It's interesting that many museum objects from the Middle Ages and earlier times are everyday items, often kitschy, that now tell us volumes about life in those times. Every year there are new techniques that reveal more about those old times from the same or newly discovered "trash". When people say "Why preserve that can-opener or plastic apple," keep that in mind. Everything isn't worth preserving, but what our collections may tell future generations (if civilization survives or recovers) is unpredictable.
12
Plastics are not the only short-lived art materials. Long before plastics there were artists, some still famous, who tried out new materials that turned out to be short-lived. Some of the great art works are in disrepair or a delicate state of preservation because of that.
I'm not saying plastics, as such, are no different. Plastics are all over and a kind of infestation. But it's worth keeping in mind that materials, paints for instance, that deteriorate rather rapidly are not only a modern problem.
4
Neil Armstrong's Apollo Space Suit is the latest example of an earlier example of a seminal moment in human history: arguably as the first and perhaps the last greatest achievements of Mankind.
The first and earliest of these are the Lascaux cave paintings found
in the Dordogne region of southwestern France representing some of the earliest examples of the birth of creative, conceptual abstract thinking and realisation, manifested in the exquisite ochre and charcoal drawings and paintings of animals hunted and living in the area at the time they were being immortalised as our earliest art forms more than 20,000 years ago!
Both of these remarkable achievements represented or in the case of the Moon Landing given meaning literally by/of a great leap made by Humanity: the first by the linkage made between Imagination and Execution and the many implications such a leap began and foreshadowed in the millenia to come and the Latest by a speech spoken analogy in the moment seen by half the planet
of the first human to set foot on another! (Moon ...satellite, but not planet) an almost unbelievable technological accomplishment so monumental that 50 years after it happened, to many people today, are easily led to think it never happened and wasn't and isn't possible that it did or could be done today.
It's Ironical that an item of our latest Leap won't last 100 years, but of our earliest Leap, already 200 times older looks almost newly made and will last millenia!
9
Published articles in our field began coming out in the 1980s, but the warnings were there with the "natural" plastics like cellulose nitrate films and objects that were ending up in gooey pools of melted plastic. A large chunk of silent films were lost because of our lack of knowledge about these materials. Then Barbie dolls started going south in museum collections. My hats off to colleagues working with these materials. We are now finding early plastics at archaeological sites, so the problem is not going away. Good science and chemistry are the keys to understanding the complex nature of modern plastics, and they are every bit as challenging as working with ancient metals. Thank you for this article and for showcasing the efforts of colleagues who work quietly behind the scenes, trying to preserve our cultural heritage.
12
When the sun’s corona engulfs the earth I hardly think any of this will matter. If you counting on the human race escaping to another solar system, good luck with that. Oh, man’s hubris, that they think they matter.
6
@Paulie: Huh? This is our problem?
3
I remember when plastic toys easily broke. That was disapointing to me as a child.
5
Memo to artists, if you want your works to last, go back to natural materials ...
13
Let it rot, and then in a few decades have an exhibition titled "The Art of Decay / The Decay of Art."
7
The accompanying photo of the Spacesuits on display at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, worn by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin during their moonwalk looks suspiciously like the Hollywood film set where it was filmed...
Such good news, to learn that plastic breaks down, for it is the curse of mankind. Norman Mailer, acting as a brilliant sociologist, said plastic was a “malign force loose in the universe that [is] the social equivalent of cancer...It infiltrates everything. It's metastasis. It gets into every single pore of productive life.”
If the astronauts’ plastic space suits must rot, well, let them rot, and then let us send a little prayer to the gods that may be that other plastics will also wither into nothingness, yeah, and let’s start that wonderfully liberating process with the Pacific Ocean’s Great Garbage Patch, and then let’s move the plastic decaying fungi to every smoldering garbage dump in America. Such freshness to come into a world without the crinkle of plastic. It would be like Eden.
13
@Dave Thomas
There is no evidence so far that I have seen-- and I look-- to indicate that plastic "breaks down" in any way other than to become particles and fibers of smaller and smaller size. These tiny particles are being eaten by microscopic life forms just as larger items like trash bags are being eaten by turtles and whales. The plastic not only attracts all kinds of bacteria and viruses which take up residence on them but also absorb all kinds of toxic chemicals which bind chemically with the plastic and create new compounds along with the salt water and UV radiation which have not been studied by science.
We are finding plastic at the bottom of the deepest oceanic trenches, fouling the most exotic beaches. No matter how small the "nets" are made with which researchers test various depths of ocean water columns they continue to find smaller and smaller particles.
Believing that plastic breaks down is like reading 'The Cat in the Hat' and believing that the stain that started as a bathtub ring and ended up spreading-- via successively smaller cats in the hats-- until finally a cat in the hat so tiny that you can't see him, but only the rays of his power emanating from him, is able to use his awesome skills to completely remove the stain and return the snow to pristine white.
In our story it is the plastic that keeps getting smaller and smaller. It doesn't go away, and there's no magic to save us.
It's in soil too. Everywhere we want to look, there it is.
25
Thank you for your thoughtful & factual reply. I am truly sorry to hear what you say, that plastic doesn’t decay, it just breaks apart, getting smaller and smaller. Norman Mailer certainly had the right metaphor, plastic is a cancer that gets into everything.
19
@Dave Thomas
I don't want anyone to despair. There are some bacteria that we have found are apparently able to process it further, so there is some hope. What they break it down into, we also have no idea. Some bacteria, for instance, take safe forms of mercury in the environment and turn it into the neurotoxin form methylmercury which is what is building up in the arctic and then the oceans where it enters the food chain. And we do know that many forms of plastics are neuroendocrine disruptors as well, many are similar to the hormone estrogen which in large quantities is carcinogenic, especially for animals living in an aquatic environment. But we get it too from the plastic bottles and food containers we have come to rely on-- and heating releases even more of the stuff. Truth is, we just don't know enough about the stuff to continue to use it in the quantities we are, but it doesn't look like we're even beginning to be ready to think about phasing it out.
5
Oh please, let it go.
For the environment, the sooner plastics disintegrate the better. For human heart valves, etc, not so much. For the so-called art works, take a picture.
3
Lemon pledge...
2
They're not treasures. They are junk that has no historic or cultural value. Let them disintegrate.
8
" ...the suit is made of 21 layers of various plastics: nylon, neoprene, Mylar, Dacron, Kapton and Teflon."
Luckily, Armstrong's Helmet is undamaged thanks to the use of "Cap-On tm" now known as Kapton tm.
However the full body of the Space Suit is disintegrating due to a one off technical failure that prevented the 'infusion wrapping' of the Suit in a Kapton tm variant plastic known as Keepon tm.
Keepon tm is essential to ensuring a Space Suit's structural integrity remains viable for use in multiple environments for a maximum longevity rating of 200 years.
Sadly, whilst Armstrong's Helmet will remain preserved thanks to Kapton making That On the Museum's displayed items for many years to come, the absence of Keepon in his Suit wont Keep On display much longer , what has been the most viewed item in Museum history.
Taken together, The Helmet and the Suit have represented the
Twin Peaks of museum display popularity but this will end with the loss of the missing Keepon tm infusion wrapped Suit as it disintegrates and the time comes when, as the Head Curator is quoted saying:
" She's dead... NOT wrapped in Plastic"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cymp70Jn1UE
She will be sorely missed.
“There’s a great future in plastics. Think about it.”
~Mr. McGuire, 'The Graduate'
Welcome to the Plasticene Era where, long after our other reckless uses of fossil hydrocarbons have killed us all off, our plastic in its hundreds and thousands of forms, shapes, and sizes-- from nanoparticle and microfiber to giant wind-formed trash gyres the size of Texas or France-- will still be around influencing the geology of this planet.
We humans just don't appreciate the irony or extent of our blindness. We have surrounded the planet with thousands and thousands of projectiles-- space junk-- hurtling round and round at 20,000 mph in the first faltering attempts at space travel, in effect building a prison for ourselves that will eventually hold us in, much to the relief I'm sure, of any truly intelligent life form out there which might be monitoring our "progress".
Our technological reach has exceeded our headlights for too long; rock falls and collapsed bridges await. But damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead! The future doesn't exist-- how could evolution have come up with a creature, even us, that could prepare for its coming? The good news is that for the same reason, there probably isn't really another intelligent life form monitoring our progress that will be able to gloat.
And not being laughed at, when we can't even laugh at ourselves, is something, after all.
5
I recommend ModCon patent whatever accidental process museums have discovered to cause plastic to disintegrate. Cities right across the world will gladly pay to have access to the technology.
2
We tend to be inconsistent in what we appreciate about old things. Patina and ‘original surface’ are valued in furniture. Metal art work either can’t or can be polished, depending on fashion. Fabrics can be mended, or not. And so forth. Plastics are no different. Sometimes the action of time can be appreciated, sometimes disliked. Until recently, the many materials in restored cars had to look exactly like they did new; now that doesn’t seem to be the fashion. For the unstable organic materials that make up our very persons, piling on of remedies and makeup to eliminate the evidence of age is best left to morticians.
4
Another potentially informative article dumbed down for mass consumption. Sort of hermetically sealed so that an interested reader has no easy way (save Google) to follow up or find references. But when particular technologies, such as the infrared reflectance instrument, are described in kindergarten terms, it’s just harder to follow up.
However, conservators have a prime directive that does change with time: replicate the damaged statue and toss the original; then touch up the faded painting so it ‘looks just painted’’; more recently, keep the original scraps, fragments and chips, and make all the work reversible in case the future has better methods. Unfortunately, the current thinking absolutely precludes trying new ideas until they extensively prove out. I sort of agree.
By the way, carbon dioxide snow has been in use in many applications for at least four decades that I know about.
2
@Marat In 1784
You cited no specifics, so it's unclear what elements of this article you are criticizing. However, using a search engine such as Google is, in fact, a very easy way to find more information. A cursory search of "cellulose acetate" took me right to the Getty Institute's Preservation of Plastics webpage for further reading. If I so choose, I can also easily access any number of sites where I could further research plastic compounds to my heart's delight.
5
"Another potentially informative article dumbed down for mass consumption."
While that has been a problem with some science articles, this one actually uses some correct technical terms.
"... the infrared reflectance instrument, are described in kindergarten terms, ..."
Although, the article never uses the exact name, "infrared spectrometer", it does use "spectrometer", "spectroscopy", and "infrared light".
Two sentences explain how spectroscopy works. Spectroscopy is a highly technical subject, so it is unrealistic to expect too much from such a short explanation.
2
@Marat In 1784, what's wrong with your temper? This is one of the Times' finest science articles. I plan to recommend it to my friends for its abundance of interesting, relevant technical detail in a very clear presentation.
4
Can't they use Armor All?
5
Wait!!! I thought these things would last forever, they do not rot or decay. Guess someone(s) are really wrong here.
I recommend auctioning Armstrong's suit (and all the other plastic treasures) off to fools with more money than brains. Use the proceeds for other, more lasting pieces.
4
Meanwhile a Bellini painting in Egg Tempera or Oil on Wood from the 1400's, sitting in some moldy old church, looks like it was painted yesterday.
6
No. It doesn't.
9
Plastic has been an environmental disaster. Unless an object that is made from plastic is necessary to save lives, I find it quite fitting that everything else plastic be allowed to disintegrate.
4
@smcclellan the disintegration of plastics is, itself, a grave environmental concern.
6
Our era of plastics and plasticity will shortly evaporate into the atmosphere unlike the Temple of Concord in Sicily, ca. 500 BCE, which still stands. That which is significant will endure; while we will not.
2
I was just reading earlier today that conservators recommend oil painters use PVA sizing instead of the traditional rabbit skin glue because it is less responsive to moisture. Now I'm wondering if this advice will stand the test of time. And what about acrylic paints and gesso?
7
How about posting a digital image of what the original objects looked like immediately adjacent to each of the actual objects. Then open the entire assemblage as a singular display unto itself renamed "Democracy: It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time."
Future archaeologists (if any remain, or failing that intergalactic visitors from other worlds) will find it a great historic and artistic archive.
2
Times photo caption: "... a graduate intern ..."
She has a master's degree from the University of Turin in "Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage".
According to the University's web site, students study subjects that include:
* Chemistry and Physics
* Biology, Chemistry, and Physics for Restoration
* Chemistry, Mineralogy, and Physics Applied to Cultural Heritage
The web site has more: conservazionerestauro.campusnet.unito.it
(The site is in Italian, but there is a link for English.)
2
@MBV, thanks for all your informative comments.
