droning on (CLICK) "Here we are standing in front of the world's largest ball of twine" (CLICK) "Here we are getting ready to go in the Perkin's Pancake House in West Diddleback" (CLICK) "Here we are getting ready to climb back in the family wagon"
Seriously, I have always been baffled by the need some people feel to capture their own mugs in the frame of travel photos...perhaps it is a side effect of sitting through one too many slide shows as a child--listening to the next-door neighbor droning on (CLICK) "Here we are standing in front of the world's largest ball of twine" (CLICK) "Here we are getting ready to go in the Perkin's Pancake House in West Diddleback" (CLICK) "Here we are getting ready to climb back in the family wagon"
35
Even better than friends taking your picture is meeting a stranger by asking if they will take a photo, handing over my camera in trust, or offering to take the picture of the lovely young couple on their honeymoon....
3
I recall a few years back in the immediate panic after 9/11, some one 'of interest' to the FBI sent a selfie with time stamp to the local field office every ten minutes of his waking life. I believe they lost interest after a while. A brilliant passive-aggressive strategy.
1
At least taking selfies is (usually) a silent process. What about people who stand directly in front of a painting and loudly hold forth, invading our space in two ways - our view of the artwork and our own thoughts about it. I'm old enough to remember when it was considered polite to keep silent or whisper, and never to stand so close as to spoil the viewing experience for others.
A few weeks back I saw a couple using a selfie stick at the Met. They were so preoccupied with what they were doing they didn't notice that they came an inch or two of hitting an ancient Egyptian sculpture.
86
A selfie of someone who is not wearing clothes should be called a * fleshie * .
5
How does this "selfie stick" push the take photo button on my iPhone6?
Bluetooth function on some models.
Your phone has a timer--it counts down.
Now ban the cell phone cameras too! All I see these days is people walking around the museums looking through the lens of a cell phone camera. Very sad. This kind of behavior in the museum makes me think twice about going to a museum in New York City, particularly the Museum of Modern Art.
55
Yes. I came to the conclusion many years ago that my personal photos were dreck and decided that postcards are the way to go. I buy only cards from places I've seen then date them and make notes on the back.
If I want a picture of myself, I have someone take one of me. It's just that simple. I have some amazing and beautiful scrapbooks. No selfies but lovely snapshots taken by other friendly tourists.
If I want a picture of myself, I have someone take one of me. It's just that simple. I have some amazing and beautiful scrapbooks. No selfies but lovely snapshots taken by other friendly tourists.
1
Must be a real slow news day, for the New York Times to was space on a topic as benign as a "selfie stick" with the approaching tourist season in NYC, I imagine these scepter's of rudeness will receive plenty of press, as native New Yorker's break them, and rightfully so, over their own knee, or, in a true rage, over the "selfie shooter's" head.
Tom Franzson Brevard NC
Tom Franzson Brevard NC
5
I live in Midtown and have sadly watched Central Park, Times Square and Soho, each be taken over by tourists, Pedi-Cars, Rental Bikes, those annoying selfie sticks, and the throngs of vendors selling what seems like whatever they please, even when grease is leaking from their cart, staining the pavement and polluting the environment. Sidewalks, even in the park, are commonly used, not by New Yorkers who pay a lot of money to live and work here, but by tourists 5 deep at a snails pace, coming to an abrupt stop to witness the awe of squirrels. I've practically stopped going to MOMA which has become a shopping Mall/daycare center. On a rainy day it's really impossible. We were told by the Bloomberg Administration that tourists are good for us...I ask who? The economics of one guy makes money at the expense of quality of life for many is how that really works. The Highline, so wonderfully designed is unusable by its residents. The density of tour buses in residential neighborhoods. What a disgrace. New Yorkers need to demand some management to this growing problem. We live here. Tourists are nothing more than the culture of validation...the "I was there" crowd posting on FB. They barely know or care what they are looking at. I wish they would all leave.
58
So few can afford to live in Midtown Manhattan. The rest of us can only visit, and afford to eat only what the merciful cart vendors deign to sell us. However the daycare crowd at the MOMA must be locals. We tourists wait for the free Friday evenings to get our selfies with Matisse.
5
Not to mention the re-routing and reduction of NYC bus service (M7 and 104 among them) by the Bloomberg Administration in order to accommodate creation of touritst "pedestrian plazas."
