1. DaveinLA says

    I find it sad that the Met has to resort to a McQueen show to get this sort of crowd. I have nothing against McQueen or even a McQueen show. I do have a problem with such a show being held at the Met. There are enough venues for the display of fashion, and the Met should be preserved for Old Masters of painting. (Imagine me clutching my pearls now.) A McQueen show at the Met is meretricious and sadly, I fear there will only be more fashion shows since this one was such a huge success. (And let the angry responses begin…Now.)

  2. says

    The Met is one of the very tiny number of museums that have the staff, the money, and the public support to lead the art world in new directions. The Met, along with the Louvre, the Art Institute of Chicago, the Hermitage, and other similar places are institutions that showcase all kinds of artistic visions, some of which speak to me, while others do not… but what they all have in common are that they are all of superlative quality. I have no problem with this show being featured at the Met, as McQueen’s artistic vision and genius are on par with the other artists whose work can be seen there. Art takes many forms, and any effort to limit the art shown at the Met to “old master paintings” would be antithetical to the mission of the organization.

Leave A Reply