Works by Rodin and Munnings could raise £5m

AFTER THE RACE: By Sir Alfred Munnings.  £2m to £4m

AFTER THE RACE: By Sir Alfred Munnings. £2m to £4m

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author Exclusive by , Feature Writer

THE Daily Echo can today exclusively reveal the masterpieces that will go under the hammer in Southampton’s great art sell-off.

Southampton City Council wants to sell a bronze sculpture by Auguste Rodin – the French master who created The Thinker – and a painting by the British artist Sir Alfred Munnings.

The council’s Tory leaders hope the once-in-a-lifetime sale will raise about £5m, which they have promised will only be spent on a new heritage museum due to open in 2012.

Other masterpieces by Turner, Lowry, Picasso and Monet will all remain in Southampton. New space created by the museum also means an extra 100 paintings will go on permanent display.

Today’s announcement comes after a three-year Daily Echo campaign for some publicly-owned art from the overflowing £180m collection to be sold to fund new culture projects in the city.

Only 200 works in the vast 3,500-piece collection can be shown in the City Art Gallery at any one time and some works have scarcely seen the light of day in years.

The Daily Echo can today reveal that the painting by Munnings, titled After the Race, has only recently returned to Southampton after being on loan to a museum in Essex for the past 20 years.

The council estimates its sale could raise between £2m and £4m for the new £15m museum, which will feature a permanent Titanic exhibition and an extension to the art gallery.

Southampton’s two Rodin sculptures are also both currently being kept in storage in the vaults below the City Art Gallery.

Eve, a near life-size nude sculpture, is valued £1.5m while Crouching Woman, which is just 31cm high, is thought to be worth about £400,000. However, only one will be sold.

The pieces were identified after a review of the collection, which could also lead to the sale of other paintings considered to be of “low significance”.

The Rodin and Munnings works were chosen because they did not form part of the gallery’s focus on British modern and contemporary 20th and 21st century art.

Southampton’s culture boss, Councillor John Hannides, said: “The Munnings has not been seen in Southampton for quite some time and that also goes for the other items too.

“While they have been on display on occasions they are not central to the collection.

“We have looked at all potential options for funding, and we have not yet taken a decision to sell them, but without this it would be very difficult to see how we might otherwise be able to fund the heritage museum.”

Southampton residents can voice their opinions at a public meeting in September, before the Cabinet makes a final decision whether to proceed in late 2009.

If the sale goes ahead, the council first wants to approach other British museums and galleries about whether they would be interested in buying the works.

If prices cannot be agreed they would then be sold to the highest bidder at auction next summer.

Cllr Hannides will travel to London today to present the proposal to the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), which is the most powerful arts body in the UK and advises the Government how millions in funding should be spent.

While the MLA has already given in principal support, if it refuses to back the sale it would put the entire heritage museum project at serious risk.

Comments (63)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:44am Thu 30 Jul 09

dennytg says...

It would have been helpful if the reporter had done some investigative work to identify from where these artwork originated. A lot of Southampton's Art has been donated by benefactors. This stream could dry up if they think their gift could be sold in the future. It's pointless saying this is a one-off sale. It is always less painful the second or third time around !
It would have been helpful if the reporter had done some investigative work to identify from where these artwork originated. A lot of Southampton's Art has been donated by benefactors. This stream could dry up if they think their gift could be sold in the future. It's pointless saying this is a one-off sale. It is always less painful the second or third time around ! dennytg
  • Score: 0

11:15am Thu 30 Jul 09

Bartonian says...

This was on Radio Two yesterday, with the Daily Echo being interviewd. Even Mr Murray was told that he got his facts wrong! As Southampton has the best art collection outside of London, it should be promoted more so that art lovers from far afield could visit the city.
This was on Radio Two yesterday, with the Daily Echo being interviewd. Even Mr Murray was told that he got his facts wrong! As Southampton has the best art collection outside of London, it should be promoted more so that art lovers from far afield could visit the city. Bartonian
  • Score: 0

11:21am Thu 30 Jul 09

Linesman says...

Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs!

I wonder where the money raised will be spent?

Councillors' expenses?

Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? Linesman
  • Score: 0

11:37am Thu 30 Jul 09

Bartonian says...

Lowry...Turner...Pic
asso...Monet...the Echo has been looking for the City's WOW factor. Well, here it is, the largest collection outside London. For goodness sake, PROMOTE IT, and use it to put Southampton on the map.
Lowry...Turner...Pic asso...Monet...the Echo has been looking for the City's WOW factor. Well, here it is, the largest collection outside London. For goodness sake, PROMOTE IT, and use it to put Southampton on the map. Bartonian
  • Score: 0

11:39am Thu 30 Jul 09

Family Man says...

If the public was unable to see many of these items as they remain in deep storage, then perhaps it is not such a bad idea, especially IF all the proceeds go back into the communities so that ALL the taxpayers will benefit.
However a) I sincerely doubt it will (and will probably be part siphoned off and the residue spent on "multicultural bandwagon" projects that benefit very few, and b) is selling into a credit-crunched depressed market necessarily the best time to be doing this? I recall the early days of the Labour government when the gold reserves were sold off at a knock-down price losing the taxpayer billions! What better a state would we be in now had that not taken place at such a bad time!? Once you've sold the family silver, you can NEVER get it back!
If the public was unable to see many of these items as they remain in deep storage, then perhaps it is not such a bad idea, especially IF all the proceeds go back into the communities so that ALL the taxpayers will benefit. However a) I sincerely doubt it will (and will probably be part siphoned off and the residue spent on "multicultural bandwagon" projects that benefit very few, and b) is selling into a credit-crunched depressed market necessarily the best time to be doing this? I recall the early days of the Labour government when the gold reserves were sold off at a knock-down price losing the taxpayer billions! What better a state would we be in now had that not taken place at such a bad time!? Once you've sold the family silver, you can NEVER get it back! Family Man
  • Score: 0

11:40am Thu 30 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

A very sad day for the City.

As someone who has visited the gallery many times and found the collection informative and inspiring I am sickened by the actions of the Echo and Cllr Samuels.

Why not sell the Bargate to the highest bidder? I'm sure it'll make a nice centre piece of a development in Abu-Dhabi. That's how much this City cares about it's heritage.
A very sad day for the City. As someone who has visited the gallery many times and found the collection informative and inspiring I am sickened by the actions of the Echo and Cllr Samuels. Why not sell the Bargate to the highest bidder? I'm sure it'll make a nice centre piece of a development in Abu-Dhabi. That's how much this City cares about it's heritage. mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

11:54am Thu 30 Jul 09

Jerry Parsons says...

I too am sceptical that the money will be 'ring fenced' for a new museum. I suspect it will be nibbled away until another 'one-off' sale is required. Eventually the problem will solve itself when there is nothing to display.
I too am sceptical that the money will be 'ring fenced' for a new museum. I suspect it will be nibbled away until another 'one-off' sale is required. Eventually the problem will solve itself when there is nothing to display. Jerry Parsons
  • Score: 0

11:57am Thu 30 Jul 09

stuartjebbitt says...

Don't sell the Munnings, sell the 20th Century modern stuff that no-one understands...it won't be missed..
Don't sell the Munnings, sell the 20th Century modern stuff that no-one understands...it won't be missed.. stuartjebbitt
  • Score: 0

12:07pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Nothing to say says...

Why would more people visit the Gallery on the back of promoting it's now showing "art that was deemed not important or good enough to show in the first place"

Doesn't appear to be a winner does it?

The City needs a top class museum a lot more than it needs pictures that barely anyone knows exist.

Would be nice if we could have both a great museum and great gallery, but you have to find the money from somewhere to pay for these things and I personally think I pay enough as it is via my Council tax.
Why would more people visit the Gallery on the back of promoting it's now showing "art that was deemed not important or good enough to show in the first place" Doesn't appear to be a winner does it? The City needs a top class museum a lot more than it needs pictures that barely anyone knows exist. Would be nice if we could have both a great museum and great gallery, but you have to find the money from somewhere to pay for these things and I personally think I pay enough as it is via my Council tax. Nothing to say
  • Score: 0

12:10pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Little P says...

I agree with the comments above. I didn't actually know that we had these great pieces of art in Southampton. I don't claim to know much about it, but would go and see it.
I agree with the comments above. I didn't actually know that we had these great pieces of art in Southampton. I don't claim to know much about it, but would go and see it. Little P
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Lone Ranger says...

Linesman wrote:
Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses?
Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo

This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

12:35pm Thu 30 Jul 09

nikolai says...

Yet another example of how the city of Southampton is ill-served by it's local newspaper. The only people more short-sighted and petty-minded that the Echo is the local council, but then they are pretty much in bed together.

It's not just on Radio2 that the Echo has rec'd negative attention for this campaign - type in 'Daily Echo Greenslade' into Google to see the attention this story has rec'd from the Guardian.
Yet another example of how the city of Southampton is ill-served by it's local newspaper. The only people more short-sighted and petty-minded that the Echo is the local council, but then they are pretty much in bed together. It's not just on Radio2 that the Echo has rec'd negative attention for this campaign - type in 'Daily Echo Greenslade' into Google to see the attention this story has rec'd from the Guardian. nikolai
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Rob444 says...

Linesman wrote:
Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs!

I wonder where the money raised will be spent?

Councillors' expenses?

The council's tory leaders appear to be typical thatcherites.

They know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Even if the art sell-off could be justified, the middle of a recession is the worst time to get the highest prices. Would they sell their personal possessions at this time, or would they wait for more affluent times to return?


[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]The council's tory leaders appear to be typical thatcherites. They know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Even if the art sell-off could be justified, the middle of a recession is the worst time to get the highest prices. Would they sell their personal possessions at this time, or would they wait for more affluent times to return? Rob444
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Thu 30 Jul 09

St.DaveH says...

The Southampton art gallery is a fantastic asset of this City, and these hidden gems should be kept and shown on a rotational basis. They are not the council’s property to sell, but belong to the City, its residents and our future generations.
It is the council’s short sightedness that funds are not available for heritage development, and a history of missed opportunity to apply a structured levy on new builds such as West Quay and the like.
Not only will this sell off be detrimental to us all, but any realisation of funds could not be guaranteed for use on heritage work, and would certainly have an adverse effect on future donations to the collection.
I consider the sale a cop out by the council to avoid putting in the effort to required to raise funding for one off initiative such as an RMST museum; they should roll up their sleeves and make some concerted effort instead of strutting like peacocks. DON’T SELL just because it’s the easy way out..
The Southampton art gallery is a fantastic asset of this City, and these hidden gems should be kept and shown on a rotational basis. They are not the council’s property to sell, but belong to the City, its residents and our future generations. It is the council’s short sightedness that funds are not available for heritage development, and a history of missed opportunity to apply a structured levy on new builds such as West Quay and the like. Not only will this sell off be detrimental to us all, but any realisation of funds could not be guaranteed for use on heritage work, and would certainly have an adverse effect on future donations to the collection. I consider the sale a cop out by the council to avoid putting in the effort to required to raise funding for one off initiative such as an RMST museum; they should roll up their sleeves and make some concerted effort instead of strutting like peacocks. DON’T SELL just because it’s the easy way out.. St.DaveH
  • Score: 0

12:39pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Saints Mike says...

Lone Ranger wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses?
Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo

This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE
A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid.

Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers,

I doubt a museum will be built..

More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE[/p][/quote]A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all. Saints Mike
  • Score: 0

12:42pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Paramjit Bahia says...

I am not aware of what American owned Echo has contributed to Southampton’s art collection, which is one of the best. But the editor whose paper is having its own problems has the cheek of campaigning for the destruction of our city’s heritage. Perhaps Ian Murray should be concentrating on saving the jobs of his already poorly paid staff rather than keep on sticking his unwanted nose into affairs about which he knows little but pretends to be a self appointed expert. (As has been exposed by Bartonian’s post)

Tory’s are notorious for ‘selling the family silver’ and through creative accounting and operating practices putting the public money into the pockets of their own class. The Art Collection will be sold on the cheap to some stinking rich parasites who have hardly any love for Art but only eye for opportunity for easy profits. So they will make a fortune when the market picks up.

Other people who will gain from this act of sheer madness will be the Conservative supporting cowboy builders who will get the contracts for making the museum.

More than likely like most other lunacies of our council the proposed museum will also end up like the ship it will be named after. Only consolation will be that this Titanic will not take many human lives down with it but it will certainly sink lots of Southampton’s heritage.

By the way, what the other underworked overpaid useless so called opposition Councillors and the MPs for the city have to say on this day light robbery of City’s assets?
I am not aware of what American owned Echo has contributed to Southampton’s art collection, which is one of the best. But the editor whose paper is having its own problems has the cheek of campaigning for the destruction of our city’s heritage. Perhaps Ian Murray should be concentrating on saving the jobs of his already poorly paid staff rather than keep on sticking his unwanted nose into affairs about which he knows little but pretends to be a self appointed expert. (As has been exposed by Bartonian’s post) Tory’s are notorious for ‘selling the family silver’ and through creative accounting and operating practices putting the public money into the pockets of their own class. The Art Collection will be sold on the cheap to some stinking rich parasites who have hardly any love for Art but only eye for opportunity for easy profits. So they will make a fortune when the market picks up. Other people who will gain from this act of sheer madness will be the Conservative supporting cowboy builders who will get the contracts for making the museum. More than likely like most other lunacies of our council the proposed museum will also end up like the ship it will be named after. Only consolation will be that this Titanic will not take many human lives down with it but it will certainly sink lots of Southampton’s heritage. By the way, what the other underworked overpaid useless so called opposition Councillors and the MPs for the city have to say on this day light robbery of City’s assets? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

12:54pm Thu 30 Jul 09

southy says...

