Jane Austen's Ring: Should It Stay Here?

[ChillDoubt]

And if so, who will buy it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-23531601

Whilst I agree the ring ought to stay here due to its heritage and cultural significance, why is the Culture Secretary asking for buyers to come forward?
Can't it be bought with funds from the culture budget?

And what Ms Clarkson wants with it is beyond me, but hey-ho.

[naomi24]

//The ring comes with papers documenting its history within the family of Jane Austen…. Jane Austen's modest lifestyle and her early death mean that objects associated with her of any kind are extremely rare……//

Yes, it should stay here. This is a unique and irreplaceable personal item that once belonged to one of England’s greatest authors – lauded worldwide. It seems to me that people who would discard such a treasure without a second thought appear to know the price of everything - and the value of nothing.

[emmie]

too much of our heritage is being flogged off, it should stay here.

[jake-the-peg]

I agree with joko - it's not particularly relevant to her fame.

It's not like it's her pen or writing desk it did not, as far as I know, play any major role in her inspiration or work.

So there's no particular cultural reason to retain it as far as I can see.

Let me put it this way - how many people would actually pay to see it?

[emmie]

if it's displayed with other items of course.

[Gromit]

There seems to be a lot of people who want this item retained so a charitable collection should be set up online. It would be nice for it to stay, but no tax payers money should be used.

[naomi24]

It would be a lovely addition to Chawton. Yes, I’d pay to see it.

[Gromit]

// Jane Austen's House Museum
The museum also has a collection of other Austen family items and furniture. //

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Austen%27s_House_Museum

I wonder if this ring is already an exhibit? And was auctioned knowing that the taxpayer would eventually have give the family £150,000 and the ring stay in the country? That would be a bit naughty, wouldn't it.

[Gromit]

Yes, sounds like it is already a display item...

// Other important objects include: her writing table, some of HER JEWELLERY and the patchwork quilt made Jane, her mother and Cassandra. //

[ladybirder]

Yep absolutely it should stay here and I'd chip in to keep it. A ring that sat on the finger of the hand that wrote some of the most famous books in the world should be displayed at Chawton in my opinion.

[naomi24]

Gromit, //sounds like it is already a display item... //

Why does it? 'Some of her jewellery' doesn't necessarily include the ring. I assume it's with the person who bought it.

[Peter Pedant]

oh you chilling cold hearted unRomantic Chilldoubt !

I wd give it house room - but perhaps not for 150k
Anglos - to answer your question - go in for the 'genius loci' bit - the spirit of the place - so if you go and sit under the tree Isaac newton sat under, a lot of us wonder if we will have the same thoughts....

In the 1930s Haworth ws still so godforsaken that if you got to the museum above the skool, and were a gurl then they might let you wear her shawl and rock in her rocking chair.....now behind glass......

[Peter Pedant]

Oh Chilly - there are gonna be some useless bits of paper wid Janine Austen on them - you wouldnt want them..... can you send all the ones you get to me ?

thanks

[Peter Pedant]

Blimey judging by Mama's comments - hi Mama ! - there has been some pigtail pulling in the playground.
RonKep is half sane a lot of the time...

Objaaaaayze in death are interesting - if you are known to be famous then all the stuff is kept - look at Dickens. - or Beethoven 1827 was known to the best musician alive - and others die in obscurity of which Jane Austen was an obvious one. Newton was so famous that every bit of paper he wrote (along with Leibnitz) was collected and saved s- we can now track exactly the development of calculus (in both) in May 1676 as a result.

[Sharingan]

Had the ring been some great inspiration for a literary gem then I could see what the fuss was about, but it isn't, it's just a little ring, a commn ring, in the style of the time that just happened to belong to someone we regard as a great literary figure.It's a trinket, an artifact, which is interesting but nothing more. None of that makes it important enough to spend that volume of money on, and I doubt Kelly Clarkson is going to trash it or lose it, so let the girl have it. She has bought it because she obviously wants it.

[jno]

genius loci I understand, Peter, but genius ringi?

Sounds like a new moble phone.

[FredPuli43]

It would be surprising if, now they are aware of it, some rich Briton or foreigner resident here didn't buy it and then give it to the nation to display. Bonus points if you need goodwill or a knighthood ! It's a cheap deal. You're buying it at a price which is matching the hammer price. Had you been bidding in the auction you might well have found that Kelly Clarkson bid on against you and might not have stopped until the price was £200,000. The probability is that the bidders were people with a special interest in Austen or literature, and the price only matched what they would pay. Now it is publicised it will have come to the notice of people who don't scan catalogues of such items or who aren't on the auction house's 'special interest list' of potential buyers for such things. It has wider appeal than that and you'll find buyers who would not otherwise think of buying such an item.

[ChillDoubt]

oh you chilling cold hearted unRomantic Chilldoubt !
--------------
I have absolutely no idea what that post is a out, nor the one following it..........

[ChillDoubt]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23550448

Hopefully this will raise its profile, though I still feel it should be bought with money from the Culture budget.