Paris’s Louvre museum said on Thursday, November 27, it would raise ticket prices for most non-EU visitors, meaning US, British and Chinese tourists among others will have to pay $37 to get in.
The museum told Agence France-Presse (AFP) the 45% price hike aims to boost annual revenues by up to $23 million to fund structural improvements at the world’s most-visited art museum, which is reeling from the daylight theft of priceless treasures last month.
From 2026, visitors from outside the European Union, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway will have to pay €32 – an extra €10 – from January 14, the museum and staff unions said after the measure was approved at a museum board meeting.
But I can still get in that back window for free, right?
BYOCS (bring your own circular saw).
Edit: fixed cheeky abbreviation.
BYOCC (bring your own circular saw)
Shouldn’t that be BYOCS?
I heard German ladder trucks are good for bypassing this fee increase.
You can even take your favorite pieces home for continuous access.
Oh boy oh boy oh boy! I heard them French crown jewels are magnificent!
Someone has to pay for security they finally figured out is needed
I’ve been to Russia (st. Petersburg) where entering a church would cost $10, but for Russians a couple of rubles.
It makes sense from the perspective that locals should be able to afford seeing their own art and architecture. If foreigners can afford it and are willing to pay the asked amount, I sort of understand.
That’s generally how you want to set up your tourist attractions. They provide entertainment and draw for residents and you pass upkeep costs onto the visitors.
I usually agree with this point but it does create an awkward spot for museums with a lot of international exhibits. Like, you did a colonialism, stole my peoples stuff, brought it back here, and are now charging me extra to see it? Idk how you get around that, except maybe returning the stuff I guess.
Yea returning the stuff and allowing the origin countries profit off it would be nice. We lose a lot of history to war torn countries tho. Preservation has a cost and its own logistics. If you knew the item would be pawned off or destroyed; morally I’d like the history with someone who has the resources to preserve it and share it with as many as possible. International travelers can probably afford the hit. Presuming the effected people you describe can afford to travel.
If you knew the item would be pawned off or destroyed; morally I’d like the history with someone who has the resources to preserve it and share it with as many as possible.
I recall this being discussed a while back after yet another overzealous regime destroyed some of their culture and heritage; preserving this history under capable custody would have been beneficial for everyone. I get it’s complicated but for the most part these well run long lived museums in stable countries provide a great service to humanity.
Yea, it would be interesting to have a global body like the UN working on this with public opinion. We can always be seeking a more moral and just world.
I’m in the USA: proof that a rich country will destroy their own history without much thought so ya it’s become increasingly nuanced as time progresses
Given the stolen artifacts if anything non-eu should pay much less.
People give the British Museum a lot of shit, but it’s free all year round for everyone.
Well I mean they didn’t pay for most of the stuff in there in the first place
They spend over £50,000,000/year on care, research, and conservation.
A significant portion of what we know about the ancient world is a direct result of their research sharing and activities; for example when the Rosetta Stone was in French hands they kept it to themselves, when it was in Egypt they did nothing with it, but when it came to Britain it was shared with research departments across Europe as well as in Britain, resulting in our ability today to read hieroglyphics and demotic script.
Think about that for a second: if the Rosetta Stone had been left in Egypt, there’s every possibility that Egyptians today would still have no idea about most of their own history or how to read their own ancient texts. You might dismiss this as paternalistic or white-savioury, but it’s true nonetheless.
Even as recently as last year we had researchers finding things like https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/babylonian-map-world-0021631 that simply wouldn’t have happened without the British Museum’s work. So, I’m inclined to cut them some slack.
I wonder how many artifacts are stolen from France old colonies
I doubt there are that many in the Louvre. Probably more in other museums.
Any evidence?
I found this page with many example of stolen artifacts in French museums a lot of them in Louvre just by Napoleonic armies alone
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_art_looted_by_Napoleonic_armies
Just a hunch to be honest. But the list you provided does not show artifacts from the french colonies.
the french stole quite a bit from their colonies but they’re not even close to the british, which looted from a sizable part of the entire world
How will they decide which ticket you get? Do you need a passport to enter the Louvre?
It’s pretty normal to need different ID cards to use some services in the EU.
You need student ID for student tickets, on the train if there is a senior or a youth discount they check for ID.
If you are an EU citizen, your ID is valid everywhere in the EU, no passport needed.
They‘ve been checking IDs since around 2001. Something major must have happened that year…
Usually they just ask. A lot of museums in EU are free for EU citizens. I was never asked to prove I’m from EU, only asked. Other museum are free for city residents and in those they do ask for an ID.
