Nowadays 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?

In the modern era, almost everything can be browsed on the

internet

. Some people maintain that it is not necessary to go to

museums

or

galleries

to admire

artwork

when it can all be seen online. From my perspective, I totally disagree with

this

viewpoint. It is indeed more convenient to watch or see various

artwork

online.

However

, there are some reasons why physical

museums

or

galleries

cannot be replaced by the

Internet

.

Firstly

,

although

almost every masterpiece can be searched online, it is just a flat image on the

internet

which is hard to feel the power of the

artwork

.

For example

, "Starry Night" painted by Van Gogh, appeared in the task book or the

internet

frequently, but I never felt touched until I saw the

artwork

personally in New York. It drove me emotionally at the first sight I saw the authentic work.

Secondly

, visiting

museums

or art

galleries

to see the

artwork

is a form of respect for artists. I am working as an artist, it would be depressing if nobody chooses to admire my work physically,

moreover

, getting feedback in person is truly meaningful for artists.

Furthermore

, visiting art venues is a form of entertainment, most visitors feel a calm and relaxing atmosphere as they wander around the venue, which is hard for people to have the same experience online. In conclusion,

although

it is easier to access

artwork

information or sources online, it is still necessary for the public to physically attend public

museums

or

galleries

to appreciate the

artwork

.