3 ms·
It always annoys me to no end, whenever somebody mentions about selling somebody's papers, but "putting a ban on their export", as if there is any difference wh
by krick 2y ago
It always annoys me to no end, whenever somebody mentions about selling somebody's papers, but "putting a ban on their export", as if there is any difference whatsoever where is located some personal collection where they will rot. If it's considered a "national treasure", obviously, it cannot be sold to anyone, and quite honestly it MUST be scanned and be available on the internet for anybody interested to read it. If it's unimportant enough to be sold to a personal collection, it's also nobody's business what the buyer will do to that stuff.
This reminds me: are there even any good scans of the Portsmouth Papers that Keynes bought? Or is this stuff still just buried in various museum archives, seen only by certified friends of the museum's director?
- cubefox 2y ago> If it's considered a "national treasure", obviously, it cannot be sold to anyone ... If it's unimportant enough to be sold to a personal collection It seems it already is owned by a private party, which is essentially the same as a personal collection.
- CRConrad 2y agoYeah, I think that was the GP's point: Then it either isn't "a national treasure", or it needs to be bought by the state.
- cubefox 2y agoAllocating a budget for that may be a major hurdle. Preventing national cultural heritage from being sold to someone outside the country seems to be a good compromise. If it is indeed "national cultural heritage".