The first thing that I thought was that this painting is, like the one in Quest, in an impressionist style. It might be a bit more detailed, but it's hard to say from such a small copy, and I couldn't quickly find a larger version. But what most caught my attention was the appalling government interference. First, the state imposes an absurdly high tax on the sale of paintings. Out of a total sale price of more than £28m, the British government would steal more than £20m. How can this interference in private matters of citizens possibly be just?
But worse, after imposing this unjust policy on the sale of art, the state then breaks the law to give special help to a private organization. Now, I think it's very good that the Ashmolean Museum wants to buy the painting for public display, but why should the government be making special conditions to help them do that? It seems to me dishonest and unjust. Some British tax payers probably do want the painting to stay in England, but others likely don't care. Why should those citizens who don't care be forced to help others to buy a very expensive painting? The proper and just way to proceed is for the government to abolish its unjustly high taxes and then let private citizens donate to the museum or not so that those who want the painting to stay in the UK will freely support that, and those who don't care will not be forced to help them.
In fact, I think it's a serious mistake for governments to either ban or support painting and other cultural activities. If some element of culture is important to people, say the traditional Thai dress, then the people will save it, and if they don't care, it should be allowed to die, as many traditional customs in every culture do die. It is unjust for governments to force people to live some way and not to change just because a few old fashioned dinosaurs want to force everyone to live the way they like. The British government should abolish it's absurdly high taxes which harm the art world, and let citizens decide freely for themselves whether they want to support some arts or not, without using tax money. And the Thai government should get rid of the awful Ministry of Culture, which does nothing to help Thai culture, but instead interferes in people's lives to tell them not to dress in a certain way, not to speak in a certain way, or, really silly of the Ministry, not to plank on YouTube because it's against Thai tradition. This reminds me of the related fuss about a couple of recent ONet exam questions, but I'll leave my comments on the Ministry of Education for a later post.
I almost forgot to mention that I like both paintings, but I don't think I'll ever be able to afford either. I don't know which is the more expensive, but my personal preference is for the Manet, although I'm pretty sure the painting on page 165 of Quest is the more famous. Both artists are also very famous, but again, I think the painter of the Quest image probably wins over Manet.
__________
References
Hartmann, P. (2007). Quest 2 Reading and Writing (2nd. ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
First of all I think the writer's conception is just and i like just people.Then the price of artist works are always overrated ,government shouldn't take part in art business in any step including tax for deal with artist paints.We know an artist paint maybe be traded many times, it is unfair to tax for every trade with the same paint.
ReplyDeleteIastly, artist works are always goods rather than lifes of animals or poor people,what benefit the donater can get?Because i think artist works are wealth which beloge to all human being and people who collect them will treasure them,So stop donation.There is a saying in China:give an edgy sword to an hero.This have nothing with other persons.
Thank you Crystal, I like comments, even if I don't always agree with the ideas in them.
ReplyDeleteFor example, I like your comment that "the price of artist works are always overrated" (Feb 28, 2012 03:48 AM, ¶ 1). But I'm not sure that I agree. If some one, or some group of people are happy to pay some amount, say $50 million, for a painting, doesn't that mean it is worth that much to them, and what can financial value even mean except what something is worth to people? It might not be worth that to me, but it clearly is worth it to others.
But maybe I don't disagree completely. As I think about it more, I am sure that other sorts of value can be over-rated; for example, artistic value is often over-rated, and people judge things as having a lot of artistic value when in fact they have very little. An example might be a lot of popular culture, say the absolutely awful novel The da Vince Code by Dan Brown. This was very successful, and famous a few years ago and many people loved it, but it really is garbage with no value as art: the writing is awful, childish in its simplicity; the characters undeveloped, unconvincing and silly; and the story childishly full of amazing coincidences and simple tricks that are supposed to be complex.
But I enjoyed the film, which is fun, and a silly bit of nonsense to relax with.
The painting of Manet, It shows about cloth history in England. In my idea, it could be collect in the UK museum. But the price is too high, and government wouldn't involve.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinionthe ,it is a good point to keep valued artist work for pubic display in stead of being personal belonging.However, in this circumstance,it shows the unfair judgement of the government to impose an unusual high tax for private selling whereas cut down the tax for private organiztion.To be fair,the price should be the same, and the government should not involve.If the museum can collect the money from donation,the picture should belong to public. This means that many people still reliase and concern about the painting value.
ReplyDeleteI like the "Ashmolean Museum heads campaign to save Manet painting" news idea to save the picture by government tax in the beginning of first round reading. but after I read "Artistic Wealth - Political Poverty", I also like this piece of writing too. I can explain that the way of tax and the way of donate, it give the value of this painting. As long as it 's interesting and valuable work in some people, It still can be alive in that culture. I mean, because we like it, we still keep it there. but if we not like it, it can be garbage and we always forget it.
ReplyDeleteAs I mention on my first draft of writing that the painting or artwork give really value and meaning which I can not understand. but I like them to debate or discuss about this piece of work. the painting still be concern whereas the painter already pass away. it show the master piece have value than people. For me, it might be good if I try to understand what the painting value and try to draw my own painting. Perhap people can recognize me from now on.