Gothamist: Mo' MoMA: Mo' Art, Mo' Admission Price

hp_slash

Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:22:17 -0500

For all those who are commenting that there should be no admission for museums because they are "art for the masses:" may I ask, what about Broadway shows? What about operas at Lincoln Center? Why should the great art of a play and an opera be valued so high as over $100 a ticket, while the visual arts should be free for all? I do agree that the arts should be free, but the money for operating costs has to come from somewhere. And if you want it to come from the government like other countries, write to your congressman (or even better, the President) to get those billions of dollars being spent on Iraq tranferred over to fund the arts. Because no matter if something says "free," someone needs to be paid to maintain the space, buy and preserve the art, pay for heating and A/C, and, of course, manufacture the "free" sign.

hijiki

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:37:34 -0500

ivy, expanding appreciation of art is a good thing for everyone. fewer people appreciating art will only lead to more nea cuts. who exactly has 'no business in a museum'??? what makes you a more appropriate museum-goer than a tourist? and why do you have more of a right to view modern art than anyone else? those good ol days of elbow room were nice, but only for propping up your own entitlement. and now you support descriminating against people of lower income so you can have a little more room. well congratulations, enjoy yourself.

Ivy Hamlin

Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:55:14 -0500

Maybe there will be fewer people. I would pay more for that, I guess. I can remember back when the only people who bothered to go to museums were art-lovers. Boys and girls, it was wonderful. Then they started with the "blockbuster shows" and other events to draw in people who have NO BUSINESS IN A MUSEUM! And tourists. Sad.

captain

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:57:58 -0500

I heard a rumor that MoMA was "outsourcing" ticket sales to Ticketmaster to keep up with the demand when it first reopens. So that $20 ticket will actually be closer to $25.50. Whatta bunch of jerks.

Jess

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:44:04 -0500

Your $20. And mine. Paying MoMA CEO Glenn Lowry's $600,000 salary. No lie. He makes $600K. How's that for non-profit? $600K. That's 30,000 visitors just to pay Glenn's salary. Boycott MoMA. Pass it on.

Sly

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 19:13:38 -0500

If the $20 ticket price will keep Dazzle and people like him/her out of there, then I'm all for it.

Dazzle2112

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:56:49 -0500

And not for nothing, but how does the MoMA expect tourists to pay that kind of fee for it? It's basically a huge tourist attraction just in the middle of everything and at $20 per ticket, they are basically encouraging people to go elsewhere. Which is not a hard thing to do in midtown. They're idiots because they are alienating their bread and butter. If they don't change the price, here's a tip to tourists. Head to Soho and Chelsea and see modern art FOR FREE!!!! This fucking city is becoming a stereotype of itself!

miss representation

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:27:14 -0500

Daniel, MoMA has a website, which helpfully lists membership (single) for $75 yearly. Act now if you are concerned about an increase.

Tim N.

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:41:19 -0500

I just read the Mayor's quote that "some things people can afford, some things people can't." Hey, shrimpboat, we're not talking about Porsches here, we're talking about art. When art becomes only the province of the rich, then it, and society, has failed. Then this will truly be a Republican town.

matthew

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:39:31 -0500

art belongs to everyone and it is everyone's right to see it. i will absolutely not shell out 20 bucks on MoMa. we can see by looking at history that intellectual, social and cultural exclusion, particularly when it's financial, is a great way to keep people down. fuck the mayor, what does he know about anything anyway?

990000

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:35:03 -0500

$20??? wtf??!!!

hijiki

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:05:37 -0500

totally elitist. correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't accessibility for the masses one of the basic pillars of modernism? they may be a private institution, but they're hording artifacts of our cultural heritage and turning them into a commodity only the rich can enjoy. i might be able to afford it, but i'm not going to.

Dazzle2112

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:20:52 -0500

$20 is bullshit. It's elitists and alienates the vast majority of New Yorkers from the world of art. It's alredy elitist to begin with. Adding a $20 price tag is simply a big "Fuck you!" to those not in the design and art world. MoMA, please suck it! And I will charge you $20 to suck it so let's call it even!

jenny

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:38:39 -0500

I'm a cheapskate. I've been out of college for at least five years but still use my college ID to get into museums. And the Met's admission fee is only a "recommendation" -- I've paid $1 to get in there before. I know, I'm cheating the system but it's so hard to see these things otherwise. I love to just go to the Met for an hour, see a few things and leave and I don't want to pay $15 for that.

ml

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:55:01 -0500

The real reason for the price increases is huge increases in insurance premiums for traveling shows, borrowed works, etc. Not that this justifies the huge price hike. I still think they should have lowered general admission to around 8-10 bucks, and that gets you into the permanent collection. Then, and exra 8-10 gets you into the special exhibits, and an extra 5 gets you into a movie. Plus, Friday nights will still be free (if not uber-crowded), so the people who really get hit hard by the 20 bucks are tourists and people who can afford it... Plus, the museum is really trying to get people to join. I used to work near there and had a student id, and a student membership was (and still is actually) $35 (non-student is $70). For 35 bucks as a student, you can go as often as you want as well as see every movie they show for no extra price. That's a great deal for a student, especially since they show some great movies in a city where all movies are 10 bucks and up...

Ajit

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:47:50 -0500

Most NYC museums are free or pay-what-you-can on Friday nights. Does anyone know if MoMA will be, too?

daniel

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:47:29 -0500

Can't wait for the MoMa to come back to Midtown where it belongs. The Queens experience is: just enough from the permanent collection is on display to make the trip worthwhile (but no more). I just want to know what the memberships are going to cost.

Dirk

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:16:01 -0500

My guess is that you will turn off a lot of young folks (twenties and thirties) because of the ticket hike. Shouldn't they be trying to create a new generation of museum-goers? On some points I can understand the hike -- but for the most part, it smacks of elitism, as it seems they are targeting a wealthier clientele. Someone in the NYTimes articles is quoted as saying that $20 is still a bargain. However, I think this ticket price only serves to reinforce this chi-chi image of MoMa and will not do much in attracting a new crowd. Though I guess it will keep away the riff-raff and the unwashed...

Tim N.

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:37:14 -0500

My company ID used to get me in, I hope it still does. But there's something wrong with $20. It's elitist b.s. My daughter and I love to roam art museums on dull rainy days (or even sunny days) and by making this fee so high you're saying the art is only for those who can afford it (are you listening, Mr. Mayor?). And that's flat out immoral. You have to wonder at $20 are you paying for the art or are you paying for the "privledge" of visiting MoMA. And if the latter is the case, then MoMA is serving neither the art nor the community and has therefore failed in a museum's most basic mission. And why is it so surprising that Mayor Souless fails to see that?

Rose

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:29:59 -0500

I just read this in the New York Times on Sunday and was so pissed. I'd love to see the new building and, of course, the artwork but I'm not rushing to pay $20.

Kojak

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:29:15 -0500

Hah, Im a Student. I pay 12! But thats still a little high... They need more sponsors.

Brian Van

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:26:10 -0500

God bless the headline writers at the Daily News and the New York Post

Brian Van

Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:26:06 -0500

God bless the headline writers at the Daily News and the New York Post