Natural History Museum...Why is it free?

[Olf]

essayer said:

More importantly can you pay to jump the queue?

No need - just enter through the unused Exhibition Road entrance rather than through the grand Cromwell Road entrance.

[CommanderJameson]

ninja-lewis said:

Whereas in New York, the Metropolitan Museum of Art charges an admission fee.

Not strictly true, as we found out - at least a few years ago, anyhoo. Things may have changed in the meantime.

We were wandering across Central Park and stopped to have a sandwich and a coffee. We got chatting to a local chap who was photographing birds (or something) and mentioned that we were going to The Met. He advised us that although it might appear that it is required to pay $25 (or whatever it was) to gain entry, that is actually only a suggested donation. This is of course buried in the smallest of small print.

Also, go in via the student entrance on the south side. You miss the queues that way. I think we paid about $5.

The museum has a $3B endowment, so I didn't feel too bad about "short-changing" it.

[GeraldSmith]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

GeraldSmith said:

It's a mystery to me because it's also pretty dreadful, at least by the standards of these things in other countries. I went last year and it looks like it hasn't changed since I went as a child, 35 or so years ago.

It would be so much better if they charged and invested in it.

I'm amazed at this. The Natural History Museum is a fabulous place. I've been to loads of museums all over the shop and it's probably my favourite. When my kids were young we'd go every couple of months. Just amazing entertainment. The subsidiary NHM in Tring Hertfordshire if fabulous too.

I've never heard anyone knock it before. Does anyone else not rate it. The building on its own is fantastic, even if it were empty. We've not much to be proud of in this country, but the NHM is right up there.

Well what I saw was something that looked fairly unchanged since the 1970s when I went as a kid, that plastic blue whale is still there looking sad and dusty, the stuffed animals in the room leading to it are the same, faded and tired. There are attempts at things for kids to play with but some were broken and non looked engaging. Having been to museums like the Smithsonian and Te Papa in recent times it was very sad in comparison - except for the building, that is great.

We went to other places in the same weekend that were good, just the NHM looked like it had lost it's way.

[Eric Mc]

A completely new dinosaur gallery was opened less than ten years ago - with lots of animatronics. Did you miss that?

There is a case for "old style" museums anyway (which the NHM isn't). If you are ever in Dublin, pop into Dublin's NHM and you will see what a true Victorian and antique museum looks like. That does not mean there is anything wrong. Indeed, in many way Dublin's NHM is in reality a museum museum, and valuable for that alone.

The well rnowned paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote a wonderful essay praising the Dublin NHM in one of his books.

[Use Psychology]

the NHM seems less old and dusty than the science museum to me, which last time I was in it (on a lunch break, worked next door), still had half a floor dedicated to 'naval architecture' (models of ships). This is not to detract from that museum which I think is ace.

I think you've picked up on most of the very few bits that are old in the NHM. They aren't going to get complete new dinosaur specimens very often, a lot of the corridors have old 'dusty stuffed animals' in them but I think this adds to the feel of the place. If you want to show how big a blue whale is, which is worthwhile in my opinion, how else are you going to do it?

You haven't mentioned the newish dinosaur gallery (Eric did), the darwin centre, you could see the giant squid specimen they got a few years back, there is a 'human nature' gallery I think which is new, the aquatic stuff has been recently re-done.

[AmitG]

alfaman said:

highway said:

Qued some 40 mins to get in.
In cash straightened times it makes no sense why an attraction like that should (or even could) be gratis for all. Who funds it?

Well - perhaps they should use the same system as here in Singapore for visitors to Istana [Prime Minister's [Presidents ?] grounds ]

Singapore passport holders and permanent residents : free [shorter queue ]

tourists and non PR : queue and pay an nomimal amount.

..I was saying to my local gf : " you don't have to pay to get into Museums in London .. why should I pay here when I live here "

In India, many of the major museums and tourist attractions have two rates: one for Indian citizens (token charge) and one for tourists (much higher).

