The $200,000 Selfie

[Judge]

Ouch. People can be clumsy and make simple mistakes. But imagine trying to get a selfie and knocking over absurdly expensive art objects. From what I heard from the mainstream media, this most decidedly wasn't a joke or stunt.

California woman's 'selfie fail' destroys $200,000 worth of art

 

[AGXStarseed]

Well, to coin a phrase - "Whoops!"

 

[Mia]

It seems like it was carelessness. The exhibit should have been roped off. Think exhibitors now have to think in terms of selfies, rather than permitting people to get in close to some exhibits.
The pedestals should have been stabilized rather than left free-standing. The young woman who sat down in front of one, should have realized how unstable they were. Both sides can learn from this in future. The artists, the museum or gallery and the public.

 

[OlLiE]

i never understand people that find that showing that they were at a museum is more important than enjoying the museum - its someone else's art, but they wanted a picture of themselves in the forefront and the artwork in the background, narcissistic and stupid, a good flemish saying is 'dom zijn doet zeer' or being stupid hurts...

 

[Judge]

It seems like it was carelessness. The exhibit should have been roped off. Think exhibitors now have to think in terms of selfies, rather than permitting people to get in close to some exhibits.
The pedestals should have been stabilized rather than left free-standing. The young woman who sat down in front of one, should have realized how unstable they were. Both sides can learn from this in future. The artists, the museum or gallery and the public.

I'm pretty certain that in the event of a suit, the exhibitor will carry the brunt of the liability for this. It was absurd to set something like this up like dominoes falling. At the very least the pedestals should have been distanced to avoid the possibility of this happening. There's some real liability exposed IMO. As for the women who initiated this, I suppose it will depend on what kind of assets she has to recoup such a large loss. Probably few to none.

 

[Katleya]

It is stupid on the part of the woman to be that careless, but the exhibitor really should have set up the exhibition in a way that protected the works of art. I'm sure it's part of their responsibility towards the artist, there's a contract and surely insurance is involved.

I once visited a museum that was heaven for me: rules that the agents in the museum actually had visitors follow.
So there's this tiny fragile piece (I think it was by Bosch? Can't recall) that's displayed horizontally, as if on a table, but with a glass case above it for protection. Well, you couldn't take pictures because the flash is bad, but also because dropping the camera or phone on the glass case would have broken it and damaged the piece. Perfectly logic. That was explained on the display!!! And when some tourist that paid no attention to that tried to take a picture, an agent swooped in and reminded her of the ban.
I so many of them enforce the museum rules, I was so happy

 

[Acorn_Elf]

I don't understand why they would put $200,000 of art on those flimsy, easily knocked over tables anyway. The person who knocked them over must have been mortified.

 

[Momo]

My question is, where were the ropes to tell people the art was unstable? Seems like a stupid design to me... I would probably have done the same thing, not the selfie part, but the knock everything over due to sheer clumsiness part.

 

[WildCat]

If they knew the value of the sculptures going in, they (as in, the people responsible for the exhibit) should have taken precautions against any potential accidents. OK, so you know selfies are a trend these days? You know how easily distracted people can get with their phones now? Lock those pedestals in place, get some cases for the art...I know a couple people who can pitch in (including myself), but they don't work for free

And this woman responsible? She isn't going to come close to covering ~$200k worth of "art"...it's just not going to happen. BUT, on the other hand, she probably should have handled herself with a bit more grace than carelessly snapping photos without regard to her surroundings...

Lessons learned on both ends I'm hoping, more so for the people in charge of the exhibit.

 

[Judge]

My question is, where were the ropes to tell people the art was unstable? Seems like a stupid design to me... I would probably have done the same thing, not the selfie part, but the knock everything over due to sheer clumsiness part.

I see it as basically a complete failure on the part of the exhibitor. Not to mention how high the theft exposure must have been for much of anyone to snatch and grab pieces of art simply placed on a pedestal.