Ming the Merciless
There is no mercy
- Location
- Inside my skull
Why should we pay for anything that we don’t directly benefit from?
Tate modern
- Thread starter derrick
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Why should we pay for anything that we don’t directly benefit from?
Andy in Germany
Guru
- Location
- Rottenburg am Neckar
Normally the argument is that as a society, we benefit indirectly; we benefit from trains carrying people and goods even if we don't use them, cycle lanes benefit non-cyclists because of reduced traffic and improved air quality, schools benefit us because a better educated workforce creates wealth (and pays pensions); national parks preserve our natural environment and biodiversity which helps agriculture; the NHS benefits everyone indirectly because we lose less work days et c.
In my own field, apart from the moral argument, society benefits economically when people with psychological or mental illness and/or disability are protected and have meaningful work because it means they are less likely to become addicted and/or get involved with criminal activity or living on the streets, which costs far more to deal with.
As I said above, I'm not arguing that the arts should not get supported; that would be an odd position for someone who worked in theatre for almost a decade, but given that all the above activities have to provide a cost benefit analysis, so should the arts. That's not to say it should make a profit, but it needs to be accountable and show how it benefits society, not just tell people they're ignorant when they object; the burden of proof is on those benefiting from the support to prove it's worth it, in order to expect support from the public.
Is there such an analysis, and if not, why should the public support something without evidence this benefits more than a small group of "experts"?
Last edited:
Punkawallah
Über Member
Because it is supposed to be a national gallery? And my cost of entry is increased by the cost of my travel to it?
“There’s no point acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years”. Adams.
lazybloke
Today i follow the flying spaghetti monster
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
AndyRM
XOXO
- Location
- North Shields
It did make me chuckle that. And while I see the point about it not being free to travel to, it is free to enter.
There are a couple of national centres, for glass and the written word in Sunderland and South Shields, which are also free to enter but would incur travelling costs.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
I go to the Tate galleries (both of them) maybe once or twice a year. I also visit the Courtauld on the Strand a bit more frequently, and I'm a member of the National and often pop in. I have various favourites and un-favourites. It's fine not to like stuff.
I think @Adam4868 is spot on that if you come out with an opinion then the art is doing its job. I think Duchamp would be delighted that Cyclechat is finally considering the question of whether "Fountain" (The R Mutt urinal) is art or not
You don't have to like everything.
I think @Adam4868 is spot on that if you come out with an opinion then the art is doing its job. I think Duchamp would be delighted that Cyclechat is finally considering the question of whether "Fountain" (The R Mutt urinal) is art or not
You don't have to like everything.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
Are you mixing up Caravaggio and Canaletto?
Canaletto is the one with the Venice waterlines. I went to an exhibition of Canalettos at the Maritime museum a while ago. I have to admit I got a bit bored after about 15 beautiful Venetian vistas. He sure knew how to churn them out.
Sea of vapours
Guru
- Location
- Clapham, Yorkshire Dales
Great stuff. Someone should use that as the subtext at the entrance to their next Canaletto exhibition :-)
BrumJim
Forum Stalwart (won't take the hint and leave...)
- Location
- Selly Oak, Birmingham
I turned up at the Tate Modern once with a set of skis and left them in the cloakroom for the duration of my visit.
Still wondering if the staff thought it was some sort of performance art, rather than someone taking the advantage of arriving back in London on the overnight ski train before heading back home later in the day.
Still wondering if the staff thought it was some sort of performance art, rather than someone taking the advantage of arriving back in London on the overnight ski train before heading back home later in the day.
Beebo
Firm and Fruity
- Location
- Hexleybeef
Yep. I corrected myself a few posts later. But well done for being the only one who noticed.
But I agree they are visually stunning but similar.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
The last time I was at the Tate I remember spending quite some time admiring a piece just called "Cloakroom". It was a mixed media installation featuring racks of hanging coats surrounding a pair of skis that were in odd contrast to the drab coats and bags surrounding them.
All uphill
Still rolling along
- Location
- Somerset
A bit like Bob Ross...
All uphill
Still rolling along
- Location
- Somerset
Rather like the zoo.
The odd animals are the ones throwing fries to the elephants.
Punkawallah
Über Member
I suspect it would be easier to move the Tate Modern to, say, Morcambe (near enough the most central part of the UK).
lazybloke
Today i follow the flying spaghetti monster
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
Popped into TM today. The cloakroom has been expanded to display a new exhibit entitled @Accy cyclist's wardrobe (this tableau is from before his sartorial epiphany, and apparently represents "the futility of the music of Chris Rea")
I didn't see any skis, which explains having to drive home for christmas.
