Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   "National data indicates that free museums make less money than those charging admission." Sometimes it takes an intellectual to explain these things   (opinionjournal.com) divider line
54
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1516 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jul 2006 at 7:57 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



54 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
HumbleGod
2006-07-29 7:02:21 PM  
Now if only that intellectual can explain to me why that diarrhea splatter on canvas is considered art.

/I keed
 
PottyMcNugg
2006-07-29 8:00:11 PM  
Great use of the img.fark.net tag.
 
I wanted to be coffee
2006-07-29 8:02:05 PM  
That's a suggested donation right? Here's a dollar. No? Student discount?

/me in new york this summer
 
kb7rky
2006-07-29 8:02:48 PM  
I wonder how many tens of dollars were spent on reaching that conclusion?
 
riverhawk
2006-07-29 8:03:59 PM  
[image from upload.wikimedia.org too old to be available]

"Establishments charging admission make more money than those that don't. Story at 11."
 
AliasUndercover
2006-07-29 8:04:25 PM  
The museums are supposed to be free because we have already paid for thwem out of our taxes. Why does everyone think we should pay for this stuff twice?
 
Aexia
2006-07-29 8:06:41 PM  
Just because most here won't RTFA...

They're referring to *overall* revenue. Free museums apparently rake in less money from other sources, like gift shops and sponsorships.
 
beer4breakfast
2006-07-29 8:08:34 PM  
simpsonfan: Sure, I paid to go to the Lourve. With the stuff they have there like the Mona Lisa...Some of these museums have trash and junk you wouldn't be able to tell if it is upside down or not.(Tate Gallery, I'm looking in your direction). They call it art. They expect people to pay for garbage like that...When I went to Washington D.C., there were all these museums. I got a hell of a shock that they were all free. The Smithsonians are the best museums around...

The art I admire was functional. I don't see why aesthetics has to be choosen over functionality.

[image from airforce.missouri.edu too old to be available]
 
trozman
2006-07-29 8:09:09 PM  
HumbleGod

Now if only that intellectual can explain to me why that diarrhea splatter on canvas is considered art.

/I keed

I remember an "art piece" being this artist taking a dump, scooping a little bit of his shat and delicately placing it on this white stool (uhh, the chair kind of stool).

It was a commentary... on.. well you see.. Russia... and the economic infrastructure of... oh hell I don't know.

IT WAS A GODDAMN PIECE OF POOP ON A CHAIR.

That was selling for thousands of dollars.
 
Bon_Scott
2006-07-29 8:09:35 PM  
Damn profitable museums are no better then profitable oil companies!
 
trozman
2006-07-29 8:11:48 PM  
Aexia

I never buy anything from museums. Neither do most people. So the admission fees are a significant portion of "overall revenue", especially at $15 or 20 a pop (mentioned in the article).
 
rjShadow
2006-07-29 8:13:32 PM  
At first I read it as "free museums make more than those charging admission."

I couldn't figure out for the life of me how that was obvious.
 
SwiftFox
2006-07-29 8:14:36 PM  
Hey, if the federal government can charge me an admission fee to park and walk down and look at the south tufa mounds at Mono Lake, or drive up and look at the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest, they can charge an admission fee for the Smithsonian. Although I've never visited the Institution I suspect it has even a bigger variety of things to look at than the other attractions do, and visitors should have little to complain about.
 
pshaw
2006-07-29 8:14:42 PM  
Tell me more, oh great wise man of all knowledge. How do the sliding doors a supermarkets know I'm standing there?
 
rackrent
2006-07-29 8:19:57 PM  
It should be either:

"National data indicate" or

"National data show"

/grammar nazi
 
edschurr
2006-07-29 8:21:46 PM  
trozman I remember an "art piece" being this artist taking a dump, scooping a little bit of his shat and delicately placing it on this white stool (uhh, the chair kind of stool).

You're just sorry you didn't think of selling your poop for thousands of dollars first.
 
xlbrooklyn
2006-07-29 8:22:00 PM  
SwiftFox: Hey, if the federal government can charge me an admission fee to park and walk down and look at the south tufa mounds at Mono Lake, or drive up and look at the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest, they can charge an admission fee for the Smithsonian

Uh, no, they can't. The endowment that established and still largely funds the Smithsonian specifically forbids charging any admission, in perpetuity. Look it up.
 
gradatim
2006-07-29 8:23:10 PM  
IT WAS A GODDAMN PIECE OF POOP ON A CHAIR.

