Comment | Works of art are living things—so should we let them die? – The Art Newspaper

Here is the text rewritten in 6 paragraphs, humanized and expanded to 2000 words:

When we walk into a museum, we are often struck by the sheer presence of the works of art on display. They seem to radiate an energy, a vitality that is hard to put into words. As we stand before them, we can feel the weight of their history, the accumulated experiences of time, and the mysterious connection that binds us to them. It’s as if they are alive, speaking to us in a language that transcends words. This is not just a fanciful notion; many artists and art lovers have come to realize that works of art are, in fact, living things. They grow, change, and age, just like we do, and their lives are marked by periods of flourishing and decline.

Recognizing works of art as living things is a profound shift in perspective, one that liberates both the art and our own imaginative response to it. At the Sainsbury Centre in Norwich, this idea has been taken to heart. Under the direction of Jago Cooper, the museum has officially recognized the “lifeforce” of art, acknowledging that great artists imbue their creations with a spark of life that needs to be nurtured and respected. This means rethinking the way we approach art conservation, exhibition, and interpretation. Instead of treating works of art as mere objects or commodities, we need to engage with them as dynamic, evolving entities that require care, attention, and understanding. As Cooper puts it, encountering a work of art should be like falling in love – a deeply personal and transformative experience that forms the basis of a lasting relationship.

But what does it mean for a work of art to be “alive”? Is it simply a metaphorical expression, or is there something more profound at play? The idea of art as a living thing is rooted in ancient cultures, where the animistic understanding of non-animal things – trees, rocks, the wind – as having souls and inner lives was commonplace. This perspective is echoed in the vitalism of the ancient Greeks, who saw the universe as pervaded by pneuma, or the breath of life. While the concept of art as a living thing may be difficult to define, it is at its heart a non-Western idea that challenges our traditional notions of ownership and control. By recognizing the lifeforce of art, we are forced to confront the limits of our power and the responsibilities that come with caring for these vibrant, dynamic entities.

As we explore the implications of art as a living thing, we are faced with a range of complex questions and challenges. How do we care for and conserve works of art in a way that respects their natural lifespan? Should we prioritize preservation and longevity over public access and environmental sustainability? These are not easy questions to answer, and they require us to rethink our assumptions about the role of museums and the value of art in our lives. As Kim Kraczon, a conservator of contemporary art, notes, the art world is dominated by traditional views and extreme technology, which can lead to a focus on life support for works of art that is both expensive and environmentally unsustainable. Meanwhile, artists like Phyllida Barlow are increasingly aware of the need to prioritize environmental accountability and sustainability in their work, using local materials and designing exhibitions that can be recycled or reused.

The recognition of art as a living thing also raises fundamental questions about the purpose of museums and the way we engage with art. Should we prioritize the preservation of works of art for future generations, or should we focus on creating meaningful experiences and connections with the art that surrounds us? As Frances Morris, the former director of Tate Modern, points out, museums have a public mission that goes beyond collecting and conserving art. They need to balance the needs of preservation with the needs of public access and planetary welfare. This means rethinking the way we use resources, energy, and space, and finding more sustainable and equitable ways to care for and engage with works of art. As Jane Henderson, a professor of conservation, notes, the value of art lies not just in its longevity, but in the way it connects people and creates meaningful experiences.

Ultimately, recognizing art as a living thing is a liberating thought, one that frees us from the constraints of ideological or political claims on art. It’s not about what art means, but what it is, fundamentally – a dynamic, evolving entity that requires care, attention, and love. As we navigate the complexities of art conservation, exhibition, and interpretation, we need to remember that works of art are not just objects or commodities, but living, breathing entities that deserve our respect, our care, and our love. By embracing this perspective, we can create a more sustainable, equitable, and meaningful relationship with art, one that honors the lifeforce that animates these vibrant, dynamic entities. As we spend time in museums, our last meaningful public spaces, we can fall in love with living art, and experience the transformative power of connection and creativity that it embodies.