I think the museums should be free to UK citizens and tourists should pay a nominal charge (say £2 for something like the Natural Gallery) for entry to the permanent collections. I reckon most tourists would be fine with that.

However, paying an entrance charge reduces the visitor's obligation to make a voluntary donation, so I wonder how the economics would work out. I spend a fair bit of time in the National Gallery and National Portrait Gallery and I reckon that less than 1% of foreign tourists actually make a donation, of any size.

[Use Psychology]

i reckon that the government probably gets back more in taxes paid by tourists than it loses in its 'grants' to all of the museums. i have no evidence, just a feeling in my bones (late cretaceous).

[oyster]

highway said:

Is it free to access the big museums in the US for example?

Looks to me like we are missing a trick here.

Why are we missing a trick?
Any extra money charged for museums will get spent on the underclass who will not use the money for museums but instead for fags, sky and booze.

Presumably you also think we're missing a trick by not having another 10p tax on fuel? After all, I still have to queue for petrol.

[oyster]

Sam_68 said:

dickymint said:

Disagree. The exhibits are largely OTHER COUNTRY'S National treasures robbed by OUR gunboats and explorers.

EFA... but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

And of course, the big cost isn't the maintenance of the 'national treasures' themselves, but rather the running costs of the buildings and the wages of the staff that look after them.

I don't think it's unreasonable - particularly in the current economic climate - to have to contribute a modest sum (not necessarily to cover all costs) to those public services you actually use, to relieve some of the financial strain from those taxpayers who don't use them.

The same principle applies (in theory) to roads (road tax), health (prescription charges, dental charges), public sports centres, etc., so why not services like museums, schools and libraries, for those who use them and who can afford it, to relieve some of the tax burden from those who choose not to?

You could always issue a free passcard for pensioners, students and (if you must) the unemployed?

I am amazed when I read posts like this.

I work hard, I pay lots of taxes. Why should I have to pay even more to use some public services?

Many millions of people in this country use my tax to pay for their Stella and visits to Betfred.
All I'm asking is that a tiny proportion of my taxes is given back to me by way of free libraries and museums.

Can you not see that?

[highway]

If I need a prescription from the doctor, I pay for it as I work. Likewise the dentist. Pet sick? Vet care no charge if you are on the giro (get ready to be mugged if you are working)

The list of "benefits" the unemployed received that I, as someone who works doesn't, goes on and on.

I dont agree with it all but in this context I found it surprising that museums arent charging for entry. It seems to be an anomaly. We went to Windor castle last year. Another pleasant place. Again, I paid to get in. I dont mind paying either.

It just seems strange (especially in view of the que) that no entrance fee is levied.

If loads of other similar "attractions" were free it would make more sense. Likewise if the economy was doing particularly well.

[richardxjr]

Eight of us went on Sunday and we bought lunch there. They did alright out of us

[dickymint]

If you want to pay then stuff some money in the box. Easy innit.

[drivin_me_nuts]

Use Psychology said:

This, the building is fantastic. I used to walk past it on the way to work, and with the sun low in the sky in the morning or evening it was spectacular. up out of south kensington tube station and it would lift your spirits.

this is also the reason why museums and art galleries should be free.

The collections of art or specimens or scientific knowledge and artifacts they hold are things which belong to all of mankind. They are repositories for the best things that humans have achieved and for displaying wonders of the planet earth and the universe. At their best they can transcend boring day to day st like 'who should pay for this' and show all that is good about society and civilisation, as a storefront for what we as a species have achieved. They educate, and inform, and inspire.

If you really worry about who is paying for these then I think you've missed the point, or exchanged your humanity for accountancy training, or something. you grey, grey, people.