1
@Kate. Yes, that is really infuriating. For a Mayor (Bloomberg) who prided himself on being the king of capitalism...his only economic plan was tourism. Turning a once working city into a lounge for tourists.
1
So glad that I am not so self aware nor interested.
18
Why do people need this thing? There is no purpose behind them a tripod can do and better?
2
How many pictures of yourself do you need?
171
Or the food you are about to, or have just, eaten.
At the Philharmonic last night. At intermission people couldn't wait to turn on their smartphones. Maybe one or two people have a sick parent at home. But what could be so important to all?
As my wife says, when someone is talking to her, unless the person is waiting for notice of a kidney or other organ for immediate transplant, put the phone away.
At the Philharmonic last night. At intermission people couldn't wait to turn on their smartphones. Maybe one or two people have a sick parent at home. But what could be so important to all?
As my wife says, when someone is talking to her, unless the person is waiting for notice of a kidney or other organ for immediate transplant, put the phone away.
21
If you are a Facebook or social media addict, sadly, there is never enough pictures of yourself....
1
Hey, hey....I'm important! Other being less important than me need to be in touch with me. get my advice, share bits of their humdrum existence with me. It's an act of human kindness on my part.
Now, I await responses to my very important post..."lighten up", "get a life", "get off your high horse", "chill" and, my favorite, "what about MY rights".
Now, I await responses to my very important post..."lighten up", "get a life", "get off your high horse", "chill" and, my favorite, "what about MY rights".
It seems fewer and fewer museum visitors stop to consider exhibits in the flesh, even though art museums have been sold in every city as "the new cathedral" where we can spend $25 to worship rare, expensive objects.
Instead visitors record the objects on their phone as they swoop by, and experience nothing deeper than what they would looking at images on the web.
Thanks to our new friction-free iPhone culture, the shared physical world is now full of people who take up space and spew exhaust into this world while their head is elsewhere, in the cloud.
Instead visitors record the objects on their phone as they swoop by, and experience nothing deeper than what they would looking at images on the web.
Thanks to our new friction-free iPhone culture, the shared physical world is now full of people who take up space and spew exhaust into this world while their head is elsewhere, in the cloud.
25
I thought the reason people went to art museums was to look at the art. But apparently people go to art museums more intent on showing that they were there than on viewing and enjoying the art, or understanding their own emotional response to the art, which takes effort and may be challenging or even threatening. Let's take a selfie in front of the Edward Hopper! The narcissism of the selfie makes for very small minds and hearts.
409
Absolutely. It is disgusting the distraction of these photographers for those of us who love to look and be immersed in the art. I love art museums and wish all photography be banned except for a few specific hours. let these ignoramuses buy a postcard. (It's a seeming numbers game by the institutions themselves.) I recently took a guided tour at the Louvre from a master art historian. Besides my granddaughter and myself, the rest were interested in few of the masterpieces. See the Mona Lisa, Winged Victory, and all set. It was pitiful.
3
If all the pictures you take are selfies, and virtually all you do in the museum is take pictures, then you are narcissistic, vane, and small-minded, but I don't think there are so many extreme cases, and after all, it is their problem. Let's not get too uptight on this.
2
"...or understanding their own emotional response to the art"
Looking back over 65 years of art museum visits, a vanishingly small number of visitors ever experience any kind of emotional response to art. As far as I've been able to determine, in a large number of post-museum conversations, museum visits are undertaken to demonstrate their sensitivity and superiority, and to make sure they get their share of 'art'... whatever the heck that is..., and fill up the part of weekend afternoons not devoted to brunch, lunch, or dinner.
Looking back over 65 years of art museum visits, a vanishingly small number of visitors ever experience any kind of emotional response to art. As far as I've been able to determine, in a large number of post-museum conversations, museum visits are undertaken to demonstrate their sensitivity and superiority, and to make sure they get their share of 'art'... whatever the heck that is..., and fill up the part of weekend afternoons not devoted to brunch, lunch, or dinner.
2
I was pleasantly surprised to see that the word "elite" was not used in this article. Nevertheless, elite museums are generally several steps behind popular culture. I get it that the stick could potentially damage works of art- but this throws down the gauntlet to the top-class museum to invent some clever tech workaround to enable visitors to take selfies. It might even be low tech like putting a famous painting into a specially designed selfie room, rotate the artwork- different painting each day. Keep the visitors coming back. Maybe build in a surprise factor, put it in social media. Different ways of spreading the "art" message- which I think is what we are talking about here.
