[DISCARDED] International Art Gallery

[Fachumonn]

Thanks. Any other iffiness I may have about this proposal is sufficiently minor that I can support this in good grace.

Same here.

[Eggraria]

Very neat proposal. I'd love to see this reach the WA floor in a final form.

That being said,

1a. Visit the public museums and galleries of all consenting member nations to photograph, audio/videotape, or otherwise record a digital display of all exhibited artworks within. This does not apply to nations that present a direct or indirect danger to any dispatched photographers or historians.

Could be rewritten as "...exhibited artworks within, unless in a case of direct or indirect danger to any dispatched photographers or historians." to be more succinct. It's a stylistic choice, so it's up to you.

1b. Research and compose, to the best of their ability, a short historical explanation of each recorded artwork for study of the context of said art.

Many art galleries often contain pieces with contemporary significance; could this be amended to include contemporary context if present/relevant? Or would this just be implied by "historical"?

1e. Ensure the proper organization and working order of the IOAR, including making artworks searchable by nation or artist.

Could be rewritten as:

1e. Ensure effective and adequate organization and working order of the IOAR, including searchable labelling of artwork by nation, artist, time period, collection, and any other relevant labels deemed by the IOAR.

2a. The Office of Building Management must allocate a sizable portion of land - within international World Assembly territory and with sufficient transportation to and from all member states - on which to build the IGA.

For clarity, "...must allocate a sufficiently accessible and sizable portion of land within international World Assembly territory for the purposes of building the IGA."

Build and maintain the IGA, making sure to accommodate space and constant provide adequate expansion for member states that wish to donate artwork to the gallery. future donations to the gallery.

Changes in strikethrough + italics.

I think 2biii is a bit too wordy and difficult to parse at times. Work on condensing it down or re-organizing it to be more succinct.

Seeing as most of these suggestions are stylistic and mostly just feedback on your writing, you're under no obligation to take them up. That being said, I love the concepts laid out in this proposal. I'd love to see the concept of an international celebration of artwork play out in this way. Best of luck!

[West Barack and East Obama]

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Opposed so long as the IGA is established. A hideous waste of valuable funds that would be better used for public welfare and law enforcement. The likelihood is that only rich fat cats will have the means to be able to visit such an extravagant museum whilst the working class of the World Assembly have less money to buy an iPhone so that they can view the internet gallery which has the same art anyways

[Thousand Branches]

-snip-

Thanks so much! I’ve taken most of these suggestions in some form or another

[Tobosarsk]

OOC: Without googling, name two well-known Finnish works of art and their signifigance to you.

If you cannot and if they hold no signifigance to you, why should someone from a different universe care about somone else's nation's art? If they are interested, I'm fairly sure they could ask for pics of them already.

The point of this resolution is to make it that others can appreciate art from other cultures

[Tralfamdore]

I feel as if some of the requirements are simply unfeasible, such as ALL artwork, that is just ridiculous in my opinion, now if we amended this to be closer along the lines of being mostly voluntary to participate (as not to force countries without a significant art culture to create one) and the idea nation submitting a certain number of works of art they feel best represent them instead of all art in the country, which I repeat is plainly preposterous to expect due to the size of some of the countries in NS.

[Thousand Branches]

I feel as if some of the requirements are simply unfeasible, such as ALL artwork, that is just ridiculous in my opinion, now if we amended this to be closer along the lines of being mostly voluntary to participate (as not to force countries without a significant art culture to create one) and the idea nation submitting a certain number of works of art they feel best represent them instead of all art in the country, which I repeat is plainly preposterous to expect due to the size of some of the countries in NS.

Meh, I have no issue with the size of the ordeal. The WA exists on a much larger scale than any earthly group. It is also objectively voluntary, nations do not have to participate.

