The "living" museum would somehow scan the identities and histories of each visitor. The walls and halls would then blossom with paintings and statues revealing their lives.
Thus, when the slaughter progressed, it could not be impersonal. The "living museum" would record the details of the massacre; this would also turn into paintings and statues.
The feedback loop of endless documentation and analysis would eventually fragment into the "deconstruction" process when it would all turn into abstract art -- which, naturally, stood for abstract data.
The "Narrator" recorded this experience in a cold, heartless art review. The person doing the writing (Me?) was clear to distinguish between himself and this unfeeling "Narrator." He's saying it; I'm not.