Many people argue about museums and galleries showing foreigner work ruther than local work. Others say that art should be restricted with political borders. In fact, it’s a vey old tradition, not a consequence of the globalization or other modern conceptive; we know that all magnificient paintings and curvings used to be sent to French exhibitions in Paris to garner more appriciations and regional evaluations.
When a museum or a gallery give the priority to the local art, local artists would probably feel more supported and appriciated for arts they present. Moreover, they could encourage them to represent their country with its specific traditions, occasions, and other cultural features. This would enhance the tourism in the country and lead to add revenue which support the national economie.
On the other hand, many people consider arts as a world-wide message, we should spread it crossing all borders, restrictions, and unreasonable regulations. In other words, they see arts as one continueum we have to respect, spread, and never divide. They say impressive paintings are not tagged with a flag or symbol of the artist’s nationality; the same applied to well-crafted sculptures. However, it is achieved in one small area of land, it’s a gift for the whole humaity currently and in the future.
In conclution, I believe that arts have to be unconstrained; it’s one of the most powerful yet peaceful weapons that could help to free humanity and break all meaningless constraints that hinder our development and limit progress. However, it’s recommended for museums and galleries to support local arts and appreciate the messages they try to deliver.