Why? Why exactly should taxpayers be forced to pay £215m for the Tate's 230 ft high "chaotic-looking glass structure featuring huge blocks protruding from a pyramidal form"?
Tate Director Sir Nicholas Serota explains:
"It would be opened in time for the Olympics in 2012, when “the eyes of the world are on London”. He spoke of a new museum for the 21st century, a landmark building that would form one of the most exciting new cultural quarters in Europe — “a symbol of creative Britain”.
“Tate needs to improve facilities so that visitors have enough space to enjoy and appreciate exhibitions and displays. Many of the comments made by visitors each month refer to the congestion within the building.”
Nick, mate, none of that explains why I should shell out £215m. First, we're already crushed by the ballooning costs of the Olympics (see many previous posts)- the last thing we need is to add on yet more. Second, isn't the existing Tate Modern enough of a "creative symbol"? After all, you keep boasting how it's the most visited gallery in Europe.
And third, that overcrowding could be sorted quite easily. Just charge an entry fee.
I don't want to pay any more taxes for your art galleries. OK?
PS Don't take this too personally. Mrs T already supports you through her Tate membership, and we regularly buy your overpriced exhibition catalogues. And we regularly visit you to spend money. But we're choosing to do all that, and don't want to be subsidised by the taxpayers of Scunthorpe.