The first thing that struck me was, why isn’t this priceless thing behind glass. I asked one of the two guards on security this very question. She said, nothing ever happened. What...? If that’s the rationale from the top down. It’s deeply flawed. If someone slashes it. It’s too late after the fact. Priceless human history destroyed. Think it can’t happen. Well, I couldn’t conceive of someone throwing paint over a Van Gogh painting in the Louvre. But it happened. Is it a rare random act? That’s besides the point. The point is, the idea is out there, in public consciousness. A seed planted. A virus. Like school shootings. Something once remote and inconceivable. Now tangible, global, and digitally instant. With regards to security, here's something fundamental. Like police. Security can only respond, after the fact. There is no prevention for surprise-premeditated attack. That requires hyper-alert vigilance.  And even then, Presidents are behind glass because they know response isn’t prevention. So why take the chance?

My second thought was: If the piece were enclosed in glass, how much better it would be, for the viewing public. You could get closer and examine the intricate nature of the work. Which the work requires. Also it’s being exhibited as a type of painting on the wall. When in fact it’s a three-dimensional artifact. With painted scenes on the doors. Barely visible and largely unnoticed by the general public. The work should be viewed on all sides, centrally placed and again enclosed in glass.

These are my thoughts. I know I’m completely right on this. I’ll email The Prado. It’ll probably go nowhere. Or maybe someone will listen. Consider the times we live in, and help pass it on (safely) to the next generation.