Taking Ownership: The Louvre Asks the Public to Pitch In
For the first time in its 217-year history, the Louvre, perhaps the greatest museum in the world, is asking the French public for financial help to purchase a painting. Even after tapping their own resources, the Louvre found itself 1 million Euros ($1.35 million USD) short of the purchase price of German Renaissance painter Lucas Cranach the Elder’s 1531 painting Les Trois Grâces (The Three Graces in English; shown above). "It's a work that is amusing, troubling and mysterious, as well as very sensual at the same time," Louvre president, Henri Loyrette, says in defense of his belief that Cranach’s ladies could be an iconic work for the museum along with more familiar faces such as Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa and the Venus de Milo. But not everyone agrees with that belief or the idea that the public should pitch in and aid the effort to own the enticing trio.
The obvious complaint centers around taxes. The Louvre gets much of its funding from the government, which gets it from taxing the French people. All of the money comes from us, the angry public clamors, so why should we pony up another cool million or so for another piece of art when unemployment and a world-wide recession continue to dog us? It’s hard to argue with those who feel that adding another masterpiece, no matter how iconic, simply isn’t worth it right now. The Louvre has set up a website as a virtual kitty to which art lovers may contribute to the campaign. The fact that Cranach’s painting has never been publicly displayed seems to have inspired the Louvre’s directors to make a push to right that wrong. However, in the process of righting one wrong, they might be committing another.
Museums exist at the pleasure of the public, even one as old and revered as the Louvre. Patrons coming through the door keep the institution alive, both financially and metaphorically. Without the oxygen of public interest, museums suffocate in the stuffy air of their own irrelevance. The Louvre risks a major public relations disaster with this campaign. As much as it pains me that such a beautiful and significant work languishes unseen, it pains me even more that the Louvre seems so tone deaf to the cries of the French public right now. In a land that once boiled over after the (probably apocryphal) phrase “Let them eat cake!”, the Louvre seems to suggest, “Let them feast on Cranach!”
This episode reminds me of the curious case of Kempton Bunton, a retired British bus driver living on a meager pension in the 1961 who loved his television. When an American collector threatened to take Francisco Goya's Portrait of the Duke of Wellington away from England, the British government bought it back and placed it in the National Gallery in London. The government paid for that purchase by raising the television license fee imposed on all British television lovers, including Mr. Bunton. In retaliation, Bunton climbed through a bathroom window of the National Gallery early one morning and stole Goya’s painting. Bunton soon sent a letter to the authorities asking the government to donate money to allow the poor to pay their television licenses and amnesty for the thief in exchange for the return of the Duke. The government turned that offer down. Four years later, Bunton returned the painting anonymously and then gave himself up a few days later. He served 3 months of prison time and became a folk hero to those everywhere who hate taxes and love their telly.
I’m not suggesting that a French Kempton Bunton lurks somewhere biding his time to crawl through the loo and snatch the Cranach. What I am saying is that the public at large pays little attention to the arts as it is. Making that scant attention turn negative seems unwise. Aside from a trip to case the joint, slipping through that bathroom window may have been the only time in his life that Mr. Bunton entered the National Gallery. If the Louvre lets itself get carried away in icon hunting, they may allow the public’s good will to slip away and go down the toilet.
Upstreamism advocate Rishi Manchanda calls us to understand health not as a "personal responsibility" but a "common good."
- Upstreamism tasks health care professionals to combat unhealthy social and cultural influences that exist outside — or upstream — of medical facilities.
- Patients from low-income neighborhoods are most at risk of negative health impacts.
- Thankfully, health care professionals are not alone. Upstreamism is increasingly part of our cultural consciousness.
An innovation may lead to lifelike self-reproducing and evolving machines.
- Scientists at Cornell University devise a material with 3 key traits of life.
- The goal for the researchers is not to create life but lifelike machines.
- The researchers were able to program metabolism into the material's DNA.
Some evidence attributes a certain neurological phenomenon to a near death experience.
Time of death is considered when a person has gone into cardiac arrest. This is the cessation of the electrical impulse that drive the heartbeat. As a result, the heart locks up. The moment the heart stops is considered time of death. But does death overtake our mind immediately afterward or does it slowly creep in?
- A huge segment of America's population — the Baby Boom generation — is aging and will live longer than any American generation in history.
- The story we read about in the news? Their drain on social services like Social Security and Medicare.
- But increased longevity is a cause for celebration, says Ashton Applewhite, not doom and gloom.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.