Parents Let Kid Play in Artwork Worth Millions of Dollars

If the artwork is indeed worth $10 million, why is this even permitted? Shouldn't the area be cordoned off? Or someone posted there?

If it hadn't been in an art museum [edited by admin - be nice now] wouldn't have known it was supposed to be "art" in the first place.

If a kid is old/mature enough to visit the art museum, they're old/mature enough to be expected to behave and not touch or climb on the art. If they're still so little that being little should be an excuse, they're still too little for the art museum. Try taking them to the park or the zoo instead. They'll have more fun and not likely harm anything.

It doesn't matter if the work is priced right or overpriced, it's not the child's possession, the child isn't at home, they should know they aren't to treat it as if it's their possession and act like that in public. It shouldn't make any difference to the child or the parent if it's a 10 million buck sculpture or a cheap plant pot, it's not a chair, it's not theirs, it's not for touching.

Should have been roped off and parents kicked out immediately. fail all the way around

No, it shouldn't need to be roped off. From my experience, everything in a museum is valuable, and therefore, shouldn't be played on like a jungle gym. Adults/parents visiting an art museum should certainly respect this and if they can't, take junior someplace more appropriate.

Kid, if you need a rest, go play in Tracey Emin's exhibit.

Art, like anything else, is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it. But as Melissa said, it doesn't matter what it's really worth; it's in a museum and not to play on.

I have two daughters, five stepchildren, and two grandkids, so I know that kids will do what they want WHEN YOU LET THEM DO ANYTHING THEY WANT.

What if the artist's concept was "multi-level bunk bed" and s/he decided that s/he wouldn't label it, just to see if anyone "got it".

(Too many quotation marks? How about "valued" at $10M? Don't worry, it's not part of my "argument".)

I am an artist who has their stuff in a gallery, and I have done multiple art shows. You wouldn't believe the kind of behavior parents let their kids get away with in those situations. I make beaded cuffs on a loom, which requires hours of delicate handiwork and the materials cost me about $40-$50 per bracelet, and parents just let their kids touch all over my work and screw with my display, despite the high(ish) price tag. And don't even try to ask them to not touch, because then that makes you look like the jerk. Now, if it's ceramic work, they admonish the kids, but smaller pieces like mine they don't give a crap about.

Regardless of what you think about this artist's work, it is still their work that they put a lot of time, money and effort into, and it shouldn't be treated like a toy.

kids here in The United States (since the picture was taken in london) are taught by some that they can be anything they want without having to work to get there.. "look at this person they became a billionaire and THEY never went to college" dont correct them.. let them be free to make their own choices??!!.. i say children need love, guidance, structure and discipline. they need to understand that if they make a mistake there are consequences. I love my kids and i would have never allowed them to be this disrespectful!

smh..BAD PARENTS.

We were in a museum when a guard told me I was standing on a work of art (thought it was just decorative floor). I said to him "Then maybe you shouldn't lay it on the floor!". No ropes or anything. AND there were things on the wall by it.

Pittsburgh. Carnegie.

So... Art, and especially modernist art, is supposed to confront societal norms.
The actions of this family have certainly provoked that. The interesting point is that their actions have confronted the norm of artists. Is this picture seriously more confronting than many modernist installations? Does this picture just question how art can be appreciated in a tactile way by multiple generations? What if the child becomes the next great architect? What if the installation is actually supposed to be touched?

I'm not condoning the family. But I do think there is a responsibility from the gallery which is clearly lacking and many of the comments betray a pecuniary justification. This wouldn't be a news article if the work was worth $100, even though it may still be just as important to the artist who created it.

Sure that's not at IKEA?