Can first-time visitors to major museums like the Prado really allot just 45 minutes for the stop on their itinerary? That was the thesis behind an article in the Travel section of Sunday’s New York Times: “Touring the Prado at Warp Speed” appeared under the rubric “Cultured Traveler” with, I believe, no irony intended.
I can hear the groans. But wait. The article quoted Gabriele Finaldi, the Prado’s deputy director for conservation and research, as saying: “Forty-five minutes is the perfect amount of time to get to know the Prado.”
He advises skipping the Prado’s English and Dutch paintings and heading for the Velazquez, Titian, Rubens and Goya paintings, plus a few other galleries.
Heresy?
Not everyone wants to spend hours in the Louvre or the Met or the Prado. It is better, probably, that they spend a little time seeing the best works than no time at all — if they feel obligated or intimidated into staying hours when they’d rather be doing something else, they may say “skip it.” Seeing the highlights might even bring people back for more another time — their appetites whetted.
Why do ardent museum-goers guilt those who aren’t interested into feeling deficient? It has always been a mystery to me why some people naturally appreciate any particular art form, while others don’t. I call it a gift — some people have it, some don’t, even if we wish they did.
So Finaldi makes some sense, with one problem: cost. If the price of visiting a museum is too high, people will feel obligated to spend the entire day — and those straddling the line of interest (probably) will not go.
Membership is the answer, of course: “Free” admission, once one is a member, allows visits of any length. That’s why museums need all the creative strategies to increase membership (which I’ve mentioned here before) they can get. Short-term “summer memberships” are one tactic I haven’t seen enough of; discounts to stores and restaurants neighboring a museum are another. There’ve got to be others.