Hmm…that’s what Trump is doing in america as well. Prices higher for foreigners. Maybe the
moneyworld isn’t so different after all.Americans pay the tariff, dummy
I think they mean higher prices at national parks for foreigners. Just announced. Japan is doing the same thing.
Ah yes, lets gut the NPS, discourage foreigners to visit the US, then charge the few that do come more. Brilliant.
Alright, I didn’t know. Still can’t follow the conclusion “guess it can’t be that bad”
They never said that though.
Literally racist.
Literally opposite of racist. Same races are EU citizens and not EU-citizens. This is literally about residence, not race.
I mean, unless you consider US citizens to be separate race.
You are also wrong, “races” do not exist. Racism is the belief that “race” is a thing, and deducing opinions from that. Do not use racist terminology, please.
As you said racism is the belief that races exist AND that they should be hierarchized. It is true that the genetic diversity is too big in the race groups for it to be biological races, so the word usually is a synonym for way too big ethnic groups.
Thus using “race” is biologically ambiguous and “ethnic groups” should be preferred, however it is still very well socially defined. Using “race” in a social context makes sense and is far from being racist.
Saying “black people are discriminated” is a talk about race not ethnic group. “Black people” is not an ethnic group, it has hundred of ethnic groups and some ethnic groups are mixed race.
Thus using “race” is biologically ambiguous and “ethnic groups” should be preferred, however it is still very well socially defined.
“Ethnic group” is an anthropological category, not a biological one. The correct biological term is “subspecies”, which Wikipedia defines as “populations that live in different areas and vary in size, shape, or other physical characteristics (morphology), but that can successfully interbreed.”
Using “race” in a social context makes sense and is far from being racist.
Given the history of its usage in that context, I have to vehemently disagree. Plus it is so ill defined that it is a useless term anyway. From Wikipedia again: “[…] various definitions exist. Sometimes it is used to denote a level below that of subspecies, while at other times it is used as a synonym for subspecies.”
Using it invokes all the Social Darwinism and whatnot that the Nazis and others abused it for. So where is the sense in using it exactly?
An actually good answer.
But what I disagree with is that the word race being used by racists is justified to call random people racists. I do not use it personally anyway
Oh yeah, not saying that anybody using the word is a racist. Just ignorant, you shouldn’t use it if you are aware of its historical context.
Race isn’t biological at all. It is purely about phenotypes like dark skin colour and mainly comes from dog breeding. There is much more genetic diversity in between people with or without dark skin colour than between these two groups as a whole. So there really isn’t anything other than a different skin colour. Just look at pictures of Albino Africans. They would perfectly fit in the “white race” category and they actually are because again the only distinction is the skin colour. Nothing else attached.
Yes you are proving my point
Using the term “race” as if that is a thing enables and facilitates racism and racist language. There is zero actual use for the concept among people who are not racists.
Race definitely exists, it’s just a social construct. Like gender.
Nope. Social constructs can only be made up by social people. Racism is inherently anti-social. Race is not a thing. There is no “race” of any kind of humans. Saying otherwise doesn’t make it true, it only enables and facilitates racist language.
Social constructs can only be made up by social people.
Yeah that’s not a thing. It’s not true just because it sounds cool.
“racism is anti-social” ?
Did I stutter?
Sorry, “ethnic groups”.
Haplogroups
Much better :)
Under the rules of the EU most benefits an European country provides to their citizens must be provided to residents of other European nationalities.
With that in mind I guess the purpose is to keep the price of access to culture lower for locals and still follow the rules from the EU
which is peachy because i bet many of the artifacts in such a museum are stolen from the very people now paying more to see them.
yep and the people arguing against this blatantly correct take are just pretending we are upset about americans paying more while completely ignoring the actual argument.
American is not a race.
The people complaining are not mad about Americans but mad about up charging say egytptians to view their artifacts looted by napoleon and that’s just one example why attack a position nobody is taking.
A race … to the bottom.
Ba dum tssss!
There’s an entire planet of races you forgot about. Besides, I saw the crown jewels a week before they were nicked so I don’t need to go back anytime soon.
Besides, I saw the crown jewels a week before they were nicked
I believe the correct term is ‘scoping the joint’ 🕵️♂️
It’s run by the fucking French, what do you expect?
Everything that’s lacking in America and more. Starting with manners and self-reflection.
self-reflect a bit about the stolen artifacts being exposed in that museum, then.
Interesting question. If artifacts were built/crafted by slaves working in Egypt, should one return the artifacts to the Egyptians or the people who actually laboured to produce the artifact?
probably not france.
Either way it seems to me like Egypt has to be the entity that reckons with that question as it’s a part of their past.