Family Man, Bitterne, that gold was sold to the usa to help pay off the large amount off our war loan from the usa. what did't help was that the south africa release a load off there surplus gold at the same time, the gold prices drop like a brick, south africa had a bigger loss than the uk, because they had sold there gold just after the uk.

lone yes i see that to £85,000 this time, how much was the last one, after samules made that gaff by letting out the tory manifest for the next general election. 2 spin doctors with in 3 mths, think we in the wrong trade.

before the council sales them, they should go back to the nearest member family who gave them the art first, to see if they want it back at the same price that the council paid for it, morally this be the right thing to do.

if you people feel so strongly about it then organise a demo out side the civic centre main hall.
Family Man, Bitterne, that gold was sold to the usa to help pay off the large amount off our war loan from the usa. what did't help was that the south africa release a load off there surplus gold at the same time, the gold prices drop like a brick, south africa had a bigger loss than the uk, because they had sold there gold just after the uk. lone yes i see that to £85,000 this time, how much was the last one, after samules made that gaff by letting out the tory manifest for the next general election. 2 spin doctors with in 3 mths, think we in the wrong trade. before the council sales them, they should go back to the nearest member family who gave them the art first, to see if they want it back at the same price that the council paid for it, morally this be the right thing to do. if you people feel so strongly about it then organise a demo out side the civic centre main hall. southy
  • Score: 0

1:00pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Night Mare says...

How about making a compulsory purchase order for the Dibden Bay land and building a heritage centre and a big enough gallery to exhibit all of the Southampton collection!

I have to very reluctantly say that Southampton appears very second rate in terms of visitor attractions compared, for example, to Portsmouth. If the heritage centre is going to be a Titanic museum then it has to be open before the hundreth anniversary in 2012 otherwise the council will have missed the boat, so to speak. One could argue that they already have as the blockbuster film was released more tham 10 years ago and the last British survivor has recently died. After the centenary I think that public interest will diminish over time and the council could be left with an expensive white elephant. It does seem a bit like selling off the family silver, taking a gamble and putting all one's eggs in one basket. It also sets a dangerous precedent. I can see the council arguing that they need to sell off more art work because the cost of the centre has increased or, more cynically, to boost the council's coffers before an election.

Southampton's history has a much longer span than an unfortunate ship sinking on one fateful night.

Southampton City Council/Southern Daily Echo = narrow mindedness and lacking in creativity.

How about making a compulsory purchase order for the Dibden Bay land and building a heritage centre and a big enough gallery to exhibit all of the Southampton collection! I have to very reluctantly say that Southampton appears very second rate in terms of visitor attractions compared, for example, to Portsmouth. If the heritage centre is going to be a Titanic museum then it has to be open before the hundreth anniversary in 2012 otherwise the council will have missed the boat, so to speak. One could argue that they already have as the blockbuster film was released more tham 10 years ago and the last British survivor has recently died. After the centenary I think that public interest will diminish over time and the council could be left with an expensive white elephant. It does seem a bit like selling off the family silver, taking a gamble and putting all one's eggs in one basket. It also sets a dangerous precedent. I can see the council arguing that they need to sell off more art work because the cost of the centre has increased or, more cynically, to boost the council's coffers before an election. Southampton's history has a much longer span than an unfortunate ship sinking on one fateful night. Southampton City Council/Southern Daily Echo = narrow mindedness and lacking in creativity. Night Mare
  • Score: 0

1:17pm Thu 30 Jul 09

MrGMan says...

I am happy that works of art I have never seen, that the public have never seen are sold to pay for something the majority will enjoy.

The echo says today that the sculptures are sitting in the vaults right now.

so if no one has ever seen them what is the problem?
I am happy that works of art I have never seen, that the public have never seen are sold to pay for something the majority will enjoy. The echo says today that the sculptures are sitting in the vaults right now. so if no one has ever seen them what is the problem? MrGMan
  • Score: 0

1:26pm Thu 30 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

there needs to be some kind of protest. Anyone up for organising something outside the gallery on Saturday, facebook groups that kind of thing?
there needs to be some kind of protest. Anyone up for organising something outside the gallery on Saturday, facebook groups that kind of thing? mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Thu 30 Jul 09

southy says...

MrGMan wrote:
I am happy that works of art I have never seen, that the public have never seen are sold to pay for something the majority will enjoy.

The echo says today that the sculptures are sitting in the vaults right now.

so if no one has ever seen them what is the problem?
plenty those works of art was giving to the city, for the benifit of the city and not just a few, i am wondering if the council is sitting on dodgey legal ground, what was the terms and condiction off the art giving to the council in the first place.
[quote][p][bold]MrGMan[/bold] wrote: I am happy that works of art I have never seen, that the public have never seen are sold to pay for something the majority will enjoy. The echo says today that the sculptures are sitting in the vaults right now. so if no one has ever seen them what is the problem?[/p][/quote]plenty those works of art was giving to the city, for the benifit of the city and not just a few, i am wondering if the council is sitting on dodgey legal ground, what was the terms and condiction off the art giving to the council in the first place. southy
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Thu 30 Jul 09

southy says...

mr.southampton wrote:
there needs to be some kind of protest. Anyone up for organising something outside the gallery on Saturday, facebook groups that kind of thing?
i be interested mr.southampton.
[quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote: there needs to be some kind of protest. Anyone up for organising something outside the gallery on Saturday, facebook groups that kind of thing?[/p][/quote]i be interested mr.southampton. southy
  • Score: 0

1:52pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Maggie Hill says...

Saints Mike wrote:
Lone Ranger wrote:
Linesman wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses?
Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE
A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all.
Saints Mike and lonreanger are so obseswsed with tories they wouldnt understand anyway. You two probably dontr knoew where the art gallery is. Get back to work in your labour office and stop wasting taxpayers money sitting on theis website
[quote][p][bold]Saints Mike[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE[/p][/quote]A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all. [/p][/quote]Saints Mike and lonreanger are so obseswsed with tories they wouldnt understand anyway. You two probably dontr knoew where the art gallery is. Get back to work in your labour office and stop wasting taxpayers money sitting on theis website Maggie Hill
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Lone Ranger says...

Maggie Hill wrote:
Saints Mike wrote:
Lone Ranger wrote:
Linesman wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses?
Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE
A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all.
Saints Mike and lonreanger are so obseswsed with tories they wouldnt understand anyway. You two probably dontr knoew where the art gallery is. Get back to work in your labour office and stop wasting taxpayers money sitting on theis website
Strange, you cant justify it or spell very well. It seems you were just full of anger and had to post quickly.

Well you made me giggle

SW-: hill-move you couldn't make it up
[quote][p][bold]Maggie Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Saints Mike[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE[/p][/quote]A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all. [/p][/quote]Saints Mike and lonreanger are so obseswsed with tories they wouldnt understand anyway. You two probably dontr knoew where the art gallery is. Get back to work in your labour office and stop wasting taxpayers money sitting on theis website[/p][/quote]Strange, you cant justify it or spell very well. It seems you were just full of anger and had to post quickly. Well you made me giggle SW-: hill-move you couldn't make it up Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Thu 30 Jul 09

AndyAndrews says...

I enjoy popping in the art gallery but there's far too much modern crxp on show and not enough classic masterpieces like those the Echo claims to be up for sale.
I enjoy popping in the art gallery but there's far too much modern crxp on show and not enough classic masterpieces like those the Echo claims to be up for sale. AndyAndrews
  • Score: 0

3:38pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Northamboy says...

I am born and bred in Southampton and in 60 years been to the art gallery twice.

I am not interested in art but I am interested in where the money would go. Stop closing care homes, spend the money on the people not the ifrastructure of the city as thats why we pay rates. Stop fat cat councillors ripping us all off and DONT EMPLOY A SPIN DOCTOR!

