If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Is Art a waste of money?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL0170229020070301?src=030107_1332_DOUBLEFEATURE_other_news
Personally I can't see why paintings like this are worth so much money - I can think of a lot more things I'd rather spend £6 million on.
I also don't see why the UK government has the right to stop it's owner taking it out of the country, I don't see how it's any of their business.
Personally I can't see why paintings like this are worth so much money - I can think of a lot more things I'd rather spend £6 million on.
I also don't see why the UK government has the right to stop it's owner taking it out of the country, I don't see how it's any of their business.
0
Comments
It's an important part of this country's heritage, and should remain here as such.
I think it's nice that some British work is being kept here. Though we've still got the British Museum, so we're hypocrits really.
basically any use of taxpayers money to keep art in the UK is subsidy for people that go to art galleries.
So the question to ask is, are people who go to art galleries a group that should be subsidised so that there leisure time is cheaper/more enjoyable?
I for one would say not........
The more people want it, the more valuable it is. Just the way it works.
It isn't more complicated than that.
Here is an appropriate comparison:
David Beckham is considered a 'national treasure' someone who is important to the 'national culture'. Because of this the govt matches what LA Galaxy are paying for him and install him at Man Utd (the most popular football club as compared to tate modern, the most popular art gallery presumably)
Does that sound reasonable to you?
i might spend a tenner on a pretty picture to stick on my wall, but the only reason id buy an old piece of artwork or any other antique is i might make a few bob in a few years.
i find it strange, cos thing like that are only valuble because there are other rich people who want it. and they probably only want it because other rich people want it.
imo, the antique world is similar to the fashion world.
Generally, richer people like to have a lot of assets that can grow in value with/above inflation and not be taxed as much. As far as I know anyway.
damn right.
What has Beckham got to do with art?
Should the government pay so much for a painting?
and
Is art a waste of money?
The first question is relevant to what most people seem to be saying here but most people's comments don't seem to have anything to do with the original question.
If you think something is beautiful, if you believe you want to own it, or be able to hang it, if it moves you in a way nothing else ever can, if you want to own the version that actually looks good, want to have that link with something that so moves your soul in a way nothing else can - then why not pay for it?
And whilst we are on the subject-
http://vbulletin.thesite.org/showthread.php?t=48247
Art makes people think, it brings pleasure. But I don't think millions of public money should necessarily be spent on it. Especially when much of it is hidden away in private council rooms/government buildings/10 Downing Street (at a guess) where the public cannot even see it.
David Beckham is a million more time important to what 'British culture' is than that painting.
A part of 'our' history?
It ain't a part of my history, I had never heard of it and will likely never see it, yet you are asking me to pay for it.
Why should I?
Saddo.
I certainly know which one I'd prefer.
http://uk.ask.com/reference/dictionary/wordnetuk/6616/analogy
Hope I can help you out with this
Will anyone know who Beckham was in 200 years time?
I doubt it.
It is a part of your history. As to never having heard of Turner? :eek:
It's not a very good analogy as the two things have no similarities at all.
Incidentally, i would imaigne that people will know who David Beckham was in 200 years time.
There are after all many mnay more serious football fans than art fans.......
Yes I have heard of him.
I also have heard of many other people who have had no discernible impact on me.
What is your point?
You really can't work out what I mean? :eek:
Can you name any footballers from 200 years ago?
My point is that you're not very well educated.
Who's history? :razz: