Van Gogh immersive experience
This is a review of an exhibition of room-sized projections of animated van Gogh paintings set to music. There is also a virtual reality simulation of Arles. The reviewer is not impressed, suggesting that the exhibits are a reduction of van Gogh to a "nursery mobile," as well as comparing them to world's fair exhibitions. He points out that in New York, viewers could choose to go see actual van Gogh paintings instead, and that the immersive exhibits are a pale and gimmicky imitation. On the other hand, the reviewer has to admit that the immersive exhibitions have been more successful at engaging people in the works of van Gogh than traditional museums.
I agree with the reviewer that by including only van Gogh's work in the exhibition, the artists are cheapening both van Gogh and the medium of projected immersive art installations. Something designed specifically for the medium, perhaps inspired by some aspects of impressionism could be a powerful exploration. Alternatively, immersive elements could be exhibited alongside van Gogh's paintings in order to help deepen viewers' experiences with the work.
On the other hand, the reviewer dismisses experiences with drugs and psychedelics (and nursery mobiles) as inherently meaningless or less meaningful than experiences with paintings. This strikes me as an unexamined absorption of war-on-drugs rhetoric, especially in light of recent studies finding psychedelic drugs to be extremely effective for reprocessing trauma - clearly many people find these experiences to be deeply meaningful, which is perhaps the disconnect between the reviewer and the popularity of the show.