Please I beg you don't buy more traffic lights and then find somewhere to put them!!!!
I am born and bred in Southampton and in 60 years been to the art gallery twice. I am not interested in art but I am interested in where the money would go. Stop closing care homes, spend the money on the people not the ifrastructure of the city as thats why we pay rates. Stop fat cat councillors ripping us all off and DONT EMPLOY A SPIN DOCTOR! Please I beg you don't buy more traffic lights and then find somewhere to put them!!!! Northamboy
  • Score: 0

4:04pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Major Sir Jerry Pending says...

At last! They great sell-off begins! Well what did you expect form a Tory council!? After all, the last Tory government sold off the Country's assets.
At last! They great sell-off begins! Well what did you expect form a Tory council!? After all, the last Tory government sold off the Country's assets. Major Sir Jerry Pending
  • Score: 0

4:19pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Saints Mike says...

Maggie Hill wrote:
Saints Mike wrote:
Lone Ranger wrote:
Linesman wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses?
Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE
A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all.
Saints Mike and lonreanger are so obseswsed with tories they wouldnt understand anyway. You two probably dontr knoew where the art gallery is. Get back to work in your labour office and stop wasting taxpayers money sitting on theis website
In fact I do know where the art gallery is.

I'm not a Labour supporter or Liberal neither do I vote Tory, if any party was selling the cities treasures I would object, especially as I doubt the museum will ever be built, I suspect the council will hold on to this money and say at a later date that external funding could not be gained, so the project is cancelled.

Like most who work, I am entitled to annual leave, so before you accuse people of working in Labour offices, please check the time of year, for example school holidays are when people tend to take work holidays, if you worked you would probably understand that.

By the way Maggie spellcheck is right click on your mouse, spell-checker options, press that and it tell's you where you miss spelt words, it even tells you how to spell properly, you obviously went to a state school and not a private one like I did.
[quote][p][bold]Maggie Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Saints Mike[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE[/p][/quote]A Tory led council selling off the family silver..nothing new there then, they would sell there own mothers for a quick quid. Money for the Spin Doctor, the Stormtroopers, I doubt a museum will be built.. More councillors expenses, more plush offices, more jollies for all. [/p][/quote]Saints Mike and lonreanger are so obseswsed with tories they wouldnt understand anyway. You two probably dontr knoew where the art gallery is. Get back to work in your labour office and stop wasting taxpayers money sitting on theis website[/p][/quote]In fact I do know where the art gallery is. I'm not a Labour supporter or Liberal neither do I vote Tory, if any party was selling the cities treasures I would object, especially as I doubt the museum will ever be built, I suspect the council will hold on to this money and say at a later date that external funding could not be gained, so the project is cancelled. Like most who work, I am entitled to annual leave, so before you accuse people of working in Labour offices, please check the time of year, for example school holidays are when people tend to take work holidays, if you worked you would probably understand that. By the way Maggie spellcheck is right click on your mouse, spell-checker options, press that and it tell's you where you miss spelt words, it even tells you how to spell properly, you obviously went to a state school and not a private one like I did. Saints Mike
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Iain says...

£5 million? Shared between the 231,000 Southampton residents, that's £21.64 each. Which is 9.62 pints of lager (during happy hour).

Sounds like a good swap for a bunch of paintings to me.
£5 million? Shared between the 231,000 Southampton residents, that's £21.64 each. Which is 9.62 pints of lager (during happy hour). Sounds like a good swap for a bunch of paintings to me. Iain
  • Score: 0

4:40pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Saints Mike says...

Iain wrote:
£5 million? Shared between the 231,000 Southampton residents, that's £21.64 each. Which is 9.62 pints of lager (during happy hour).

Sounds like a good swap for a bunch of paintings to me.
Your round then Iain?
[quote][p][bold]Iain[/bold] wrote: £5 million? Shared between the 231,000 Southampton residents, that's £21.64 each. Which is 9.62 pints of lager (during happy hour). Sounds like a good swap for a bunch of paintings to me.[/p][/quote]Your round then Iain? Saints Mike
  • Score: 0

4:53pm Thu 30 Jul 09

soton-mike80 says...

The Conservatory Party swung to power at the last local election. Who voted the party into power? The people of Southampton - Why are you now so surprised when the administration does what it has always done?
The Conservatory Party swung to power at the last local election. Who voted the party into power? The people of Southampton - Why are you now so surprised when the administration does what it has always done? soton-mike80
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Thu 30 Jul 09

flower49 says...

Do we have any say in this? Whats the betting the money raised will be to put back into more mispent councillors funds or expenses. Once these art pieces are gone they are gone forever.
Do we have any say in this? Whats the betting the money raised will be to put back into more mispent councillors funds or expenses. Once these art pieces are gone they are gone forever. flower49
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Boatman says...

A good deal of nonsense written by both the Echo and commentators. Every gallery/museum must of necessity possess more objects than it can display at any one time.
Do you really want to see exactly the same works each time you visit? I certainly don't. This sell-off is a disgrace. You need to go to London to find a gallery to match Southampton's. Can you imagine the National Gallery going in for a 'once in a lifetime' sell-off?
A good deal of nonsense written by both the Echo and commentators. Every gallery/museum must of necessity possess more objects than it can display at any one time. Do you really want to see exactly the same works each time you visit? I certainly don't. This sell-off is a disgrace. You need to go to London to find a gallery to match Southampton's. Can you imagine the National Gallery going in for a 'once in a lifetime' sell-off? Boatman
  • Score: 0

6:14pm Thu 30 Jul 09

oooarrr says...

Here's an idea!
Why not sell off all the real treasures and then use the money for putting up a giant cheesegrater at bevois valley or better still a rusty lump of barbed wire at the six dials?
Here's an idea! Why not sell off all the real treasures and then use the money for putting up a giant cheesegrater at bevois valley or better still a rusty lump of barbed wire at the six dials? oooarrr
  • Score: 0

6:17pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Lone Ranger wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses?
Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo

This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE
Lone Ranger - you are a spin doctor hired by john denham, paid for by taxpayers. Where's the difference you disturbed little hypocrite. I know your boss is now on a 3 month taxpayer-funded holiday, why can't he extend the privilege to his staff and save us the pain of having to read your nonsense? You could clear off and damp proof his bathroom - oh no, he's already claimed nearly £3000 of taxpayer's money to do that.

Lone Ranger - disrespecting the military at the public's expense.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Once the Goose is killed, there will be no nore Golden Eggs! I wonder where the money raised will be spent? Councillors' expenses? [/p][/quote]Yes Linesman and a new SPIN DOCTOR if you read the front page of the Echo This Tory Council is an utter DISGRACE[/p][/quote]Lone Ranger - you are a spin doctor hired by john denham, paid for by taxpayers. Where's the difference you disturbed little hypocrite. I know your boss is now on a 3 month taxpayer-funded holiday, why can't he extend the privilege to his staff and save us the pain of having to read your nonsense? You could clear off and damp proof his bathroom - oh no, he's already claimed nearly £3000 of taxpayer's money to do that. Lone Ranger - disrespecting the military at the public's expense. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

6:59pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Phantomdoll says...