That was selling for thousands of dollars.

Anyone who can sell a piece of poop on a chair for thousands of dollars is either a goddamn genius or the best salesman on the planet.

/jealous
 
StreetlightInTheGhetto
2006-07-29 8:23:10 PM  
Sweet! Favorite museum admission story!

So my friends and I were in Chicago for a music festival (of the indie rock variety), and got up hella early to see the Toulusse-Lautrec show at the Art Institute. It's free, and we're broke, great. Wait, the show itself costs $18, and it's not "suggested". F--k.

So this nice security guard lets us know that if we search for a used ticket, we can probably get in. They scan the bar code at the door, but we can just say we didn't know it was no reentry. Cool. So me and Rachel go searching for used tickets, and the other three in our group start asking people at the door for their tickets.

Rachel ends up finding two tickets, but we're still short three. Then the other group asks this older man and his daughter, and the guy gets all pissed off. "What do you think you kids are doing", blah blah. Walks off, comes back a minute later, throws $60 in my friends hand, and tells him to enjoy the show.

We just figured his daughter gave him hell and had him turn around. In any case, we got to see the show for free, and it was lovely. And since only 2 of us were pulling the "no reentry?" business, no trouble.

My point is, goddamnit, I'm a poor student who appreciates art. You let me get in for free now, I promise I'll pay above the "suggested" fee later. k? Thx.
 
skinink [OhFark]
2006-07-29 8:26:03 PM  
He gave his life for Tourism.


[image from king-tut.org too old to be available]
 
StreetlightInTheGhetto
2006-07-29 8:27:21 PM  
... for the record, I do donate something if I'm at an exhibit I enjoy, but what my broke-ass can afford. More often than not, I get something at the gift shop for someone's present. Two birds with one stone.

Still, I'm happy the Smithsonian will never charge admission. It seems in line with "public education" as something I'd expect of this country. Other museums, not so much, but the Smithsonian... there should be no financial reason barring any American or visitor to America to see the stuff there. That's just my 2 cents, there.
 
MicalAugust
2006-07-29 8:28:07 PM  
What we need to realize is the real reason that admissions are be charged for entrance to museums is to further the intellectual and cultural gap in america. On what will a lower middle class family of four spend their precious few dollars of disposable income. Will it be A) a trip to the amuseument park, B) A night at the movies that will merely distract them from the relentless banality of their lives, or C) A trip to the musuem to culturally better themselves and their children, perhaps renewing their sense of awe in the potential of humanity, pushing them to strive to better themselves and their community?
Well as long as we continue to not only charge admission but push the cost of entrance up, museums will continue to gentrify and become a self congratulatory realm of the bourgeoise.
 
tdpatriots12
2006-07-29 8:30:59 PM  
MicalAugust:

Or maybe it's because museums with half-way decent stuff in them have something called overhead.
 
TheOther
2006-07-29 8:31:02 PM  
Where do I go to get one o them free museums? I want MINE, dammit!
 
Mr Sunshine
2006-07-29 8:31:33 PM  
MicalAugust You are one jaded bastard. I salute you.
 
farbekrieg
2006-07-29 8:32:06 PM  
Homer takes Lisa to the museum and sees the sign,
`Suggested donation: $4.50'.

Homer: Eh, what do you mean by `suggested donation'?
Clerk: Pay any amount you wish, sir.
Homer: And uh, what if I wish to pay ... zero?
Clerk: That is up to you.
Homer: Ooh, so it's up to me, is it?
Clerk: Yes.
Homer: I see. And you think that people are going to pay
you $4.50 even though they don't have to?
Just out of the goodness of their... [laughs]
Well, anything you say! Good luck, lady, you're gonna need it!


[image from filmthreat.studiostore.com too old to be available]
 
Nobody'sPerfekt
2006-07-29 8:34:27 PM  
"There ain't no free lunch".

/It's ECON 101...I took it 25 years ago.

//Get off my lawn!
 
SwiftFox
2006-07-29 8:35:35 PM  
xlbrooklyn:
Uh, no, they can't. The endowment that established and still largely funds the Smithsonian specifically forbids charging any admission, in perpetuity. Look it up.

