Prompt: Some people claim that public museums and art galleries will not be needed because people can see historical objects and works of art by using a computer. Do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Nowadays, it is the pros and cons that public museums and art galleries will disappear due to rapid development of technology such computer. I strongly disagree with this view, these building will still be necessary although people can see the art works and historical object from computer through internet. Ċ Public museums and galleries will be always exist as displaying art objects needs the real place. Looking art works such sculptures and images in an exhibition offers direct feeling because people see directly and they stand in front of art objects. For example, Portrait painting, Mona Lisa, if people visit Mona Lisa museum, they can see in real size of picture, texture and even touching it with their finger. As a result, people get detailed information about an art work that is done by an artist. Therefore, museums and galleries are the major places to display various type of collections. Ċ However, Unlike public museums and art galleries, museums and galleries have a fixed schedule of exhibition and visiting hours. Technological advancement helps people to see an art works in a convenient way as they can look anytime and everywhere from computers through internet connection. People see virtual image on computers screen, so that they cannot catch the detail such texture and color. Also, sometimes most of picture do not have a high resolution enough, and then pictures become less clear. There is still different between looking art work on screen of computers and seeing it directly. Ċ In conclusion, I believe that computers cannot replace public museums and art galleries.