Politics apart - it's a silly idea to sell off any of Southampton's art to fund a Titanic museum. Rodin, Munnings and the rest will be admired still in 100 years. After the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic, in my opinion, interest will start to wane. Most of the artefacts have been sold abroad anyway. A Heritage Centre could be an extension to the Art Gallery within the old Law Courts without the need to sell our treasures. By the way, 'twas the Labour Party which sold off all our gold reserves at a knockdown price when Gordon Brown was our so-called Chancellor of the Exchequer - so, they're all as bad as each other!
Politics apart - it's a silly idea to sell off any of Southampton's art to fund a Titanic museum. Rodin, Munnings and the rest will be admired still in 100 years. After the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic, in my opinion, interest will start to wane. Most of the artefacts have been sold abroad anyway. A Heritage Centre could be an extension to the Art Gallery within the old Law Courts without the need to sell our treasures. By the way, 'twas the Labour Party which sold off all our gold reserves at a knockdown price when Gordon Brown was our so-called Chancellor of the Exchequer - so, they're all as bad as each other! Phantomdoll
  • Score: 0

7:12pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.
Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway. Jenjo
  • Score: 0

7:28pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Jenjo wrote:
Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.
Did you even know that Southampton owned these pieces before the possibility of them being sold was muted? I suspect not. Typical mob reactionaryism. I'm glad there are people willing to take these difficult decisions because nothing positive would ever happen if they weren't
[quote][p][bold]Jenjo[/bold] wrote: Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.[/p][/quote]Did you even know that Southampton owned these pieces before the possibility of them being sold was muted? I suspect not. Typical mob reactionaryism. I'm glad there are people willing to take these difficult decisions because nothing positive would ever happen if they weren't senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

7:53pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

senseofsouthampton wrote:
Jenjo wrote:
Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.
Did you even know that Southampton owned these pieces before the possibility of them being sold was muted? I suspect not. Typical mob reactionaryism. I'm glad there are people willing to take these difficult decisions because nothing positive would ever happen if they weren't
Thank you councillor whoever-you-are. Great art lasts forever, and so will the Titanic artefacts and pictures, but a tacky walk-on model of the Titanic (wow, just like the one that all those people drowned on) is a cheap insult to the city that the council should have nothing to do with (PS of course I'm not familiar with the name of every work of art but you don't have to be in order to enjoy it when you see it). You can go back regularly to the gallery to see works that have been rotated, but one visit to the macabre Titanic toytown and you'll have seen it
[quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jenjo[/bold] wrote: Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.[/p][/quote]Did you even know that Southampton owned these pieces before the possibility of them being sold was muted? I suspect not. Typical mob reactionaryism. I'm glad there are people willing to take these difficult decisions because nothing positive would ever happen if they weren't[/p][/quote]Thank you councillor whoever-you-are. Great art lasts forever, and so will the Titanic artefacts and pictures, but a tacky walk-on model of the Titanic (wow, just like the one that all those people drowned on) is a cheap insult to the city that the council should have nothing to do with (PS of course I'm not familiar with the name of every work of art but you don't have to be in order to enjoy it when you see it). You can go back regularly to the gallery to see works that have been rotated, but one visit to the macabre Titanic toytown and you'll have seen it Jenjo
  • Score: 0

8:07pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Jenjo wrote:
senseofsouthampton wrote:
Jenjo wrote:
Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.
Did you even know that Southampton owned these pieces before the possibility of them being sold was muted? I suspect not. Typical mob reactionaryism. I'm glad there are people willing to take these difficult decisions because nothing positive would ever happen if they weren't
Thank you councillor whoever-you-are. Great art lasts forever, and so will the Titanic artefacts and pictures, but a tacky walk-on model of the Titanic (wow, just like the one that all those people drowned on) is a cheap insult to the city that the council should have nothing to do with (PS of course I'm not familiar with the name of every work of art but you don't have to be in order to enjoy it when you see it). You can go back regularly to the gallery to see works that have been rotated, but one visit to the macabre Titanic toytown and you'll have seen it
If you're not familiar with it how on earth can you miss it when it's gone? Can't you see how ludicrous your pitiful argument is? I believe that the council is working in the best interests of the people it represents by bringing visitors into the city and encouraging investment - your argument is that we should maintain the status quo and keep the art work in storage. What other works that are not on public display are you worried about the council selling? I bet you can't even name one. You are a Luddite standing in the way of progress.

And for your
information I am not a Councillor, I am in fact unemployed thanks to this useless government.
[quote][p][bold]Jenjo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jenjo[/bold] wrote: Disgusting - the art treasures are something that Southampton can be proud of, who wants a cheap and nasty tacky Titanic theme park? There's plenty of fine Titanic exhibits in the Wool House, and that can be enhanced as 2012 approaches. Don't vote Tory if you don't want your heritage to be sold off - if my neighbours are any guide, Hanndides and Samuels will be finished as councillors in Bassett before the anniversary comes round anyway.[/p][/quote]Did you even know that Southampton owned these pieces before the possibility of them being sold was muted? I suspect not. Typical mob reactionaryism. I'm glad there are people willing to take these difficult decisions because nothing positive would ever happen if they weren't[/p][/quote]Thank you councillor whoever-you-are. Great art lasts forever, and so will the Titanic artefacts and pictures, but a tacky walk-on model of the Titanic (wow, just like the one that all those people drowned on) is a cheap insult to the city that the council should have nothing to do with (PS of course I'm not familiar with the name of every work of art but you don't have to be in order to enjoy it when you see it). You can go back regularly to the gallery to see works that have been rotated, but one visit to the macabre Titanic toytown and you'll have seen it[/p][/quote]If you're not familiar with it how on earth can you miss it when it's gone? Can't you see how ludicrous your pitiful argument is? I believe that the council is working in the best interests of the people it represents by bringing visitors into the city and encouraging investment - your argument is that we should maintain the status quo and keep the art work in storage. What other works that are not on public display are you worried about the council selling? I bet you can't even name one. You are a Luddite standing in the way of progress. And for your information I am not a Councillor, I am in fact unemployed thanks to this useless government. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

8:16pm Thu 30 Jul 09

sadtobehere says...

Appalling decision - the only culture in the city and Royston wants to sell it. Madness. Reduce the number of councillors instead. They would not even be missed. The moral of this story - do not bequeath anything to this city as they do not value culture or bequests.
Appalling decision - the only culture in the city and Royston wants to sell it. Madness. Reduce the number of councillors instead. They would not even be missed. The moral of this story - do not bequeath anything to this city as they do not value culture or bequests. sadtobehere
  • Score: 0

8:31pm Thu 30 Jul 09

kiddo says...

The far-sighted folk who contributed to Southampton's marvellous art collection over the years must be turning in their graves. This is like a quick trip to a pawn shop.
The far-sighted folk who contributed to Southampton's marvellous art collection over the years must be turning in their graves. This is like a quick trip to a pawn shop. kiddo
  • Score: 0

9:33pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Pam W says...

senseofsouthampton is getting steamed up about the fact that jenjo said we should keep the art in storage. I have read his/her comments sevearl times and nowhere does he or she say that. And the idea that you have to be familiar with something to appreciate it is obviously untrue.