5
If they must, let the museums have a separate section for those who need to indulge their narcissism - similar to the children's section of a science museum. There are already plenty of outlets for "popular culture" - American Idol, The Kardashians, and other such nonsense.
5
In addition to not using self-sticks, I wish people WOULD talk softly in museums. That bit of politeness has fallen by the wayside. And not only are the current crowds loud and obnoxious, but you have those tour groups going through (I'm looking at you, Metropolitan) with the leader talking at high volume. It really ruins the experience. When I used to hang out in the Met as a teen in the 60s, the place was like a tomb and it was heavenly.
132
Dear Mr. Grimes, since when is the selfie stick 'sometimes known as the wand of narcissm'?
2
NOW! and what a brilliant description it is.
6
More commonly known as the narcisstick.
4
I just googled "wand of narcissm" and pages and pages came up.
1
Years ago, my late wife and I were touring the Louvre for the first time and. like any other first-timers. made a stop at the Mona Lisa. To our surprise, you couldn't get near it/her. There was a line of Japanese tourists each taking his or her turn standing in front of the picture to have a picture taken by a friend. I can only imagine what it would have been like if the selfie at the end of stick had been invented.
17
the best time to contemplate the "Night Watch" in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam is in November. A few years ago there was just me and two attendants. Just perfect!
2
I've had one of these sticks for years. For starters I can take better pictures with it than asking a stranger to take it for me. I also refer to it as a "groupie" stick because I take shots with multiple people in it.
1
Good. About time the not so young techno wannabees learned some manners.
Selfies inadvertently capture people who like their privacy. OK that only includes the very smart or the very wise - but we dont like it.
Selfies inadvertently capture people who like their privacy. OK that only includes the very smart or the very wise - but we dont like it.
24
They sound pretty dangerous to me. Why don't we deploy them to our troops in the middle east and see what they can do with them against the enemy. We may not need all the expensive equipment we have now ...
3
Most tourists don't go to museums to see anything in particular. I believe that they just go there to tick an item in their list of to do things, and of course, prove it with a photograph of themselves.
I am glad to hear that museums in The United States are restricting them.
I am glad to hear that museums in The United States are restricting them.
34
You mean I might have to ask a complete stranger to take a picture of me and my kids? Oh, the horror.
22
I am amazed that photography of any kind is allowed. Certainly at the Amsterdam Van Gogh gallery cameras are forbidden.
156
It's not to protect the art, it's to protect the museum's rights to sell copies.
4
Most museum ban flash to prevent damage to pictures, but non-flash photography is allowed very widely.
1
It probably is forbidden, but that's simply one more sign to ignore if one is moved by the spirit.
Think movie theaters now: the admonition to shut off cellphones makes little impact on the audience. Note: it is illegal to drive and text in New York state. And how is that working out?
Think movie theaters now: the admonition to shut off cellphones makes little impact on the audience. Note: it is illegal to drive and text in New York state. And how is that working out?
2
What a hoot.
But we won't always look so obviously like idiots. The thickets of sticks will evaporate once smart phones get smart lenses. Hear that Apple and Google?
Still, one must ask in the midst of this social media madness, is there an audience anymore, or are we all players?
But we won't always look so obviously like idiots. The thickets of sticks will evaporate once smart phones get smart lenses. Hear that Apple and Google?
Still, one must ask in the midst of this social media madness, is there an audience anymore, or are we all players?
1
Missing from this article is an evidence based recounting of actual damage to artwork or injury to persons attributable to the selfie stick. Is it possible our galleries are responding en mass to a superstitious fear?
3
I commed theses museums for taking theses steps. Do we really need to suffer even a single case of damaged art in order to collect "data" on the problem? What theses museums are relying on, it seems to me, are observations in the field, prudent precautions for the sake of the art itself, and the imposition of reasonable limts on the viewing public.
When we go to a museum we are inadvertant impositions on each other. This is neither good nor bad, just the nature of gathering in a public place. Once you whirl around to take a selfie or expect a crowd to clear away from a work of art so you can take a photograph, that imposition grows. The question then becomes at what point does this situation become unacceptable for the museum and its visitors. These limits seem perfectly reasonable.
When we go to a museum we are inadvertant impositions on each other. This is neither good nor bad, just the nature of gathering in a public place. Once you whirl around to take a selfie or expect a crowd to clear away from a work of art so you can take a photograph, that imposition grows. The question then becomes at what point does this situation become unacceptable for the museum and its visitors. These limits seem perfectly reasonable.
4
Perhaps they are just getting in front of the issue before it becomes a problem. If you read these comments you will learn that even if this behavior hasn't caused physical damage to art or people it is causing damage to the experience for other museum patrons.
2
If we truly wish to protect artwork and not "suffer even a single case of damaged art," I would suggest we ban all humans from the museums. That way the art will be protected in a completely controlled climate environment, with no danger of a deranged person attacking any artwork, as has happened several times in Europe. Perhaps we could have video of the actual artwork which patrons could watch in a separate location.
My wife and I invented the selfie. We have thousands of selfies going back to when we met more than thirty years ago. The stick we might have invented out of necessity but we thought we overame the problem, having a son instead. Like most kids, he was forever annoyed when we asked him to stop what he was doing so we could take his picture. A few years later, our arms not long enough for a three person selfie, we took to asking strangers to take a picture of the three of us. We could have used a selfie stick, but we could never get over the expression on my son's face in those pictures. It was the same face he made when we told him we were going to a museum. Today we go to parties that include a 'photo booth' and suddenly our son and his generation have a new found appreciation for pictures that include them--it is almost an honor to be asked into someone's selfie picture. Unless of course it's a picture with mom and dad. The selfie stick really oivercoimes so little.
8
Is it stuffy in here? This appears to be just another case of museum snobbery.
2
Not snobbery. There's actually people out there who would like to concentrate without interruption when they go to a museum. These are not elite, or snobbish people, they are students or scholars or artists or writers or simply those who enjoy peace and quiet without the distractions of the fun and games you find in a park or ballgame or train station. Museums acquire a tax free status and enjoy their bills and salaries paid for with public funding because they are places of learning. Not image making, not respites between shopping and not urban money generators. When you go to school or a movie or a (gasp, remember going to the library?) you are expected to behave in a manner considerate and respectful of your neighbors' need for a decent environment to concentrate without interruption.
42
You can call it stuffy. I call it going to the museum to see the art, not to have you and your selfie stick step in front of me so that you can have a bad picture so that you will remember, "Oh Yeah--I spent half an hour at...and don't even remember that I did that so I need to have a picture with me in it".
9
Right. Because the go-to excuse now for anyone being told that what they're doing isn't totally wonderful, is to accuse that person of snobbery.
3
Selfie schtick?
7
I totally don't get the analogy that opens the article. Is the author comparing people who use selfie-sticks to monkeys? That seems a little crass. I hope he treated himself with a banana for such clever remark.
1
“It’s not the product that’s at fault, it’s the behavior of the people using it.”
Hmm, haven't we heard something like this before? Oh yeah, the gun debates.
Hmm, haven't we heard something like this before? Oh yeah, the gun debates.
14
Noah Rasheta sounds like a gun manufacturer : "Selfie sticks don't hurt art, people hurt art"; as though the tool itself wasn't part of the problem. Museums are right to - even pre-emptively - manage and/or ban this practice - it is potentially dangerous, distracting, and detrimental to all visitors' museum going experience. It's bad enough that visitors have to continue their self(ie) obsession even while presented with the opportunity of what is for some a once-in-a-lifetime encounter with some of the world's greatest examples of artistic expression. There's an even more radical way to "bond" with art - put the phone/camera/tablet away - and LOOK at the art; even more importantly, allow it to look at you, speak to you ... each work has a unique gift to give, but only if the beholder gets his/her eye out from behind the screens through which many now filter virtually all of their human experience.
12
look at this picture of a man unaware of a whale surfacing a few feet from him while he checks out his messages.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/feb/04/man-on-phone-misses-whale-bre...
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/feb/04/man-on-phone-misses-whale-bre...
6
The need for selfie sticks is rooted in social media which requires all photos be perfect and "strangers" generally lack necessary photography skills (or interest). Of course, there is also the problem that we all don't look quite as good as we envisioned ourselves so we flock to any gadget which will promises improvement. Personally ,I have no problem with selfie sticks, but like everything else in life, people need to be respectful of others while trying to achieve that perfect shot.
Another example of the "it's all about Me" attitude.
