Glasgow Guide Home

Whats On Glasgow Guide
  Glasgow What's On


    Glasgow Reviews


    Glasgow Gallery


      Glasgow Links
Discuss | Guestbook | Postcard | News | Weather | Feedback | Search | About | What's New
Glasgow Guide Discussion Boards

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )                >> View Today's Topics <<

34 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Glasgow To Lose Burrell Collection, Sir William Burrell's wishes to be discarded
GG
post 24th Sep 2013, 10:43pm
Post #106


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
QUOTE (Guest @ 24th Sep 2013, 02:02pm) *
"... from the very upper reaches of class and privilege in Scotland and England".

Could Sir William Burrell have been described thus?

He was in his later life, although, he was born in a tenement. What distinguishes Sir William Burrell from the privileged Sirs and Lords of today – those who are intent on deceiving his dying wishes and betraying his cherished legacy – is that Sir William was an entrepreneur and an innovator who created and built wealth for himself, and he gave something back to the city. And, of course, unlike most of those trying to steal his life's work, he was born in Glasgow!

GG,


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Betsy2009
post 24th Sep 2013, 11:53pm
Post #107

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 3,292
Joined: 21st Jun 2013
Member No.: 25,701
We could always sneak in and steal the removal vans and hide the collection all over Glasgow. Get the building sorted out pronto or else?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Douglas*
post 25th Sep 2013, 01:00am
Post #108






I imagine that the 45m will be used to degrade the Burrell Museum in much the same way that the council did to the Kelvingrove Museum. Dumbned down and geared towards children running about and interacting with multimedia displays that usually broke within the first week. An no doubt their idea of expanding the space is to stack stuff up on the walls and hang things from the ceiling. We've been there twice already. How many times before the people of Glasgow realise that this is all just smoke and mirrors and the end result will be worse than what we've already got?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Guest*
post 25th Sep 2013, 06:59am
Post #109






"– those who are intent on deceiving his dying wishes and betraying his cherished legacy –"

These are emotive words and no doubt sincere. I would, however, bring to your attention and that of your readers, that Burrell's gift to the city with its attendant conditions was made in 1944. Since Sir William's death was not until 1958 these conditions can hardly be described as his "dying wishes".

I would suggest that since we cherish the legacy so much we should be striving to do what is best for the collection. Surely refurbishing and expanding the building in which the collection is presently housed is better for the collection than leaving the building in its present condition? I think it is worth remembering that the exhibition space available in the present building has never been suffiicient to show the collection in its entirety and at any one time only part of the collection can be displayed.

Perhaps we should also bear in mind that there is a significant body of informed opinion in Scotland and elsewhere which believes that touring the collection abroad would raise the profile of the collection not only to the Burrell collection's advantage but to the advantage of the arts in Scotland in general.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TeeHeeHee
post 25th Sep 2013, 09:41pm
Post #110


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 14,334
Joined: 25th Jan 2009
From: German/French/Swiss border town on the River Rhein
Member No.: 6,448
QUOTE (Guest @ 25th Sep 2013, 06:57am) *
... Perhaps we should also bear in mind that there is a significant body of informed opinion in Scotland and elsewhere which believes that touring the collection abroad would raise the profile of the collection not only to the Burrell collection's advantage but to the advantage of the arts in Scotland in general.

Was it absolutely necessary to tour Dali's "Christ of St John of the Cross" abroad to raise the profile of the work while serving to the advantage of Dali, in general?

Attached Image


--------------------
"Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way. When it isn't, don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery, or simple bad luck.”
― Joseph Heller, God Knows
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 25th Sep 2013, 10:28pm
Post #111


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
Good point, THH. One of the tenuous arguments put forward by those experts who advocate loaning out the city's premier art works is that it will gain wider recognition of Glasgow's treasures and lead to increased visitor numbers to museums. Let's take the Dali/Kelvingrove experience:

2009: Dali's St John in Kelvingrove all year. Visitors: 1,368,096

2010: St John in Glasgow 6 months, rest in US: Visitors: 1,070,521

So, we'd expect a rush of visitors to the Kelvingrove in 2011 ...

2011: Dali's St John in Kelvingrove all year. Visitors: 981,061

So much for the 'loan dividend'. ohmy.gif

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 25th Sep 2013, 10:42pm
Post #112


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
QUOTE (Guest @ 25th Sep 2013, 07:57am) *
"– those who are intent on deceiving his dying wishes and betraying his cherished legacy –"

These are emotive words and no doubt sincere. I would, however, bring to your attention and that of your readers, that Burrell's gift to the city with its attendant conditions was made in 1944. Since Sir William's death was not until 1958 these conditions can hardly be described as his "dying wishes". [...]