I am concerned about the Echo's stance on this - an editor who is not a resident of the city (ie does not pay council tax to Soton) is trying to whip up support for a policy to sell off things that were bequeathed to the city (ie things that are not his in any respect whatever). What moral right does he have to do that?
senseofsouthampton is getting steamed up about the fact that jenjo said we should keep the art in storage. I have read his/her comments sevearl times and nowhere does he or she say that. And the idea that you have to be familiar with something to appreciate it is obviously untrue. I am concerned about the Echo's stance on this - an editor who is not a resident of the city (ie does not pay council tax to Soton) is trying to whip up support for a policy to sell off things that were bequeathed to the city (ie things that are not his in any respect whatever). What moral right does he have to do that? Pam W
  • Score: 0

10:04pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Pam W wrote:
senseofsouthampton is getting steamed up about the fact that jenjo said we should keep the art in storage. I have read his/her comments sevearl times and nowhere does he or she say that. And the idea that you have to be familiar with something to appreciate it is obviously untrue.

I am concerned about the Echo's stance on this - an editor who is not a resident of the city (ie does not pay council tax to Soton) is trying to whip up support for a policy to sell off things that were bequeathed to the city (ie things that are not his in any respect whatever). What moral right does he have to do that?
So then Pam, When and where have these works been on display? I don't know the answer and therefore I really don't mind if they are sold. Jenjo is only objecting to the sale because he objects to the council, that is terrible. I don't know whether these two pieces of art were in storage or not but neither does Jenjo and that is why his, and now your, objections are so baseless.
[quote][p][bold]Pam W[/bold] wrote: senseofsouthampton is getting steamed up about the fact that jenjo said we should keep the art in storage. I have read his/her comments sevearl times and nowhere does he or she say that. And the idea that you have to be familiar with something to appreciate it is obviously untrue. I am concerned about the Echo's stance on this - an editor who is not a resident of the city (ie does not pay council tax to Soton) is trying to whip up support for a policy to sell off things that were bequeathed to the city (ie things that are not his in any respect whatever). What moral right does he have to do that?[/p][/quote]So then Pam, When and where have these works been on display? I don't know the answer and therefore I really don't mind if they are sold. Jenjo is only objecting to the sale because he objects to the council, that is terrible. I don't know whether these two pieces of art were in storage or not but neither does Jenjo and that is why his, and now your, objections are so baseless. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

10:07pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Can someone who has come out with mock outrage at this story please, please answer this question honestly...

Have you ever taken time out of your day to go and look at either of the 2 works of art that the Echo has suggested may be sold? I strongly contend that the answer is no and in which case your arguments are a farce.
Can someone who has come out with mock outrage at this story please, please answer this question honestly... Have you ever taken time out of your day to go and look at either of the 2 works of art that the Echo has suggested may be sold? I strongly contend that the answer is no and in which case your arguments are a farce. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

10:10pm Thu 30 Jul 09

Swalk says...

Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first
Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first Swalk
  • Score: 0

10:31pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Swalk wrote:
Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first
If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?
[quote][p][bold]Swalk[/bold] wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first[/p][/quote]If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too? senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

10:31pm Thu 30 Jul 09

southy says...

would be good for another local paper to start printing or one others like the evening star to publish a local paper.
would be good for another local paper to start printing or one others like the evening star to publish a local paper. southy
  • Score: 0

10:47pm Thu 30 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

southy wrote:
would be good for another local paper to start printing or one others like the evening star to publish a local paper.
That would be really good in case the people of Southampton ran out of toilet paper...

Seriously southy, local papers are really struggling and may soon be a thing of the past. Mainly due to the web. Just look at some of their corporate results and then perhaps you see the reason behind their over-hyped, under-researched stories.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: would be good for another local paper to start printing or one others like the evening star to publish a local paper.[/p][/quote]That would be really good in case the people of Southampton ran out of toilet paper... Seriously southy, local papers are really struggling and may soon be a thing of the past. Mainly due to the web. Just look at some of their corporate results and then perhaps you see the reason behind their over-hyped, under-researched stories. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

7:38am Fri 31 Jul 09

freemantlegirl2 says...

senseofsouthampton wrote:
Swalk wrote:
Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first
If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?
We can always live in hope!! after certain comments I saw on that other thread!

As for the art, it's a slippery slope.....is it funding the new spin doctor? ludicrous and I don't think it will be agreed anyway. Let's hope not! However, why is it kept under wraps? it should be displayed for all to enjoy ! or is this because they can't afford the insurance? if it will never be displayed for that reason then it makes sense to sell it because the public will never get to see it :/
[quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Swalk[/bold] wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first[/p][/quote]If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?[/p][/quote]We can always live in hope!! after certain comments I saw on that other thread! As for the art, it's a slippery slope.....is it funding the new spin doctor? ludicrous and I don't think it will be agreed anyway. Let's hope not! However, why is it kept under wraps? it should be displayed for all to enjoy ! or is this because they can't afford the insurance? if it will never be displayed for that reason then it makes sense to sell it because the public will never get to see it :/ freemantlegirl2
  • Score: 0

8:07am Fri 31 Jul 09

Swalk says...

Freemantlegirl, I agree with you here and also agreed with you about the student story on the other thread, so I don't understand why you find me so boring
Freemantlegirl, I agree with you here and also agreed with you about the student story on the other thread, so I don't understand why you find me so boring Swalk
  • Score: 0

8:46am Fri 31 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

The most valuable works are precisely the ones that the Council shouldn't be selling because they are the ones that the public will come to see - just like people go to the Louvre specifically to see the Mona Lisa. The problem has always been letting the world know what Soton art gallery has to offer. But the Council's plan to sell off some of the best bits has achieved something that no previous publicity campaign has ever managed, talk about shooting yourself in the foot! How can they sell these sculptures off now when more people that ever will want to come to the city to see them?
The most valuable works are precisely the ones that the Council shouldn't be selling because they are the ones that the public will come to see - just like people go to the Louvre specifically to see the Mona Lisa. The problem has always been letting the world know what Soton art gallery has to offer. But the Council's plan to sell off some of the best bits has achieved something that no previous publicity campaign has ever managed, talk about shooting yourself in the foot! How can they sell these sculptures off now when more people that ever will want to come to the city to see them? Jenjo
  • Score: 0

9:21am Fri 31 Jul 09

Lone Ranger says...

senseofsouthampton wrote:
Swalk wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first
If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?
Dear Sense.

Why do you have to be so bitter towards posters on this site.

Like you they have an opinion and are well justified in expressing it.

Perhaps its the bitterness in you that you are unemployed and blame the Government for it.

When i was in your position three years ago, unemployed, rather than sit back and moan and blame Governments etc i took no handouts and set up my own business without the help of anyone and still supported a family.

Why dont you?