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

“I see no major errors. Full support.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

[Tralfamdore]

I feel as if some of the requirements are simply unfeasible, such as ALL artwork, that is just ridiculous in my opinion, now if we amended this to be closer along the lines of being mostly voluntary to participate (as not to force countries without a significant art culture to create one) and the idea nation submitting a certain number of works of art they feel best represent them instead of all art in the country, which I repeat is plainly preposterous to expect due to the size of some of the countries in NS.

Meh, I have no issue with the size of the ordeal. The WA exists on a much larger scale than any earthly group. It is also objectively voluntary, nations do not have to participate.

ok, the voluntery part wasnt apparent, your criticism of my criticism is valid, my concerns were mainly based around me thinking there would be forced participation

[Fhaengshia]

Great to see this new draft!

Meh, I have no issue with the size of the ordeal. The WA exists on a much larger scale than any earthly group. It is also objectively voluntary, nations do not have to participate.

ok, the voluntery part wasnt apparent, your criticism of my criticism is valid, my concerns were mainly based around me thinking there would be forced participation

That was a concern of mine in a previous draft, and I like the language of the solution used by Ara.

[WayNeacTia]

Support!

[Comfed]

So the artists have no say in this at all? Not even the right to compensation? Whatever happened to intellectual property?

Maybe I'm reading this wrong but that is my impression. If that's the case, I am opposed until that is addressed.

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

I really don't have much to add. This is a great effort.

Establishes the Artistic Retention Trusteeship (ART), with the task of creating * * *

The International Online Artistic Repository (IOAR), a publicly and easily available online repository with the purpose of documenting the artwork of member states.

Why not the "Publicly Available International Net Treasury (PAINT)". Just trying to stay on theme here.

The ART must:* * * Visit the public museums and galleries of all consenting member nations to photograph, audio/videotape, or otherwise record a digital display of all exhibited artworks within, except when a nation would present a direct or indirect danger to any dispatched photographers or historians.

Perhaps also an exception for when recording a digital display would damage or otherwise degrade the work? Maybe the thought was that the "consenting" part already takes care of this (because a member nation probably wouldn't consent to the WA photographing a photosensitive piece of art) but since the clause is written as a mandate I just thought I'd mention it.

The International Gallery of Art (IGA), a physical gallery with the purpose of exemplifying the best masterpieces of each individual member nation:

Okay, this is tough. Why not the "Special Center for Unifying Lots of Pleasing Things (SCULPT)." Again, just trying to stay on theme.

The Office of Building Management must allocate a sufficiently accessible and sizable portion of land within international World Assembly territory for the purposes of building the IGA.* * *

[*]The ART must * * * Build and maintain the IGA, making sure to accommodate space and provide adequate expansion for future donations to the gallery.

There are currently 24,072 member nations. If every nation had an exhibit space merely half the size of a standard bedroom, we're talking about a facility close to three times the size of the Louvre. Just saying.

Acknowledging, however, that cultural divide and a lack of international cooperation often lead to a lack of multiversal artistic knowledge throughout member states,

I don't acknowledge this. I don't even know what "multiversal artistic knowledge" is, or how it is different from "artistic knowledge." If we are talking about the scientific theory of parallel universes then my understanding is that it's impossible to acquire knowledge from (or even observe) a universe outside your own. If we are talking about the concept from science fiction and comic books... well... I guess anything goes.

I object to this preambulatory statement. It confuses me, which makes me scared and angry. Please consider changing "Acknowledging" to "Concerned" and "multiversal" to "[deleted]"

[Goobergunchia]

Would nations opting into clause 1a of the draft proposal be considered as making appropriate modifications to their domestic copyright scheme for purposes of clause 2 of "Foreign Copyright Recognition"?

Madeleine Kofelgas
Deputy WA Ambassador
Moderately Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia

[Thousand Branches]

So the artists have no say in this at all? Not even the right to compensation? Whatever happened to intellectual property?

Maybe I'm reading this wrong but that is my impression. If that's the case, I am opposed until that is addressed.