Oh. Good for them, then.
 
crazy_gaijin
2006-07-29 8:37:08 PM  
skinink: He gave his life for Tourism.


Now, when I die,
don't think I'm a nut,
don't want no fancy funeral,
Just one like ole king Tut. (king Tut)
 
the_god_ninti
2006-07-29 8:38:11 PM  
MicalAugust: What we need to realize is the real reason that admissions are be charged for entrance to museums is to further the intellectual and cultural gap in america.

Hmm, I would think most of the people running museums pretty much want as many people to come there as possible and see their work. I also think that maybe they want their museums to stay in business. So given those two (admittedly uncorroborated) assumptions, I'd say your theory is complete and utter BS.
 
So_it_goes
2006-07-29 8:38:18 PM  
[image from img101.imageshack.us too old to be available]
 
MicalAugust
2006-07-29 8:38:20 PM  
Well "the good stuff" has a one time price, This good stuff is being paid fpr over and over. The goverment, grants, foundations, private donations and the gift shop should be enough to pay for our templs to arts and cultures of the world. Seeing how artists across the world is going to do more for brodening a childs horizon and helping them put the pieces together more than many things they are going to learn in school. It is also a helpful starting place for family discussion. Why should a visit to a muesuem be a once every year or so event due to the restrictive cost of entry.
 
farknozzle
2006-07-29 8:42:12 PM  
aaaaaaaaand ... cue the "O RLY?" owl.
 
MicalAugust
2006-07-29 8:46:39 PM  
Look, thhis is my point... Like a library acess to our museums is an important educationl tool. Seeing the amazing works of our worlds artists, seeign the relics of history close up help to connect people to the past and spur their creativity. People of all economic levels need to have acces, and not restricted to when they can afford it. I think this is expecially pertinent to students, those with a thirst for knowledge, in active pursuit of it. Those who are looking to bbe amazed, inspired and challenged. These are the peopel who are going to do the most to change and form the world. Frankly, i wont those who are looking for some wider perspective, that the arts provide, to be those changing the worlds. Museums have boards of directors, fancy fundraising events, ritzy dinners. They should be looking for philanthropic means to, like the smithsonian, keep them free to the masses. All people should havve equal acces the the art. FREE THE ART!
 
Goodfella
2006-07-29 8:51:14 PM  
trozman:

I never buy anything from museums. Neither do most people. So the admission fees are a significant portion of "overall revenue",

Anecdotal evidence ! = statistical data
 
Nobody'sPerfekt
2006-07-29 8:53:05 PM  
MicalAugust,

"What we need to realize is the real reason that admissions are be charged for entrance to museums is to further the intellectual and cultural gap in america"

Well, it's been my experience that it costs more for a family of four to go to an amusement park than to a museum...so your statement wouldn't seem to hold water (park).

/I like to mix-in a museum or an aquarium with other "fun-stuff" for the family...it isn't that hard.
 
MicalAugust
2006-07-29 8:58:38 PM  
Ok, admittedly i am blowing things a little out of preportion to make my point. But it really burns my ass to have to pay 25 dollars to get into the guggenheim, 18 to get into the Museum of Modern Art, and now a suggested entrance fee of 20 to enter the MET. This is an admission for one person! Not to mention the amount of people that go through these establisments every day! It may also have to do with the fact that I live in Saint Louis where we have excellent Museums and a Zoo that does not have an admission fee. I can spend an entire afternoon in Forest Park and not spend a dime.
 
the_god_ninti
2006-07-29 8:58:52 PM  
MicalAugust: Like a library acess to our museums is an important educationl tool.

I certainly agree with that but I don't see how current admission charges are all that problematic. The fees certainly don't seem that unreasonable, especially since all have discounts for students. Hey, not every museum can be as lucky as the Smithsonian or the Getty and have huge piles of cash to cover their operating, acquisition, and other expenses. Philanthropy is nice, but unfortunately all too rare. It would be great if they all could be free, but I would rather them charge money and be around for the next hundred years than try and take the high moral ground and go bankrupt.
 
MicalAugust
2006-07-29 9:04:57 PM  
Well depending on your income level that very well maybe true. But must people in America are scraping to get by. Shouldn't our museums be the last free bastion of entertainmnet for all people. It has too many advantages not to be a priority to be kept free. And as long as museums hold such precious public assests that people want to see their are creative ways to raise money and ply corporate and public sponsors and save the public. The articel even admits the pittance that the admission fee is in the balance of their operating budget.
 
mrde50
2006-07-29 9:16:42 PM  
Why the hell isn't there a [O RLY] tag?
 
mobby_6kl
2006-07-29 9:17:33 PM  
Not all museums are government-owned => not all museums are paid for from taxes.
 
