Fly in the ointment in the Vatican museums: photo ban and dirty statues in spite of $ 90 million in profits

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

While visiting the Vatican museums, which are really worthy and interesting, I noticed several negative points, some of which even took me by surprise. Somehow I didn't expect this, at least from the Vatican. And in the famous Sistine Chapel, it was not at all very comfortable for me to be, even a little unpleasant. But the frescoes of the legendary Michelangelo are not to blame. In general, a significant fly in the ointment turned out to be in a barrel of honey called the Vatican. Let's talk about this.

Firstly, the halls of the Vatican museums turned out to be rather dirty, dust, stubborn stains on the shabby walls, stains of unknown origin … Many exhibits, especially antique statues, look no less dirty than the walls. They were once installed and they stand, absorbing the age-old dust. Many are already almost black … No, really. You can, of course, say that these are unique exhibits, and that they were found and not touched so as not to damage them. May be…

But nowhere have I seen such dirty statues, not in archaeological museums in Turkey, or even in the excavations of ancient cities, where some sculptures, which are two thousand years old, stand in the open air, in the wind and rain. Yes, even pigeons sometimes treat city monuments more carefully than in the Vatican to their exhibits! It is clear that many people pass through these halls every day, carry dirt from the streets with them, wipe the walls …

02.

The Vatican is visited by about 6 million people a year, a terrible figure. But our State Hermitage is visited by about 4 million, which is also quite a lot. But no comparison! The Hermitage has completely different sensations, but what about antique statues from a parallel antique era? Yes, it's just that the attitude is different, apparently not so consumer-oriented. In the Vatican, however, there is a persistent feeling that the entire museum is a large conveyor belt for shearing Euro currency notes. And the entire collection is already the tenth thing. Do people go? They are coming. Why change something, do something, somehow spend money …

I read that the Vatican museums bring in about 90 million euros a year, which is about 250,000 euros a day. Guys, well, God bless them with the exhibits, maybe they really can't be touched, but at least clean the walls! This is some kind of unsanitary conditions … Yes, that the walls, at least the metal plates on the exhibits, should be replaced with new ones. There are already devils that.

03.

And do not forget that the budget of the Vatican is calculated not only from the museum, the Holy See has hundreds of thousands of real estate objects around the world, parishes, schools, hotels, and other institutions. The German magazine Wirtschaftswoche has a turnover of billions of euros. And another important point, in many cases, church facilities are not taxed. And what, it is impossible to replace at least the plates on the exhibits in your own main museum? Such is the indicator of culture in one of the strongholds of European culture.

04.

05. "Guys, wash the walls!" - the boy tries to shout.

Second point. There is nothing surprising here, but unpleasant. I'm talking about the ban on photography in the famous Sistine Chapel. The Vatican wants to be the exclusive producer of printed matter. And then suddenly what a nice young lady will take a picture of the chapel's interiors on her mobile phone and print a bunch of postcards! Will get hold of … Or, on the contrary, he will send a photo to Instagram, they will look at everything and everyone, they will not go to the museum, they will say they have already seen it and are not interested. Maybe the photo will turn out to be unsuccessful. And there will be no more crowds, the halls of the Vatican will be empty and the wind will spree in the cardinal's pockets. Sadness-sadness!

However, some write that the network is already full of photos. Why take pictures, stand under the watchful eye of security and enjoy the masterpieces of art! But if there are a lot of photos on the web, then what is the point of prohibitions? What will interfere with other pictures. Someone doesn't care. And someone wants to take a photo for themselves as a keepsake. Who knows, maybe he will visit this chapel once in his life, and the picture is important for him. But no, forbid! For me, this is sheer redneck, and in some ways even rudeness. That is why I shy away from such places, and it was even unpleasant for me to be in the chapel.

By the way, at a time when the Vatican prohibits taking photographs of gray biomass in the chapel, the Holy See itself does not shy away from renting it out for corporate events. The online publication RBC reports that in the fall of 2014, the Sistine Chapel was leased to Porsche, the participants were served "dinner accompanied by the choir of the National Academy of Santa Cecilia." Other publications call the cost of participation in the event at 5900 euros per person; in total, about 40 people were present at the corporate party.

It is worth remembering a private tour of the Vatican for Justin Bieber, for whom, as Forbes writes in the article "Vatican for Sale", it cost 50 thousand euros, plus another 20 thousand euros in a fine he paid for the pleasure of kicking a ball in the aforementioned Sistine Chapel.

And, finally, a few more words about redneck. I have met such an opinion that the ban on photography saves cultural objects from … selfies! After all, it's a terrible misfortune and wild lack of culture that someone will take a selfie with Michelangelo's work. Or maybe he will take a picture of the Eiffel tower on the palm of his hand … Probably this is the real redneck when we, such as cultural ones, consider ourselves in the right, whether it is possible, and how, to photograph certain cultural objects. I took a selfie with a picture of da Vinci - wow, what a cattle you are, but I'm a pillar of culture and education. I don’t think it paints us. There are, of course, really inappropriate places for selfies, but we are not talking about them now.

In the end we are all different, but we are all human. And if someone will appreciate the selfie from the Sistine Chapel when you bought a museum ticket there, then why not. Someone likes to take pictures, someone just needs to contemplate the beauty. Someone makes great pictures, someone crooked little pictures in instu. There is nothing terrible or criminal in this. And delusional prohibitions, especially on photography, do not carry any benefit in themselves. And even more so, they have nothing to do with culture and art. Anyway, can you wash the walls first?