I’m not sure what you mean? A picture of a piece of art isn’t exactly intellectual property. I suppose when it comes to the physical gallery I could include something that would require consent of the original artist but that would be a bit difficult considering most of said artists are gonna be dead by now.

Would nations opting into clause 1a of the draft proposal be considered as making appropriate modifications to their domestic copyright scheme for purposes of clause 2 of "Foreign Copyright Recognition"?

I’m gonna go with yes? Frankly I don’t really understand that proposal and as far as I can tell, clause 2 is a definition but I think the answer to that is yes?

---

Also PRS I will get back to your comments when I have a bit more time to hit the resolution with some longform edits

[Desmosthenes and Burke]

So the artists have no say in this at all? Not even the right to compensation? Whatever happened to intellectual property?

Maybe I'm reading this wrong but that is my impression. If that's the case, I am opposed until that is addressed.

I’m not sure what you mean? A picture of a piece of art isn’t exactly intellectual property. I suppose when it comes to the physical gallery I could include something that would require consent of the original artist but that would be a bit difficult considering most of said artists are gonna be dead by now.

OOC:
In nations with sound intellectual property regimes distributing the type of photography that is implied by this resolution would violate the copyright of the original work, if it is still within the copyright period. Nothing in the likes of the Louvre or British Musem would have this problem, but quite a few works at say, the Centre Pompidou museum of modern art, are potentially still subject to IP protection as their creators are still living.

Also, side note, how does your proposal address contested ownership (Elgin Marbles as an example), colonialist exploitation (see the massive collections of artifacts from colonized people in the British Museum, Ethnographic Museums of Berlin, etc), and flat out expropriation/theft (NAZI plundering in the Third Reich, seizures by the Soviets, etc) all of which could conceivably occur within the NS world? What would happen if, say, the British government were to send a Nubian Christian fresco obtained during the colonial period for display?

[Fhaengshia]

Would nations opting into clause 1a of the draft proposal be considered as making appropriate modifications to their domestic copyright scheme for purposes of clause 2 of "Foreign Copyright Recognition"?

Madeleine Kofelgas
Deputy WA Ambassador
Moderately Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia

I’m not sure what you mean? A picture of a piece of art isn’t exactly intellectual property. I suppose when it comes to the physical gallery I could include something that would require consent of the original artist but that would be a bit difficult considering most of said artists are gonna be dead by now.

OOC:
In nations with sound intellectual property regimes distributing the type of photography that is implied by this resolution would violate the copyright of the original work, if it is still within the copyright period. Nothing in the likes of the Louvre or British Musem would have this problem, but quite a few works at say, the Centre Pompidou museum of modern art, are potentially still subject to IP protection as their creators are still living.

Also, side note, how does your proposal address contested ownership (Elgin Marbles as an example), colonialist exploitation (see the massive collections of artifacts from colonized people in the British Museum, Ethnographic Museums of Berlin, etc), and flat out expropriation/theft (NAZI plundering in the Third Reich, seizures by the Soviets, etc) all of which could conceivably occur within the NS world? What would happen if, say, the British government were to send a Nubian Christian fresco obtained during the colonial period for display?

GA232 defines copyright mainly for defining foreign copyright which is then used for mandating a minimum recognition time of works between member nations, that is the only aspect required from my reading. The resolution actually goes on to encourage the use of copyrighted works for education (among other) purposes without right-holder permission, which as this drafted proposal intends to become “A resolution to promote funding and the development of education and the arts.” would clearly fit that area of encouragement.

Re the side note: 2.b.ii. Stipulates that “All artworks must be of a reasonable size and moral decency”.
I understood this to cover works sourced illegally or through means of dubious morality, perhaps it could be made clearer as you do list important examples of ethically questionable holders of art.

[The Web of Life and Destiny]

FYI, I am bringing this proposal back from the dead. I’ll probably finish editing it into a new draft in ehhhh the next week? I wouldn’t quote me on that but it is coming back so if anyone does have any further comments, I’d love to hear them!