Victoly
2006-07-29 9:20:32 PM  
rjShadow: At first I read it as "free museums make more than those charging admission."

I couldn't figure out for the life of me how that was obvious.

Volume.
 
the_god_ninti
2006-07-29 9:25:42 PM  
Yeah, 25 and 18 is a lot, but it's New York, everything is more expensive in New York. And I am sure that student and children prices are significantly lower.

I certainly don't know what the national average is, but I know for a fact that in San Fran, the De Young and Exploratarium museums are both less than 10 bucks for students. And in L.A. the Norton Simon and MOCA are less than 10 bucks for adults, and something like half of that for students. And of course the Getty and Huntington are free.

It's funny that you mentioned that museums "gentrify and become a self congratulatory realm of the bourgeoise", because in reality you got cause and effect backwards. The fact is that the American people, basking in their anti-intellectualism and generally hostile to artists and scientists alike, largely see no need for museums in general. Bond measures and tax increases to fund museums, which would decrease the need for high ticket prices, routinely go down in flames.
 
Victoly
2006-07-29 9:36:11 PM  
StreetlightInTheGhetto: Meh, T-L was more worth your money than Lollapalooza, I say.

/ That said, I saw it free too
// Tickets through mom's work
/// Tres cool
//// CROTCH
/^5 LEGS
/^6 LEGS
/^7 CROTCH
/^8 ABSINTHE ABSINTHE
 
yotta
2006-07-29 9:49:40 PM  
$20.
Let's see. Got to the MMoA or buy a week's worth of groceries?
 
iccky
2006-07-29 10:28:13 PM  
From TFA

In a world where people blithely spend $20 on a few cups of fancy coffee, carping about museum admissions implies that other trivial items are more valuable.

This is the most galling statement in the entire article. The point of free museums isn't to save people who spend $5 on a cup of coffee money. It's to keep museums available to those who can not afford to spend $5 on a cup of coffee (and, perhaps more importantly, their children, who should not be punished for their parent's poverty any more than they already are).

I personally like the Met's suggested admission policy. From my experience as a grad student, they don't put you through a lot of shame or humiliation for paying less than the suggested amount. It's a far more egalitarian solution that still provides a revenue stream from the many New Yorkers who can pay full price.

In my view, museum visits aren't another consumption item like a car or a cup of coffee that are quite rightly rationed by price. Museums are important educational and cultural items that should be available to everyone. The reason is two-fold: as educational items, open-access helps promote equal opportunity, an even starting point for everyone. As cultural institutions they help provide a common cultural language that helps us get along with each other in a society.

It is because museums are more important than cups of coffee that we can't apply the same economic model to them.
 
Battlestar Maniaca
2006-07-29 10:30:34 PM  
$20 buys you a week of groceries?!
 
Nobody'sPerfekt
2006-07-29 10:43:02 PM  
MicalAugust,

"What we need to realize is the real reason that admissions are be charged for entrance to museums is to further the intellectual and cultural gap in america"

Well, it's been my experience that it costs more for a family of four to go to an amusement park than to a museum...so your statement wouldn't seem to "hold water" (park).

/I like to mix-in a museum or an aquarium with other "fun-stuff" for the family...it isn't that hard.
 
Goodfella
2006-07-29 10:53:56 PM  
StreetlightInTheGhetto: and got up hella early
And I thought the 90's were over a long time ago.


[image from volokh.com too old to be available]

Stan says, "Please please please for the love of all that is holy, don't ever use the term 'hella' again, mkay? Thank you."
 
Emerson999
2006-07-29 11:53:48 PM  
Let me start off by saying I'm a big fan of open source software. I use Linux at both work and home. But the lesson here is one a lot of people in that community could stand to learn.

It's really surprising how often I see people within it shocked to find other people selling their work and making more off it than the products owner and creater is able to now that the market's been taken, or people with high profile projects shocked to find themselves basically paupers after quiting their jobs and thinking they'll be able to live on a "tip jar" on the projects home page.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

All the submissions, none of the calories.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.