39
Ah, really - visitors and those around tourists have always been subjected to being in the midst of pictures and picture undertaking. To have a big stick making the intrusion, though, does put a slightly more dangerous aspect of being in that midst.
Having said that, the whole selfie thing does seem to have gotten out of hand sometimes. After all, we can get smacked in the face by another's outstretched arm anywhere regardless of stick or not. All for a shot of me, me, me and mine, mine, mine.
I suppose better that than possibly imposing on those around us if we just "wouldn't mind taking a minute to take a picture, please?" Have any of us really ever refused to take those special shots of others, though?
Having said that, the whole selfie thing does seem to have gotten out of hand sometimes. After all, we can get smacked in the face by another's outstretched arm anywhere regardless of stick or not. All for a shot of me, me, me and mine, mine, mine.
I suppose better that than possibly imposing on those around us if we just "wouldn't mind taking a minute to take a picture, please?" Have any of us really ever refused to take those special shots of others, though?
75
I enjoy it when tourists ask me to take their photo. It's a bit of friendly interaction. Usually the Golden Gate Bridge is in the background.
2
MIMA, thank you. As you can see from the photos accompanying this article, another person can still take a better picture of you than you can with the selfie stick. At best, the young lady with the dinosaur would get a few ribs in. The photographer got the entire beast.
3
I'm from Brooklyn. The old, real Brooklyn. Get in my way and act rude, and I'll gladly return the favor.
2
I believe it was another New York Times column which characterized the selfie stick as a "narcis-stick." I'll probably eventually buy one but it seems somewhat of a pain to keep taking the phone off and then putting it on the stick -- unless I'm going to walk around carrying the stick.
Although I've taken plenty of selfies, in museums I generally just photograph the art so that I can have a memory of what I saw in the particular building. What I did on my last trip to a museum was look at each piece closely and then read the text panel before even taking a picture. I went to the museum 6 months ago and have not looked at any of the pictures but do remember the experience of actually looking at the museum pieces and learning from them.
Although I've taken plenty of selfies, in museums I generally just photograph the art so that I can have a memory of what I saw in the particular building. What I did on my last trip to a museum was look at each piece closely and then read the text panel before even taking a picture. I went to the museum 6 months ago and have not looked at any of the pictures but do remember the experience of actually looking at the museum pieces and learning from them.
15
@Debra: So what was the point of your taking all those photos in the museum? You admit that you remember the ACTUAL EXPERIENCE of looking at the art, and that you haven't looked at the pictures you took 6 months ago.
2
Gee...guess we'll just have to revert to asking strangers if they'd mind taking a picture of us with our camera...least wise at the museums. No worries, it's a nice way to meet some very interesting people.
41
RE EuroAM; yes let's not forget about what can happen when we ask a stranger if they would be kind enough to take a picture of you…..it can be a a fine moment for both parties. I recently took pictures of a group of Japanese girls traveling & touring here in Palm Springs and even though language was a problem we all had a good time taking the pictures and spending a few minutes together…one of the benefits of travel is meeting "local people".
7
If we can talk in confidence, I have a close-held secret to confess. Since photos have become ubiquitous, I have stopped taking them. 100%. For at least ten years. I was never good at it. My hands are not very steady. But that's not why I quit. I did it because I never looked at the ones I had taken. Everyone and everyplace I care to see I can summon up through one sense or another. I do that a lot. As for everyone and everyplace I don't care to see, I don't have to go there in turning the pages of my album. This isn't for everybody, for sure. But if you're thinking about it, you won't be alone. If you're buying a selfie stick as we speak, have a nice day.
105
"But that's not why I quit. I did it because I never looked at the ones I had taken."
Photos can be used to communicate with others. Didn't you ever show your photos to someone else?
Photos can be used to communicate with others. Didn't you ever show your photos to someone else?
1
That's true. I've done my best with words, conveyed with emotion. Facebook proves I have chosen the less traveled path. As I said, this isn't for everybody.
Anyone using a selfie stick in a Museum is.looking in the wrong direction
350
Not only that, it could be highly inappropriate to use one in front of certain works, like Venus de Milo for example.
1
If nothing else it is a distraction and the purpose of going to an art museum is to see the art without having to be aware of what is going on around you. A museum can often be a sea of tranquility. Too many self absorbed people with selfie sticks spoils that atmosphere.
157
Tranquility. Yes, this is exactly it. The art, the visitor, and the proper environment to observe and immerse yourself in the art.
It is not just art museums that are suffering from the pursuit of selfies and photos, the people that favor such an experience are disrupting our experience of national parks, ancient ruins and antiquities, landscapes and seascapes, as well as any number of indoor environments.
Put the phone down and lift your eyes - the world awaits you.
It is not just art museums that are suffering from the pursuit of selfies and photos, the people that favor such an experience are disrupting our experience of national parks, ancient ruins and antiquities, landscapes and seascapes, as well as any number of indoor environments.
Put the phone down and lift your eyes - the world awaits you.
4
I am so lucky to live in my own little cocoon, away from such craziness.
Have never seen one of these.....
Where does one resign from this "modern" society?
Have never seen one of these.....
Where does one resign from this "modern" society?
61
After getting interested in genealogy I was given some family pictures that were well over 100 years old. Discovered then that some pictures are far more valuable because there are fewer of them. Who needs all these pictures and what do you do with them?
15
With the ephemeral nature of digital images, and the continuing evolution of storage media, all those photos will not exist in 100 years. Means of reading media become extinct. Most people will not recall 8 inch floppy disks, let alone 5.25 inch floppies, or back up tape cartridges. Writable CD/DVD ROMs degrade. Back in the 60's archival magnetic tapes of satellite data at NASA HQ were destroyed when a honking big floor waxer (with big AC magnetic field) was used to polish the floor of the storeroom. Wiped out entire lower shelves of tapes. The raw and processed data archive for my own dissertation research was over-written because somebody removed the write-protect ring (fortunately after I got my degree) and I had to rely on hard copies of their graphical form.
5
We should be asking you! ;)
1
Inventor's name is classic.... I look forward to the day when this foolish trend will Wayne Fromm use in public; it is a brash assertion of narcissistic self importance, unworthy of civilized man. ....and you just might pot your eye out! ...you did see President Obama checking in the mirror for damage after he used a stick like this? Unfortunately for those of us who saw the video, the damage looks like it is permanently engraved in our minds, though he appeared to not notice anything wrong, as usual.
1
No reported evidence that a selfie stick has harmed the artwork or other patrons. Museums reported to be eager for publicity and visitors. Explain again why the Met is banning them? Is it because some visitors are having too much fun?
1
I thought the purpose of going to a museum was to look at, and maybe even contemplate, art. People taking pictures of themselves in front of a picture certainly makes it harder for the rest of us to do that.
33
I side with the Met because a damaged piece of art cannot be repaired to their original state. I also would not wait until the harm to people or artworks - some pieces like paintings are very sensitive - is done.
22
Is it because when a stick bounces around three feet from its owner, it can hit someone who's actually looking at the art? Or, perhaps, tear into a canvas?
26
in the old days we would just ask a passing stranger to take a picture of us. Maybe this generation has become skittish or afraid of being rejected. Anyway, don't be afraid , ask.
27
95% of the time strangers take pictures that don't capture what we have in mind.
1
When you stand in front of the rim of the Grand Canyon with your family, or the White House, or a Monet, and you hand your camera to a stranger to take the shot, do they miss that shot 95% of the time, really?
2
True, they capture a "snap shot" that meets the "good enough" standard for many people. Today the threshold of "good enough" is better than "bad" but it's clearly not "good" overall. And it is true that "good enough" today is much better than it was during the "film" era. Nevertheless it's all about expectations... "good" or "good enough."
On the opposite side of this phenomenon we had my late grandmother. Family pictures taken by her would invariably be a grand vista with the tops of our heads in the lower right corner. When questioned, she provided her artistic method - "I already know what YOU look like!"
134
There is a middle ground here, namely by observing the rule of thirds when composing family pictures. In fact, most people's selfies tend to start with an extremely poor composition by not following the accepted photographic rules (there is even an academic papers written on the statistical analysis of this topic: N. Bruno et al, "'Selfies' Reveal Systematic Deviations from Known Principles of Photographic Composition", Art & Perception 2, 45-58 (2014)).
4
Mr. Trenteseau, we have to be related, because my Mother took the same type of pictures as your Grandmother. As for getting back to What's-A-Ma-Call-It, I'm with you on that as well. Thanks for the Early-Morning-Laugh.
2
Good grief.
1