Thanks for your comments, Guest. I'd like to get reply to these tomorrow (Thursday) ... just no time tonight!

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
carmella
post 26th Sep 2013, 12:05am
Post #113


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 5,392
Joined: 28th Jul 2003
From: South Ayrshire
Member No.: 58
I agree with GG and some of the other contributors to this discussion as we all have something positive and useful to add.

Since Sir William is not here to vent his opinions or anger, as I truly suspect the latter would be his position.

As has been said, he gave back a lot to the city, given that he was in a financial position at his time of the century to travel the world, he knew that most people in Glasgow and surrounding areas would never be able to see some of the wonders he collected and witnessed. Therefore, I honestly believe he gifted his massive collection for all the people (in the first instance) who lived in Glasgow to see these wonderful things. I applaud him and his memory.

After all, when we all make our Wills, we do so in the near certainty that our wishes will be carried out, he would have been no different.

I think the whole business is so sad.


--------------------
It is possible to fail in many ways...while to succeed is possible only in one way.
- Aristotle
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Guest*
post 26th Sep 2013, 08:19am
Post #114






To THH

"- Was it absolutely necessary to tour Dali's "Christ of St John of the Cross" abroad to raise the profile of the work while serving to the advantage of Dali, in general? -"

No, of course not. Was it absolutely necessary for Dr Tom Honeyman to buy the Dali for 8200 in 1952?

To GG

"- One of the tenuous arguments put forward by those experts who advocate loaning out the city's premier art works is that it will gain wider recognition of Glasgow's treasures and lead to increased visitor numbers to museums. -"

I do not claim to be an expert in these matters but I would contend that increased visitor numbers to a museum is not necessarily the only way to measure how well recognised is a collection or a particular piece.

To Carmella

"- Therefore, I honestly believe he gifted his massive collection for all the people (in the first instance) who lived in Glasgow to see these wonderful things. -"

I believe that Sir William Burrell wanted his collection to become his memorial and as such I believe that he would have wanted it to be available to the widest possible audience, consistent, of course, with the collection's safety and security. Allowing parts of the collection to be shown abroad will ensure that wider audience.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Scotsman
post 26th Sep 2013, 04:35pm
Post #115


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,279
Joined: 22nd Jan 2007
From: Edinburgh Road
Member No.: 4,353
I will answer for Carmella who I am sure will not mind. Its actually simple.... if Sir William Burrell wanted to get his collection to the widest possible audience then he would have gave the collection to London.... no ifs or buts about it. In actual fact he wanted to make sure the collection stayed as a collection and thats why he would only give it to Glasgow because the politicians here promised not to split the collection up.

Why is that so difficult for these people to understand??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Guest*
post 26th Sep 2013, 05:59pm
Post #116






"- if Sir William Burrell wanted to get his collection to the widest possible audience then he would have gave the collection to London.... no ifs or buts about it.-"

Sorry, Scotsman, I disagree.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 26th Sep 2013, 09:00pm
Post #117


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
QUOTE (Guest @ 25th Sep 2013, 07:57am) *
"– those who are intent on deceiving his dying wishes and betraying his cherished legacy –"

These are emotive words and no doubt sincere. I would, however, bring to your attention and that of your readers, that Burrell's gift to the city with its attendant conditions was made in 1944. Since Sir William's death was not until 1958 these conditions can hardly be described as his "dying wishes".

I would suggest that since we cherish the legacy so much we should be striving to do what is best for the collection. Surely refurbishing and expanding the building in which the collection is presently housed is better for the collection than leaving the building in its present condition? I think it is worth remembering that the exhibition space available in the present building has never been suffiicient to show the collection in its entirety and at any one time only part of the collection can be displayed.

Perhaps we should also bear in mind that there is a significant body of informed opinion in Scotland and elsewhere which believes that touring the collection abroad would raise the profile of the collection not only to the Burrell collection's advantage but to the advantage of the arts in Scotland in general.

Thanks you for your reply, Guest.

As an important point of fact, Sir William updated his 1944 will with a codicil in 1953, in which he reiterated and reinforced his clear and unambiguous wishes that his collection should not be broken up by sending artefacts abroad. As I have mentioned previously, the codicil followed his discovery that two paintings had been sent to a gallery in Switzerland. Sir William was livid that the conditions of his will had been broken and he wrote a very angry letter to the council (corporation) which clearly restated that items were not to be sent overseas.

