The Louvre is overwhelmed
A sharp contrast in how to fix the broken museum model
By Sarah Kass
On June 16th, the Louvre—the world’s most visited museum—made headlines. But this time, it wasn’t about the Mona Lisa. And there was certainly no smile. At 9 a.m., as ticketed visitors lined up outside, the museum abruptly closed its doors without warning.
While many museums today struggle with dwindling attendance and shift to online-only operations, the Louvre shut down for the opposite reason: overwhelming crowds.
Last year, nearly 10 million people visited the Louvre—a museum designed to accommodate barely half that number. Each day, some 20,000 visitors crowd into the Mona Lisa’s gallery, a space never intended for such volume—let alone the sea of smartphones and jostling elbows vying for the perfect selfie. Compounding the issue, the museum’s basic visitor services—signage, restrooms, food—have fallen below international standards.
Museum staff moved quickly, allowing the Louvre to reopen later that same day. Just two weeks later, the French government announced plans to launch an international architecture competition to reimagine the Louvre’s public spaces and entrances, with the goal of improving the overall visitor experience. At the same time, the museum unveiled plans to relocate the Mona Lisa to a dedicated gallery—with its own entrance and timed ticketing—to ease congestion and offer a more meaningful viewing experience.
As the Louvre prepares to inaugurate a new chapter for its visitors, there is a growing movement to upend the experience of looking at art altogether. Rather than upgrade the physical place where visitors come to admire paintings on walls, these efforts are turning 2D art into 3D immersive experiences.
“Beyond Van Gogh” brings more than 300 of the artist’s works to life through large-scale, floor-to-ceiling digital projections. Visitors move through vast gallery spaces where the art surrounds them—animated, layered, and set to music—allowing viewers to “experience the finest details of Van Gogh’s works in unprecedented clarity, as if painted before your eyes.” The New York City iteration filled over 500,000 cubic feet with immersive visuals, including a swirling, cinematic rendering of The Starry Night—whose original hangs just a few miles uptown at the Museum of Modern Art.
Meanwhile, “Beyond Van Gogh & Beyond Monet,” hosted at the Connecticut Convention Center, merges the works of two artists who never met, blending their iconic styles through synchronized projections and soundscapes. Organizers say the immersive environment allows audiences to “form new relationships with notable masterpieces.”
Reactions have been divided. Critics argue that such digital renderings cheapen the art, stripping it of texture, scale, and the singularity of the original work. Supporters counter that these experiences broaden access, preserve relevance, and ensure that new generations are awed by these masterpieces.
The Louvre, for its part, seems focused on making it easier to take selfies with the Mona Lisa; the immersive “Beyonds” aim to make it possible to get to know her. But a deeper question remains: Are we cheapening art by making galleries more Instagrammable—or by turning art into spectacle?
Which bet will keep Gen Z and the generations that follow engaged with art—and help museums stay relevant and afloat?
Is art there for us to capture on camera—or is it there to capture us?