Just get off your high horse, stop making pathetic accusations towards fellow posters and start respecting other people opinions who feel that this council is not doing its best for its citizens
[quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Swalk[/bold] wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first[/p][/quote]If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?[/p][/quote]Dear Sense. Why do you have to be so bitter towards posters on this site. Like you they have an opinion and are well justified in expressing it. Perhaps its the bitterness in you that you are unemployed and blame the Government for it. When i was in your position three years ago, unemployed, rather than sit back and moan and blame Governments etc i took no handouts and set up my own business without the help of anyone and still supported a family. Why dont you? Just get off your high horse, stop making pathetic accusations towards fellow posters and start respecting other people opinions who feel that this council is not doing its best for its citizens Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

9:24am Fri 31 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Jenjo wrote:
The most valuable works are precisely the ones that the Council shouldn't be selling because they are the ones that the public will come to see - just like people go to the Louvre specifically to see the Mona Lisa. The problem has always been letting the world know what Soton art gallery has to offer. But the Council's plan to sell off some of the best bits has achieved something that no previous publicity campaign has ever managed, talk about shooting yourself in the foot! How can they sell these sculptures off now when more people that ever will want to come to the city to see them?
You've already admitted not knowing that these two pieces were owned by the City so they can't have done a great job in promoting visitors to Southammton so far. You just disagree for the sake of disagreeing.

Name another piece of artwork that you are worried about the sale of. I would wager a hell of alot of money that you can't name one.
[quote][p][bold]Jenjo[/bold] wrote: The most valuable works are precisely the ones that the Council shouldn't be selling because they are the ones that the public will come to see - just like people go to the Louvre specifically to see the Mona Lisa. The problem has always been letting the world know what Soton art gallery has to offer. But the Council's plan to sell off some of the best bits has achieved something that no previous publicity campaign has ever managed, talk about shooting yourself in the foot! How can they sell these sculptures off now when more people that ever will want to come to the city to see them?[/p][/quote]You've already admitted not knowing that these two pieces were owned by the City so they can't have done a great job in promoting visitors to Southammton so far. You just disagree for the sake of disagreeing. Name another piece of artwork that you are worried about the sale of. I would wager a hell of alot of money that you can't name one. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

9:52am Fri 31 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

senseofsouthampton wrote:
Can someone who has come out with mock outrage at this story please, please answer this question honestly... Have you ever taken time out of your day to go and look at either of the 2 works of art that the Echo has suggested may be sold? I strongly contend that the answer is no and in which case your arguments are a farce.
Yes I have. the Rodin is a sculpture based on a ballerina. It's one of the best pieces in the gallery and has been on display in the not too distant past.
[quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: Can someone who has come out with mock outrage at this story please, please answer this question honestly... Have you ever taken time out of your day to go and look at either of the 2 works of art that the Echo has suggested may be sold? I strongly contend that the answer is no and in which case your arguments are a farce.[/p][/quote]Yes I have. the Rodin is a sculpture based on a ballerina. It's one of the best pieces in the gallery and has been on display in the not too distant past. mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

9:59am Fri 31 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

I also note how the Echo removed my link to the facebook 'Protest Against the Southampton Art Sell-Off group' from this thread.

What's the matter Echo. Are you afraid of some opposition to your unpopular campaign?

The local press should be there to inform people. Not attempt to stifle freedom of speech.





I also note how the Echo removed my link to the facebook 'Protest Against the Southampton Art Sell-Off group' from this thread. What's the matter Echo. Are you afraid of some opposition to your unpopular campaign? The local press should be there to inform people. Not attempt to stifle freedom of speech. mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

11:59am Fri 31 Jul 09

Bevois Valley Resident says...

mr.southampton wrote:
senseofsouthampton wrote: Can someone who has come out with mock outrage at this story please, please answer this question honestly... Have you ever taken time out of your day to go and look at either of the 2 works of art that the Echo has suggested may be sold? I strongly contend that the answer is no and in which case your arguments are a farce.
Yes I have. the Rodin is a sculpture based on a ballerina. It's one of the best pieces in the gallery and has been on display in the not too distant past.
Me too. I saw Eve as well on a 'behind the scenes' tour that the gallery put on.
[quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: Can someone who has come out with mock outrage at this story please, please answer this question honestly... Have you ever taken time out of your day to go and look at either of the 2 works of art that the Echo has suggested may be sold? I strongly contend that the answer is no and in which case your arguments are a farce.[/p][/quote]Yes I have. the Rodin is a sculpture based on a ballerina. It's one of the best pieces in the gallery and has been on display in the not too distant past.[/p][/quote]Me too. I saw Eve as well on a 'behind the scenes' tour that the gallery put on. Bevois Valley Resident
  • Score: 0

12:03pm Fri 31 Jul 09

MrGMan says...

Since these pieces aren't on display, how are you meant to appreciate them? By knowing they are locked downstairs in the civic?

"New space created by the museum also means an extra 100 paintings will go on permanent display. "

So those against the sale of pieces of art that are not on display are also against the funds being used to display more art!

You couldn't make it up.

Everyone who has posted on here so far should state when and where they saw these pieces of art.
Since these pieces aren't on display, how are you meant to appreciate them? By knowing they are locked downstairs in the civic? "New space created by the museum also means an extra 100 paintings will go on permanent display. " So those against the sale of pieces of art that are not on display are also against the funds being used to display more art! You couldn't make it up. Everyone who has posted on here so far should state when and where they saw these pieces of art. MrGMan
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Fri 31 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Lone Ranger wrote:
senseofsouthampton wrote:
Swalk wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first
If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?
Dear Sense.

Why do you have to be so bitter towards posters on this site.

Like you they have an opinion and are well justified in expressing it.

Perhaps its the bitterness in you that you are unemployed and blame the Government for it.

When i was in your position three years ago, unemployed, rather than sit back and moan and blame Governments etc i took no handouts and set up my own business without the help of anyone and still supported a family.

Why dont you?

Just get off your high horse, stop making pathetic accusations towards fellow posters and start respecting other people opinions who feel that this council is not doing its best for its citizens
Dear Lone Ranger

It is as inaccurate as it is offensive to suggest that I have not looked for employment. And I have taken no hand outs. In case you haven't noticed we are in the midst of a massive recession thanks to this incompetent government. You seem very happy to attack our local council but find it impossible to even accept that this Government has taken this country to the brink of economic collapse. Your myopia is truly disturbing.

I attack posts that are deliberately one-sided and ridiculous, normally they belong to you. And before you start pontificating as to what comments I should and should not be making on this website I would remind you that you called me pathetic and a tory merely for beating the drum for our lads and lasses in uniform. You started this. I have served my country you little parasite, don't lecture me about sitting back and moaning. All you do is moan, that and act apologiser in chief for our dettached local MP. Jog on you little cyber warrior.

