Do we rewind the Sistine Chapel to when Michelangelo painted it, put back the missing stones on Stonehenge, restore the Sphinx? Or enjoy their fading grace, which might enhance the art.
It's a strange conundrum, as I would like to see both.
I know the post was about fading comic books but it's my 2 penny's worth
Mark
Mark,
Devil's advocate in me coming out....you DO know that they did an extensive restoration to the Sistine ceiling, don't you? They stripped the browning layers of dirt and oil and brought the colors back to what they approximated were the originals.
....just sayin'.... 
thanks for keeping the conversation going.
What I found most interesting about the Sistine Chapel restoration, bb, is how MUCH I learned from viewing the cleaned art. ASSUMING, of course, that the restorers were actually getting closer to the original. Think of all the preconceptions we've had based on dirt and smoke and layers of dirty, smokey wax. There are people who regard the cleaned work as blasphemous, but that doesn't alter the reality of that's most probably the way it was painted. So what if we became accustomed to dirty, old murals. Our acceptance of them in no way changes what they were meant to be. We have to suck it up and reexamine the work and learn to appreciate it anew. It's not easy, but it allows a more honest evaluation of the work.
Perhaps you don't care for the newly restored, brightly colored version. Okay. But then you should be able to explain what it was about the dirty version that you DID like. YOU need to examine YOUR preferences and likes and dislikes, without reference to Michelangelo - because now you're discussing taste not art. Do you prefer "vague" art? "Earth toned" art? "distorted art"? All of these are perfectly valid personal tastes, and those who purchase a book which reproduces the cleaned version are eminently capable of laying browned cellophane over every page to cater to their preferences. What they shouldn't be allowed to do it to write books that proclaim to be historic or critical and only reproduce the versions they like. That's a distortion of reality with a primary purpose of reinforcing one person's preference.
As for the Sphinx, I would love to see it restored. There is no sanctity in its current state as it was caused by ignorant French soldiers using it for cannon practice. How non-artistic can you get?
Stonehenge I'm less sure. One would have to know EXACTLY what it looked like to be able to restore it. If one was guessing, then I'd say leave it be. And, yes, one can say the restorers are guessing on the Sistine Ceiling, but they claim to be able to tell with 99+% certainty and potential for being wrong amounts to differences probably not noticeable to our human
Regarding the resolution of my collection, I would worry more about theft splitting up the collection, not the university. The "money" angle is the motivation for stealing, not the incentive it might supply a library.
I've been MOST fortunate in my life that I've only moved twice in 40 years and each time to a larger residence - this last one literally designed to hold the collection. And, I, too, parted with my Silver Age Marvel Collection in order help finance the remodeling into this final form. Sigh...
Peace, Jim (|:{>
