4 ms·

I see, now, it makes complete sense. I'm sure museums in France are free for French citizen under 25 and the unemployed in order to draw in more tourists which

by brmgb 3y ago

I see, now, it makes complete sense. I'm sure museums in France are free for French citizen under 25 and the unemployed in order to draw in more tourists which would come and pay anyway. That has absolutely nothing to do with these countries actually seeing access to culture as a public good and valuing education.

derefr 3y ago
You don't seem to be seeing that those are two sides of the same coin. The article cites rising labor costs as the primary factor in needing to increase ticket prices. Well, why would labor costs in an industry rise? Because demand exceeds supply. And why would demand exceed supply? Because people only want to work there "as a job", rather than seeing working there as a cultural mission to educate others — to educate the world! — about their culture and history. (I.e. people working at the MoMA demand higher wages [relative to cost of living] than people working at the Louvre do, for essentially the same work, because the people at the MoMA value the "perks of the job" less.) The same kind of people who work in the museums, work in the municipal governments of these cities. In Europe, both groups — regardless of political affiliation! — tend to believe in the "city as cultural institution." And so both groups tend to work together to craft a city whose economy is in symbiosis with "global cultural enrichment", rather than in conflict with it. The US does not do this. Or at least, I have never seen a majority government in any American municipality be aligned in creating a "hospitality-driven city focused around cultural tourism" in the way that municipal governments in Europe are. Also, re: "I'm sure museums in France are free for French citizen under 25 and the unemployed" — from the article: > The Guggenheim charges students $19 (children under 12 receive free admission) and the museum maintains a pay-what-you-wish policy for everyone on Saturdays that is expanding by one hour, from 5-8 p.m. This is not a debate about economic barriers to access. The US is equally considerate of these. This really is just a question of how much to charge the rich foreign tourists who need to get out of town the next day and so don't have time to wait for a lazy Saturday to visit the museum. American cultural sites charge these people more; European cultural sites less. I'm offering an explanation for that, specific phenomenon.
- brmgb 3y ago
  No one in Europe wants to create "hospitality-driven" cities. Who do you take us for? It's not bloody Disneyland.
- shalmanese 3y ago
  No, the labor costs are mostly rising because culturally significant cities in the Anglosphere have seen their housing costs blow up to astronomical levels in the last few years. Supply is hilariously above demand globally, people in the museum space basically make the calculation of what is the minimum I can talk myself into justifying and not live an actively unpleasant life and that minimum bar has simply skyrocketed vs 10 years ago.

by brmgb 3y ago

derefr 3y ago

You don't seem to be seeing that those are two sides of the same coin. The article cites rising labor costs as the primary factor in needing to increase ticket prices. Well, why would labor costs in an industry rise? Because demand exceeds supply. And why would demand exceed supply? Because people only want to work there "as a job", rather than seeing working there as a cultural mission to educate others — to educate the world! — about their culture and history. (I.e. people working at the MoMA demand higher wages [relative to cost of living] than people working at the Louvre do, for essentially the same work, because the people at the MoMA value the "perks of the job" less.) The same kind of people who work in the museums, work in the municipal governments of these cities. In Europe, both groups — regardless of political affiliation! — tend to believe in the "city as cultural institution." And so both groups tend to work together to craft a city whose economy is in symbiosis with "global cultural enrichment", rather than in conflict with it. The US does not do this. Or at least, I have never seen a majority government in any American municipality be aligned in creating a "hospitality-driven city focused around cultural tourism" in the way that municipal governments in Europe are. Also, re: "I'm sure museums in France are free for French citizen under 25 and the unemployed" — from the article: > The Guggenheim charges students $19 (children under 12 receive free admission) and the museum maintains a pay-what-you-wish policy for everyone on Saturdays that is expanding by one hour, from 5-8 p.m. This is not a debate about economic barriers to access. The US is equally considerate of these. This really is just a question of how much to charge the rich foreign tourists who need to get out of town the next day and so don't have time to wait for a lazy Saturday to visit the museum. American cultural sites charge these people more; European cultural sites less. I'm offering an explanation for that, specific phenomenon.

brmgb 3y ago
No one in Europe wants to create "hospitality-driven" cities. Who do you take us for? It's not bloody Disneyland.
shalmanese 3y ago
No, the labor costs are mostly rising because culturally significant cities in the Anglosphere have seen their housing costs blow up to astronomical levels in the last few years. Supply is hilariously above demand globally, people in the museum space basically make the calculation of what is the minimum I can talk myself into justifying and not live an actively unpleasant life and that minimum bar has simply skyrocketed vs 10 years ago.