[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Swalk[/bold] wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first[/p][/quote]If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?[/p][/quote]Dear Sense. Why do you have to be so bitter towards posters on this site. Like you they have an opinion and are well justified in expressing it. Perhaps its the bitterness in you that you are unemployed and blame the Government for it. When i was in your position three years ago, unemployed, rather than sit back and moan and blame Governments etc i took no handouts and set up my own business without the help of anyone and still supported a family. Why dont you? Just get off your high horse, stop making pathetic accusations towards fellow posters and start respecting other people opinions who feel that this council is not doing its best for its citizens[/p][/quote]Dear Lone Ranger It is as inaccurate as it is offensive to suggest that I have not looked for employment. And I have taken no hand outs. In case you haven't noticed we are in the midst of a massive recession thanks to this incompetent government. You seem very happy to attack our local council but find it impossible to even accept that this Government has taken this country to the brink of economic collapse. Your myopia is truly disturbing. I attack posts that are deliberately one-sided and ridiculous, normally they belong to you. And before you start pontificating as to what comments I should and should not be making on this website I would remind you that you called me pathetic and a tory merely for beating the drum for our lads and lasses in uniform. You started this. I have served my country you little parasite, don't lecture me about sitting back and moaning. All you do is moan, that and act apologiser in chief for our dettached local MP. Jog on you little cyber warrior. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

3:15pm Fri 31 Jul 09

Lone Ranger says...

senseofsouthampton wrote:
Lone Ranger wrote:
senseofsouthampton wrote:
Swalk wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first
If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?
Dear Sense. Why do you have to be so bitter towards posters on this site. Like you they have an opinion and are well justified in expressing it. Perhaps its the bitterness in you that you are unemployed and blame the Government for it. When i was in your position three years ago, unemployed, rather than sit back and moan and blame Governments etc i took no handouts and set up my own business without the help of anyone and still supported a family. Why dont you? Just get off your high horse, stop making pathetic accusations towards fellow posters and start respecting other people opinions who feel that this council is not doing its best for its citizens
Dear Lone Ranger It is as inaccurate as it is offensive to suggest that I have not looked for employment. And I have taken no hand outs. In case you haven't noticed we are in the midst of a massive recession thanks to this incompetent government. You seem very happy to attack our local council but find it impossible to even accept that this Government has taken this country to the brink of economic collapse. Your myopia is truly disturbing. I attack posts that are deliberately one-sided and ridiculous, normally they belong to you. And before you start pontificating as to what comments I should and should not be making on this website I would remind you that you called me pathetic and a tory merely for beating the drum for our lads and lasses in uniform. You started this. I have served my country you little parasite, don't lecture me about sitting back and moaning. All you do is moan, that and act apologiser in chief for our dettached local MP. Jog on you little cyber warrior.
Wow !!

I know what a parasite is but what is

"myopia"

"pontificating"

unfortunately i dont have time to thumb through a thesaurus as i am busy working. Nor do i have the time or inclination to "google" it.

You come on here with no comments of your own just to pick up on what everyone else posts and slag them off.

Can you come up with anything original as regards name calling only i have been called them before by much better people than you.

And by the way your next employer, if you are good enough to find one, may just be ME.

Now thats something to think about isn't it

I cant wait!!
[quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Swalk[/bold] wrote: Is the Echo is trying to wreck the city and its great institutions? Yesterday Peter Law ran a story implying that foreign Soton uni students were defecting as illegal immigrants (not true - most of them either go to other unis or never reach the UK in the first place, but who cares what the truth is?). But the paper's part in trying to reduce the city's prestigious art collection (which belongs to the city, not Murray or Hannides) is enough to start a campaign to stop people buying the Echo. Me first[/p][/quote]If you're going to stop reading the Echo does that mean you're going to stop boring everyone on the Echo website too?[/p][/quote]Dear Sense. Why do you have to be so bitter towards posters on this site. Like you they have an opinion and are well justified in expressing it. Perhaps its the bitterness in you that you are unemployed and blame the Government for it. When i was in your position three years ago, unemployed, rather than sit back and moan and blame Governments etc i took no handouts and set up my own business without the help of anyone and still supported a family. Why dont you? Just get off your high horse, stop making pathetic accusations towards fellow posters and start respecting other people opinions who feel that this council is not doing its best for its citizens[/p][/quote]Dear Lone Ranger It is as inaccurate as it is offensive to suggest that I have not looked for employment. And I have taken no hand outs. In case you haven't noticed we are in the midst of a massive recession thanks to this incompetent government. You seem very happy to attack our local council but find it impossible to even accept that this Government has taken this country to the brink of economic collapse. Your myopia is truly disturbing. I attack posts that are deliberately one-sided and ridiculous, normally they belong to you. And before you start pontificating as to what comments I should and should not be making on this website I would remind you that you called me pathetic and a tory merely for beating the drum for our lads and lasses in uniform. You started this. I have served my country you little parasite, don't lecture me about sitting back and moaning. All you do is moan, that and act apologiser in chief for our dettached local MP. Jog on you little cyber warrior. [/p][/quote]Wow !! I know what a parasite is but what is "myopia" "pontificating" unfortunately i dont have time to thumb through a thesaurus as i am busy working. Nor do i have the time or inclination to "google" it. You come on here with no comments of your own just to pick up on what everyone else posts and slag them off. Can you come up with anything original as regards name calling only i have been called them before by much better people than you. And by the way your next employer, if you are good enough to find one, may just be ME. Now thats something to think about isn't it I cant wait!! Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

4:27pm Sat 1 Aug 09

MrGMan says...

I notice no one has said when they last saw these fantastic pieces of work?

Lone Ranger if "better people" than sense have called you the same names as sense has then isn't that telling you something?
I notice no one has said when they last saw these fantastic pieces of work? Lone Ranger if "better people" than sense have called you the same names as sense has then isn't that telling you something? MrGMan
  • Score: 0

9:11am Sun 2 Aug 09

Lone Ranger says...

MrGMan wrote:
I notice no one has said when they last saw these fantastic pieces of work? Lone Ranger if "better people" than sense have called you the same names as sense has then isn't that telling you something?
You are as sharp as a carrot

lol
[quote][p][bold]MrGMan[/bold] wrote: I notice no one has said when they last saw these fantastic pieces of work? Lone Ranger if "better people" than sense have called you the same names as sense has then isn't that telling you something?[/p][/quote]You are as sharp as a carrot lol Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Mon 3 Aug 09

spotburst says...

As at least one commentator has already stated: there is ALREADY a sizable Titanic exhibition at the Maritime Museum. What more could actually be shown? The photos and artifacts occupy most of the second floor, so why bother to re-locate it all in a costly new building? The Maritime museum is the probably the most fitting place for this. As for selling off art to fund culture - isn't that just shooting oneself in the foot? Remember that only months ago the 'culture experts' at the Echo were suggesting selling the City's art to rescue Saints! If we have so many enviable art treasures then surely for goodness sake PROMOTE this. Show all the 'classics' by all means, and why not promote the modern stuff in a separate museum of modern art? (Just like - gasp - London!)
More of a 'crowd puller' than a Titanic exhibition I would have thought. As for selling off art, as another comment has suggested: 'once it's gone, it's gone' - we'll never be able to get these treasures back. Southampton City should build on it's strengths and it's clear that the art collection (much of it unshown - so show it!) is precisely that.
As at least one commentator has already stated: there is ALREADY a sizable Titanic exhibition at the Maritime Museum. What more could actually be shown? The photos and artifacts occupy most of the second floor, so why bother to re-locate it all in a costly new building? The Maritime museum is the probably the most fitting place for this. As for selling off art to fund culture - isn't that just shooting oneself in the foot? Remember that only months ago the 'culture experts' at the Echo were suggesting selling the City's art to rescue Saints! If we have so many enviable art treasures then surely for goodness sake PROMOTE this. Show all the 'classics' by all means, and why not promote the modern stuff in a separate museum of modern art? (Just like - gasp - London!) More of a 'crowd puller' than a Titanic exhibition I would have thought. As for selling off art, as another comment has suggested: 'once it's gone, it's gone' - we'll never be able to get these treasures back. Southampton City should build on it's strengths and it's clear that the art collection (much of it unshown - so show it!) is precisely that. spotburst
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree