Talk:Accidental damage of art

A fact from Accidental damage of art appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 July 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in 2000, porters at Sotheby's auction disposed of a box in a crushing machine, accidentally destroying a painting worth about US$157,000 inside?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/July.

Wikipedia

does troll-ish meta-modern art "count" in this article when it's "damaged"?

Bear with me here, I'm not a Stuckist -- but in my mind, when Damien Hurst displays a literal pile of trash as an art piece, he's doing it to be subversive, exactly like DuChamps did around the 1920s. The fact that people might "abuse" it unlike normal art is sort of the "point"; the fact that a janitor "damaged" it would be a success for what it was setting out to do; is that really "damage"? For a more direct example -- would "Cut Piece" by Yoko Ono be considered "damaging art"? Mcdingle (talk) 06:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Referring to it as "what appears to be a pile of trash", instead of as "a pile of trash" is nonsense however. Just like a marble scuplture is a marble sculpture, a pile of beer bottles is, literally, a pile of beer bottles. Claiming it ""appears to be"" implies there is some sort of optical illusion at work. I have no idea why my edit was reverted.

151.67.95.129 (talk) 20:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All recent

These examples are all fairly recent. Perhaps older examples could be added. Art damage has been going on since man began drawing on cave walls. Wars have damaged lots of art too. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of that falls into other categories (articles linked in "See also"). I intentionally tried to avoid war and religion-related destruction. Also, e.g. bombing is not an accidental damage, IMO. Materialscientist (talk) 12:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an accident if the museum/whatever wasn't the target ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 17:49, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List

Shouldn't this be a list not an article. Unless someone has done a comprehensive study of these events, I don't think, as an article topic, this is a notable subject. It should be "List of accidental damage to art events", Sadads (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add this?

I came across this article, and thought maybe it belonged here: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36796581 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.235.1.22 (talk) 12:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notre Dame

It should include the recent destruction of Notre Dame Cathedral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.236.198.25 (talk) 00:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]