[West Barack and East Obama]

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Opposed so long as the IGA is established. A hideous waste of valuable funds that would be better used for public welfare and law enforcement. The likelihood is that only rich fat cats will have the means to be able to visit such an extravagant museum whilst the working class of the World Assembly have less money to buy an iPhone so that they can view the internet gallery which has the same art anyways

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Our position on this has not changed.

[The Web of Life and Destiny]

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Opposed so long as the IGA is established. A hideous waste of valuable funds that would be better used for public welfare and law enforcement. The likelihood is that only rich fat cats will have the means to be able to visit such an extravagant museum whilst the working class of the World Assembly have less money to buy an iPhone so that they can view the internet gallery which has the same art anyways

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Our position on this has not changed.

Ftr, out delegation’s position on your position (polite disagreement) has also not changed.

[West Barack and East Obama]

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Our position on this has not changed.

Ftr, out delegation’s position on your position (polite disagreement) has also not changed.

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Why though? The internet gallery is completely fine, but a physical one that contains less artwork, costs more money to maintain has no benefits. Sure, 'up close and personal' appreciation of the art may be a small benefit, but that will only be available to the rich upper class and will not really benefit the WA as a whole, unless this physical gallery has plans to be absolutely ginormous and also be easily accessible by the vast majority of the WA (i.e. a huge number)

[The Web of Life and Destiny]

Ftr, out delegation’s position on your position (polite disagreement) has also not changed.

Dr Justin Obama, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs: Why though? The internet gallery is completely fine, but a physical one that contains less artwork, costs more money to maintain has no benefits. Sure, 'up close and personal' appreciation of the art may be a small benefit, but that will only be available to the rich upper class and will not really benefit the WA as a whole, unless this physical gallery has plans to be absolutely ginormous and also be easily accessible by the vast majority of the WA (i.e. a huge number)

Sigh okay.

One, don’t know where you got the impression that the gallery would “only be available to the rich upper class”. I purposely never presented any price for entry and literally deemed specifically that it would be easily accessible by all WA nations. It literally says “a sufficiently accessible and sizable portion of land within international World Assembly territory”.

As for size, obviously it won’t be a small museum. If we were talking irl, it would be utterly implausible, but NationStates has literal hundreds of thousands of nations and over 20000 in the WA. And honestly assuming somehow every single nation wants to donate artwork, that’s still only 40000-ish artworks, a large complex could easily house that many. Shit, the Louvre has like 30 something thousand on it’s own.

Physical galleries are important because art is not always perfectly presented on a screen. Colors, strokes, details get lost in the pixels and the small size of a computer screen. It is important to be able to have a place to explore the cultures of WA nations from around the realm by really connecting to their art, in a way that cannot be achieved remotely. No, it is not a decision of pure efficiency, and I don’y believe it should be. The IGA remains.

[Jabberwocky]

This is a terrific idea, but is legislation necessary to bring it into being?

[Tinhampton]

I reaffirm my support for the last Aramantha-era draft but await the Webs-era draft before I can pass comment on THAT. Sorry

[The Web of Life and Destiny]

This is a terrific idea, but is legislation necessary to bring it into being?

I believe so, for a couple of reasons.

1. Money. The legislation ensures allocation of funds and resources for creation and maintenance.
2. Standards. The legislation ensures the artworks, physical gallery, and website are well taken care of and remain easily accessible to the public and not corruptible by greedy institutions.
3. Donations and care thereof. The legislation provides the guarantee that any works donated to the gallery will be maintained and not destroyed or damaged to the best of the curators ability. It’s easier to trust an organization bound by international law than a private institution or volunteer group.
4. Permissions to enter nations for photography and cataloguing of pieces is much easier to provide and the WA can also act to ensure cataloguers are not in danger when visiting nations.

I reaffirm my support for the last Aramantha-era draft but await the Webs-era draft before I can pass comment on THAT. Sorry

I’m working on it