Absolutely wholeheartedly agree with this. To charge for knowledge that was gained by those who themselves strive to gather greatness into one place is unacceptable. These are our national treasures. They whould be free for all. Every piece is a story in its own right. Everyone, regardless of financial circumstance should be able to walk in to these museums and experence these stories, these treasures, for themselves.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Tourists in London get well and truly fleeced most of the time. I think it's great that at least museums, British Library etc are free.

If they return home and tell other people that it is possible to have a great day out in London for not much money, then that helps keep tourism alive.

Many Londoners don't like tourists but I don't get that. The whole city comes alive in the summer when the numbers are doubled. Plus it brings in a fortune. I'm all for it.

[CommanderJameson]

drivin_me_nuts said:

Absolutely wholeheartedly agree with this. To charge for knowledge that was gained by those who themselves strive to gather greatness into one place is unacceptable. These are our national treasures. They whould be free for all. Every piece is a story in its own right. Everyone, regardless of financial circumstance should be able to walk in to these museums and experence these stories, these treasures, for themselves.

Some people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

[Sam_68]

oyster said:

I work hard, I pay lots of taxes.

Whoopie for you - so do I and many others.

oyster said:

Why should I have to pay even more to use some public services?

You should pay less in tax, but contribute directly to those services you actually use, and as little as possible for those you don't.

Can you not see that?

• We all pay taxes to maintain the National Health Service, but those who use it most pay an extra amount via prescription charges.

• We all pay taxes toward higher education (basic education is arguably a different matter, as people require a certain basic standard to avoid them being a burden to the nation for the rest of their lives), but those of us who use it pay an extra amount via tuition fees.

• We all pay taxes toward a state pension, but get tax relief and reduced NI contributions if we have a private pension and opt out of SERPS.

What's the difference? Are you saying that there's more 'value' to society in 'free' (taxpayer funded) museum admissions than 'free' (taxpayer funded) healthcare, education and state pension?

oyster said:

Many millions of people in this country use my tax to pay for their Stella and visits to Betfred.
All I'm asking is that a tiny proportion of my taxes is given back to me by way of free libraries and museums.

And all I'm asking is that my taxes are minimised by charging some of the costs of non-essential public facilities like libraries, museums and public art galleries to the people who actually use them and benefit from them (and in the case of museums I count myself amongst that number and would be happy to pay my share).

...though if you want to humanely destroy all the parasites who spend public taxes on Stella and Betfred, I'm behind you all the way.

[12gauge]

Its not free. Its paid for by taxes that if you dont pay you are sent to prison for.

[Eric Mc]

The Victorians are often lauded as the most business minded and commercially innovative generation ever. And they probably were.

Butr these great national museums and galleries were almost ALL set up during the Victorian Age and it was expected BY THESE SELF SAME UBER CAPITALISTS that they should always be free to the general public of ANY nationality.

We should respect their wishes.

And, as people keep saying, if you WANT to pay, you are absolutely free to do so. In addition, if you take a few minutes to fill in a form, the museum will get 25% more money from you under the Gift Aid scheme without you having to dip any further into your pocket.

What is the problem?

[Pothole]

Eric Mc said:

The Victorians are often lauded as the most business minded and commercially innovative generation ever. And they probably were.

Butr these great national museums and galleries were almost ALL set up during the Victorian Age and it was expected BY THESE SELF SAME UBER CAPITALISTS that they should always be free to the general public of ANY nationality.

We should respect their wishes.

And, as people keep saying, if you WANT to pay, you are absolutely free to do so. In addition, if you take a few minutes to fill in a form, the museum will get 25% more money from you under the Gift Aid scheme without you having to dip any further into your pocket.

What is the problem?

28%

I think we should charge people who don't hold a British Passport, but then you'd have to carry some form of ID proving you were a BPH...ID cards, anyone?

[Sam_68]

Eric Mc said:

What is the problem?

That the money to run them has to come from somewhere and unfortunately all the Victorian uber-capitalists' bequests are all long-since spent.

I thought you called yourself an accountant, Eric?