1
Gee guys, this is a no brainier. You should throw it in the ocean like we do with all plastic when we're done with it.
5
I get that plastics (polymers) are invaluable for a number of reasons.
But shouldn’t we aim a little higher in what we consider to be our “cultural treasures”?
7
Plastics are integral to modern life. They are the stuff of medicine, technology, and so many products we regard as essential. It is appropriate that efforts are being made to preserve and restore important plastic artifacts. Unfortunately irresponsible use of plastics have caused serious environmental problems. Plastic packaging coupled with our throwaway attitude toward waste is a major contributor. Hopefully that is changing. So glad those plastic film grocery bags are being banned in some locations.
11
Ah, the pedantry of having to repaint our houses every so often with acrylic latex.
I watched a house painter once, for a while it seemed. I suppose I was his audience. When I lived in that house growing up, and saw the paint chip over the years, I must have felt one with the art since there were bored moments where I assisted in the chipping process with my fingernails, sitting on the porch, scratching at a post, pretty much copying what our barn cat would do.
When the house was repainted, I remember a feeling now that I did not fully understand then: gone were all those languishing moments and lackadaisical days, painted over forever. The new paint erased my youth to some degree for me, and I can't help but think the art conservators are doing that to society writ large.
7
Can they be recycled? Let them go into the bin of history.
8
Take a picture of it and throw it away. We don't have to save everything.
8
@Bonnie Balanda Is that the advice you give your children?
2
The advice goes to the kid - take a picture of dad and throw him away!
1
So Mr. McQuire wasn't quite right with his "plastics" advice to Ben Braddock in The Graduate?
7
'So Mr. McQuire wasn't quite right with his "plastics" advice to Ben Braddock in The Graduate?'
Mr. McGuire gave excellent advice. Plastics is big business.
Now it might be bioplastics:
Bioplastics have a small but growing market
By HOLLY HUBBARD PRESTON
NOV. 2, 2007
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/02/your-money/02iht-mplastics.1.8159693....
2
With regard for the artworks, it is extremely short sighted by the conservators not to see that the changing physics of the plastics as part of the work of art in and of itself. As pointed out in the article, the word plastic means flexible.
The second half of the 20th century when artists started using plastics in earnest was the beginning of the postmodern era and in that period post structuralism developed. These folks believed the artist only began the work of art, and that viewers and audiences completed the work by the act of their experiencing it: a theatre performance is just another rehearsal without an audience. The artist was no longer the alpha and omega od all the possible meaning an artwork could have.
In this period, performance art grew out of the need to explore and reconcile the interactions the quotidian reality of the audience and the dramatic, virtual reality of the artists and artwork, and this was done by creating works of art that were reality. You could think of this art form as "actualism," where the dramatic moment or physical object was real and really happening. That's why we began seeing so many mundane works of art, and of course, apropos to the times, why so much of it was made of plastic.
The plasticity of the artworks is performance art, it is the work of art living through time, and the apparent degradation of the works is just more of the artist's inadvertent hand operating from a longer paintbrush that we should not seek to control.
9
@Chris
Wrong.
Plastic means that its shape can be changed permanently by applying force (often in combination with heat).
The technical term for "flexible" is elastic.
5
@Chris Wow. That's deep. Yeah, let it degrade and make a time lapse film of the whole process.
We'd do well to follow Andy Goldsworthy's lead on this: an honest celebration of the ephemeral.
Besides, plastics are a Faustian bargain; let their degradation be a reminder of that deal. I'll even name the next big museum show: "Plasticizers, Pigments and Pacifiers: Polymers and the Plasticization of Faust".
11
@Mark Holmes don’t forget that Goldsworthy made gigantic spirals with huge diesel burning bulldozers that took tons of fuel to create. His biggest works were merely revisionist, pseudo naturalist behemoths set up next to roadways. Hardly the subtle leaf assemblies he started with.
3
Was it in the Times that I read recently that scientists have formulated plastic that is biodegradable? Let’s hope they start with those disposable plastic water bottles.
That said, there are gorgeous and important acrylic paintings that should be preserved for the benefit of future generations.
6
Just toss them in the ocean.
I'm a materials scientist. Their efforts are largely doomed.
Plastics degrade due to moisture, oxygen, ozone, hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, ultraviolet light, continued reactions within the material with catalysts and plasticizers, and any number of other things.
Put them in the dark in a vacuum, and they will still degrade. Sorry.
28
Is this also true of polyvinyl acetate?
@Mtnman1963
I am very interested in the possible degradation of polyester and other synthetic threads. Can you tell me more or point me in the right direction to find out more? Thank you in advance.
2
All is impermanent.
8
Times: "Dr. Madden brought out a green-and-white striped vase and a small, red instrument [that] fires infrared light through materials, ..."
For the technically inclined, the infrared spectrometer in the photo is from A2 Technologies (now owned by Agilent Technologies). It appears to be the discontinued 4200 FlexScan Series FTIR handheld spectrometer. (All per Google searches.)
The instrument makes *reflectance* measurements, so the article is not quite accurate when it says that the instrument "fires infrared light through materials".
5
Microbes will eventually evolve to eat plastics. It will be vastly trickier then for these conservators.
Please now do an article on plastic off-gassing. At this very moment literally millions of children world wide are breathing in carcinogenic gasses in cars and virtually no one is aware of this danger. Literally one of the most toxic human everyday occurrences and no one has a clue.
Crazy how we embrace things so eagerly, blindly, if it makes our lives “easier” without a thought to the long term.
7
"95% of life's trouble is caused by small broken plastic parts"
NYC super, dealing with yet another repair
25
@Gerhard
Pretty soon they'll find them in our dna!
1
"I want to say one word to you. ... plastics."
I say good riddance.
6
Recycle. All of it.
2
Hundreds of years from now the archaeologists of the day will be digging things up, much as we are now, trying to make sense of what they find.
If we want them to find what we treasure, best we bury our prized possessions with us?
1
I'm an artist who works with perishable materials like plastic & paper. on purpose. its funny to read about desparate efforts to preserve the unsustainable.
4
"I'm an artist who works with perishable materials like plastic & paper. on purpose."
How do you explain that to your collectors? Do they get a repair or replace guarantee?
2
@cherry elliott - Sculptors who work in sand consider the destruction of their work within a few days of its creation to be part of the experience of their art. But not all artists share that desire or perspective. Nor do they all share yours. That you think that way is great, but why would you imagine that everyone should think just as you do?
4
@Annie, be fair to cherry elliott. She didn't lay down a rule for others.
2
Ironic that plastics are derived from oil, the breakdown product of Earth's deceased living organisms, remade into limitless new materials. Nature was much smarter at recycling than her most advanced creation, us.
3
@Emergence
Are scientists working on how to recycle plastics back into oil? If not, why not? Would seem to solve a problem.
2
..."Metal, stone, ceramic and paper have survived thousands of years, while plastics have existed for a little over 150 years. In that short time, however, they have risen to dominate the materials we use today."...
The ancients used natural materials to record their history and create art. It took modern day terrorists with dynamite to destroy that.
Plastic is perhaps a metaphor for a culture built on instant gratification and the convenience of disposability. That we seek to preserve something designed to be single use and thrown away is ironic.
7
@B Dawson It’s about maximizing profit over human welfare, the vast value paradigm we will soon invert, or die from.
1
I expected to find Eva Hess cited here, as her fondness for molded latex will make her works a conservator's purgatory.
Painting went through the same phase in the 18th and 19th centuries, when early chemistry and later industrial (petroleum) chemistry found many new pigments whose lightfastness was lacking. Go to any museum in Europe with portraits by Reynolds and bask in their yellowed, cadaverous vitality.
You can document all these works with photography, remodel them with three dimensional scanning and, worst comes to it, sink them in preserving fluid or a block of clear acrylic. Ah, acrylic!
For the rest ... we say tempis fugit, and carpe diem, for a really good reason.
9
Good to hear that at least some plastics start degrading fairly soon. I'm incredibly worried for our environment and our planet, which seems to be literally almost awash with plastics.
9
Let it go. Plastic is that kind of thing. Use it to talk about degradation and death. Of the planet.....
5
One word: hologram.
Artifacts can inspire and captivate in ways that textbook pictures and descriptions cannot, so I understand the desire to preserve, but the fact of the matter is that the creative era of our species is VERY young and even the oldest manmade relics are relatively new. Yet, everything from Armstrong’s suit to Pyramids of Giza are going to decay no matter what we do, so alternate plans seem necessary. A digital preservation seems like the most reasonable way to dramatically display relics and efficiently store them. An additional benefit is that a hologram can be replicated ad infinitum, so there is no need for planes, trains, and automobiles to let people view, say, the Venus de Milo (a boon to those with limited financial resources to travel the world). Apologies in advance to the tourism industries of the world!
3
"... even the oldest manmade relics are relatively new."
That doesn't make any sense. The Chauvet Cave paintings in France date to as much as 32,000 years ago. And the Venus of Willendorf figurine is about that old too.
See the Wikipedia article on "Prehistoric art" for more examples:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_art
4
@X - Unfortunately, digital preservation has some built-in limitations of its own. Unlike rock or paper, digital media require a "machine" for accessing them. Progress often means that the medium used originally to preserve something can no longer be accessed because the equipment that reads the medium is several generations in the past and is no longer available. Some digital records are transferred from medium to medium to keep up with the technology but that transfer has problems of its own. The increasing volume of things created or preserved on digital media makes transfer increasingly demanding in terms of both the effort required and the expense of carrying it out. Sometimes the transfer causes degradation of the original and eventually that could also render what has theoretically been preserved inaccessible.
3
"There's a great future in plastics" - Mr. McGuire in The Graduate.
The things is that the plastic itself had a limited future, we just didn't know it then.
2
Although acquisition and conservation are curatorial activities, deacquisition and destruction are necessary as well. Plastics make the last activity more difficult because the waste stream has to be isolated, it is often necessary when the material deteriorates. The well-trained conservator always faces problems of this kind. The "sticky-shed" phenomena associated with videotapes of the late '60s and early '70s caused the loss of many video records of Vietnam and other events. Materials scientists need to be consulted to find ways to preserve such materials, but that preservation also has to be within the means of the museum. When I ran a museum, I had the scientists of a National Laboratory to help me out, but not everything can be salvaged, even when cost is no object.
6
While I love modern art and it is a shame to see these pieces slowly disintegrate, it is the perfect end to the modern era which was a tongue in cheek look at modern life as experienced in the 1950's and 60's. Andy Warhol is smiling down from his Factory in the sky.
6
There is secondary value in this research: It can help inform on how to reverse engineer, or otherwise, find ways to re-use polymers -- sparing both ocean and landfill.
13
Da Vinci had this problem too. The Last Supper. Chose new materials over time-tested ones. Started falling apart almost immediately.
11
It's not just plastic. About 60 years ago Naum Gabo gave my parents a little maquette of his Linear Construction #2, which is made of nylon monofilament wound over two intersecting plastic forms. The plastic has held up, but the nylon has become extremely brittle. It's a dust-collecter and Gabo recommended washing it in the sink with warm water and liquid Joy. Can't do that now.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r4cu8pmwez2beos/Gabo%20linear%20construction%2...
7
"... nylon monofilament wound over two intersecting plastic forms."
The "plastic forms" could be Perspex, which is also known as Crylux, Plexiglas, Acrylite, and Lucite.
Some web searches found this description of a Gabo piece:
"Nylon threads are stretched around a core of two intersecting transparent Perspex lobes."
Source: Description of "Linear Construction in Space No. 2" by Naum Gabo at stedelijk.nl.
1
@Don Cooke, I suspect that nylon qualifies as a plastic in this connection.
Degradation over time adds a 4th dimension. Who is to say an artist, at least, didn't anticipate this? I particularly like the idea of Claes Oldenburg's False Food Selection aging. And it makes me think of Great Expectations.
13
Get a grip. Some materials are not intended to last forever. Mr. Armstrong's landing on the moon will never be forgotten! The actual apparel he wore is only a symbol. Many artists intentionally choose to work with short-lived materials. Others use stone that lasts many lifetimes. That is their choice and part of their work.
12
@Donna Gray: it’s ironic that you think the moon walk will never be forgotten, considering the number of people who believe it was actually a movie-set fake.
12
@Michael c
The number of people who discounted a documented, filmed moon walk remain a fringe element, not a source of an alternative viable opinion. I had two friends who questioned it; they also questioned stuff they learned in classes in astronomy, biology, chemistry, because they didn't really pay attention, or study hard enough.
The author suggests that it is a tradegy that some art work is degrading because the artist who created the piece used unstable materials. Well so what - if the artist is still alive then they should replace the pieces if the museum/collector wishes them to.
Otherwise if the artist is no longer living then viewer should appreciate the piece as best they can now as it will deteriorate over time. As others have suggested, not all pieces of artwork are meant to be conserved and saved especially if the artist selected unstable materials.
7
I had a lot of memorable moments in suits that are long gone.
15
Let them go. It’s part of the story of the object, a marker of their place in cultural history and a reflection of the process and materials available at the time. Document it.
24
@Block Doubt Absolutely - Let. It. Go.
3
@Block Doubt
Cultural history is human history; it is our history. Great art has been preserved because it is both great and not replaceable. The Sistine Chapel is maintained by experts. Your suggestion to consider great paintings, sculptures and literature as disposable is possibly meant to foster intelligent discussion about what to keep. If not, it is not worth considering. Great art is beyond a "marker in cultural history"; it continues to inspire, enlighten; and, it makes our lives fuller. I toured the Louvre, the Prado, the Musee d'Orsay, The National Gallery, The Met and the Frick; I saw things which made my life better; I saw beauty.
1
Throw it all next to the bike path I use (and try to free of garbage on my rides home); it'll still be there in the future.
3
More testament to the fact that these “works” are not as valuable as elite critics think...
6
I applaud the effort but it seems pointless.
Let ephemera be ephemeral.
9
@Marco we’re not talking about ephemera, we’re talking about art and historical artifacts
2
@Marco
Great art, sculpture and literature are not "pointless"; they are not "ephemeral"; they are what we have been, and still are. They inform our history; they represent the progression of ideas, new inventions and creations. They are not "ephemeral"; they form the foundation upon which we stand and build. They are why we don't "reinvent the wheel".
Really? The readers here are going to champion the collapse of 'modern' historical pieces, simply because they are made of plastic? Get a grip.
For the longest time, museums barely had any idea of how to take care of their charges because they couldn't be sure what they were made of, without destroying them. The pieces the survived from old cultures did so accidentally. Now, we are able to deliberately commit our precious objects - symbols of our time and culture - to a museum display case, knowing that 'these things are important', and we can't do that because the 'wonder material' we thought would last forever breaks down in ways we weren't expecting when we don't want it to, and doesn't break down in helpful ways when we do want it to.
The Armstrong suit is just one example, but a future culture could learn to much about us from it: that we went to the moon; how our engineers thought; what kind of environment humans needs to be comfortable; how our bodies move; our available materials at the time; that we knew which plastics to use and how to use them. Even 50 years from now, historians will be thrilled to have it, because I promise you, so much of engineering never gets documented and never leaves the minds of who built it, outside of the hardware itself.
Studying how to prever plastics is just as important as studying how to break them down. Even more so, because eventually, there will be something biological that eats plastic - then we'll really need to be ready.
42
I understand how so many now-valued objects have been found to deteriorate. But this paragraph has a puzzle:
"There are the triumphs of human ingenuity: the first artificial heart, Ella Fitzgerald’s LPs, the Apple I computer, a D-Tag device that helped researchers track and save endangered right whales."
Are the Ella Fitzgerald LPs in danger? And why? As I understand it, records and their covers can last 100 years, at least, if kept from sunlight and fresh air, in standing rows. Why are those LPs falling apart? Are they on display somewhere? Are they of inferior vinyl? I can't understand their inclusion here.
7
@Charlie Messing some of Ella's LPs will soon be 100 years old.
4
It's revealing that people who are fiercely opposed to plastics seem to object to the study of plastic preservation and deterioration. But if you understand how plastic deteriorates, perhaps you can learn how to break it down faster so that it poses less of a hazard in the environment. At the same time, plastic objects in a museum have been deemed worthy of preservation for the same reason as any other made objects: they tell a story, not always the one we want to hear, of human life and intelligence over time.
You can't champion sustainability without science. What's important, as one commenter has noted already, is that science not be exploited for the polluting profits of the 1 percent and instead show us a better way forward. It isn't the knowledge that's the problem. It's the shortsighted uses to which it's put.
Anyway, who doesn't want Neil Armstrong's space suit preserved? Or a work of art emblematic of its time? Or artifacts to remind future generations what it used to be like before we stopped polluting our biosphere with ubiquitous plastics? I hope we don't confuse historical perspective with approval.
83
@C Wolfe, Personally I could care less if Neil Armstrong's space suit is preserved. Humanity can survive without it.
2
@Chris- What an amazingly short-sighted attitude. Over time much human knowledge is inevitably lost. Artifacts from earlier eras can help us understand the past and help to provide knowledge that has otherwise disappeared. Sometimes that knowledge if of interest only to those with a curiosity about such things; other times it can help and inform us in ways that are helpful to our present or to our future. One wonders just why you would write such a comment that is so antithetical to learning and understanding.
4
@Chris
It is a good thing that we personally could care less about your pompous, uninformed "opinion". Historians will continue to record history for future generations; we no longer sit around campfires and listen to the "elders" relate our history. We have written, documented history; we have photography, much of which documented the Civil War, WWI and WWII. Humanity carries forward its history in its documents, pictures, paintings and recordings. You are not required to learn anything; and, we are not required to share in your point of view.
1
All this degraded plastic will be a fitting epitaph for our age, if there is anyone in the future who looks back and wonders about us.
18
The irony here is not exactly subtle. “It breaks your heart” that Neil Armstrong’s space suit is disintegrating?
Get a grip! What’s heartbreaking is a photo of a whale’s dissected stomach disgorging all manner of plastic detritus. Still, I hope this research is successful, because in the course of finding ways to preserve plastics, methods for complete disintegrating them will necessarily be discovered too.
153
"Despite their notoriety as a major pollutant, plastics have important stories to tell." Littered beaches, parks, highways and cities have important stories to tell also.
Science has given us plastics and Styrofoam and in so doing, they have given us litter.
What's wrong with this picture?
53
@Cone Human beings have given us litter. It's a huge problem because their are billions of us, and all too often we endanger ourselves and the planet for pure convenience and greed. What is sad is that we are the only species with the intelligence to create scientific marvels, but we're still too stupid to stop screwing ourselves with our science.
Sadder still, intellectually we know better. That means we have yet to progress beyond our baser, animal instincts, though we're the only species capable of consciously doing so. What good is a brain capable of accomplishing wonders if we're collectively too petty and lazy to make proper use of it?
15
@Barry Williams Sad but very true.
"One word, Plastics" Mr McGuire to Dustin Hoffman in The Graduate (1967) "There's a great future in Plastics."
1
Wood v. plastic: wood rots, is biologically recycled. Plastic degrades by fragmentation and leaching, but its chemistry is alien to biology. What we needed was a plastic that works with nature. It's a failure of our technology, due largely to the cheapness of current plastics. And why are they cheap? Because they are made from fossil petrochemicals, which have a privileged position in the economy, heavily subsidized and able to externalize most of their costs (pollution, climate change, healthcare). A carbon tax or other anti-carbon incentive would favor alternative technologies.
104
@99Percent: The big picture is always worth repeating.
1
What a comment on our society's obsession with youth. Why would we expect things to last forever, unchanging? All of the artifacts from earlier ages went through the harsh process of survival, and only some of them survived. That's the way it goes. Yes, it's sad that some materials have a limited life. Let their deteriorated state be an education for those who have no idea where things come from or what their true nature might be.
64
How about this; we never call something made out of plastic "a treasure". The items may have served a purpose, and may have even been critical, but to invest emotional energy into something so temporary is foolish at best and deluded at worst.
28
I guess the real question is whether an object was intended to endure. Art works and buildings? Yes. Space suits? No. They probably had more immediate concerns.
Rembrandt has done pretty well over time. If Claes Oldenburg wanted his works to last much past their original sale, he should have made them from something other than cheap toy materials.
As for archival toothbrushes? Well, who knew?
17
Plastic needs to be disintegrated, safely, so ... take a picture, describe the image in minute detail, and let it go.
43
And make the optimistic prediction that current digital information will be readable in the future.
3
Nothing lasts forever, and so it becomes the responsibility of the prevailing population to determine the next step. And, some technology will in time be proven undesirable ... again, becoming the responsibility of the prevailing population. Thanks for writing, thanks for the recommendations, and we shall share thoughts again soon.