Contrary to what Glasgow Life bosses would have the Scottish Parliament believe, Sir William's overriding concern was not that he did not want items sent overseas because he feared that they would be at risk during transportation; rather, Sir William's overriding concern was that the collection was kept intact as a meaningful collection. The collection was the man's life work. The collection – in its entirety – told the story of the development of human civilisation: from ancient Egypt and China through to the works of the French Impressionists and the Glasgow Boys. The collection was to be his legacy, because it represented his own unique view of human history, and he wanted people to understand that. The collection was how he would live on after he died, and to this end he tried to ensure that the collection would remain intact long after he was gone.

When I referred to "his dying wishes", I did not necessarily mean it literally: that he dictated his wishes on his deathbed. He was a man of outstanding vision and foresight, so he made sure his wishes were recorded years in advance. But I would in fact hypothesise that the words in his will and codicil did represent literally "his dying wishes", and as he lay on his deathbed and reflected on his life, he must surely have gained great comfort from how his collection would inspire future generations to learn to better understand their world.

In a word, it all comes down to integrity. The enduring integrity of the collection; and the moral integrity of those in power to ensure that a man who gifted so much to Glasgow is remembered as they promised him he would be.

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
carmella
post 26th Sep 2013, 09:42pm
Post #118


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 5,392
Joined: 28th Jul 2003
From: South Ayrshire
Member No.: 58
QUOTE (Scotsman @ 26th Sep 2013, 05:33pm) *
I will answer for Carmella who I am sure will not mind. Its actually simple.... if Sir William Burrell wanted to get his collection to the widest possible audience then he would have gave the collection to London.... no ifs or buts about it. In actual fact he wanted to make sure the collection stayed as a collection and thats why he would only give it to Glasgow because the politicians here promised not to split the collection up.

Why is that so difficult for these people to understand??

You are absolutely correct. At the time of his death, there is no doubt that London was more widely visited than Scotland, in particular Glasgow. If his intention had been for the wider masses - then London or New York would have been uppermost in his wishes - we know, however, that this was not the case.

GG has summed it up pretty well I think.


--------------------
It is possible to fail in many ways...while to succeed is possible only in one way.
- Aristotle
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TeeHeeHee
post 26th Sep 2013, 10:04pm
Post #119


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 14,334
Joined: 25th Jan 2009
From: German/French/Swiss border town on the River Rhein
Member No.: 6,448
QUOTE (Guest @ 26th Sep 2013, 08:17am) *
To THH

"- Was it absolutely necessary to tour Dali's "Christ of St John of the Cross" abroad to raise the profile of the work while serving to the advantage of Dali, in general? -"

No, of course not.

Was it absolutely necessary for Dr Tom Honeyman to buy the Dali for 8200 in 1952?

Absolutely.

Taking inflation into account that the money spent then; GBP8200, now has (at 2012) an equivalent value of GBP199,864.00, so just short of 200,000 pounds and that set against the value placed on the work today ... Dr Tom Honeyman was not only a person who new a masterpiece when he saw one but was also a shrewd business man it would seem. wink.gif

The quote below is borrowed from The Salvador Dali Society
QUOTE
‘Christ of St. John of the Cross’ may be Dali’s Most ‘Heart-Stopping’ Work!

13 Jul 2011

Posted by: PaulChimera

Christ of St. John of the Cross may be the most beautiful, the most breathtaking painting not only from the studio of Salvador Dali, but in all of 20th century art.

It’s that stunning, that iconic, that heart-stopping ...

The city fathers (of Glasgow) originally balked at acquiring it, because, they complained, the price tag seemed outrageous and irresponsible at the time ...

Today, Dali’s Christ of St. John of the Cross has been voted Scotland’s favorite painting, and a year or so ago its monetary value was set at, as I recall, some $80 million. I’d put it higher than that. Of course, its aesthetic value is immeasurable. Not to mention its value in making Glasgow a tourist attraction for art lovers the world over.


--------------------
"Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way. When it isn't, don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery, or simple bad luck.”
― Joseph Heller, God Knows
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*NorrieT*
post 27th Sep 2013, 08:13am
Post #120






I wrote this before but it got kind of lost in the discussion:

QUOTE
I'd be interested to know what people think about this point. What if the collection is moved from the Pollok Park and never comes back there? They could put some of the works there as there from the ones in storage but what if the best items stay on tour or are shifted into a new location in the city centre which is where the council wants everything to be?

Any one any thoughts on if this could happen?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

34 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > » 
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th Feb 2020

All material in the site Glasgow Guide is copyright of the Glasgow Guide Organisation. This material is for your own private use only, and no part of the site may be reproduced, amended, modified, copied, or transmitted to third parties, by any means whatsoever without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. All rights reserved.

Glasgow Hotels: book cheap hotels in Glasgow online now.