July 13, 2006
Metropolitan Museum of Art Suggests You Pay More
Holy Temple of Dendur! The Metropolitan Museum of Art has raised its suggested admission fee to $20, up from $15. The important thing to note is that the Met does not require people pay an admission fee - you can donate a dollar or a few coins (or nothing at all) and you can still get in. While the Met says the increase was prompted by a $3 million annual operating deficit, we have to wonder if the Met raised its admission to compete with the Museum of Modern Art, which raised its required admission price to $20 when it reopened. You know, tourists might look at museum admission prices and think, "Hmm, the MoMA costs more, so therefore it must be better!" Other museums have also increased their admission prices; we wonder if there will be a rallying cause to offer some sort of "Super Museum Pass" which tourists could pay $40 and visit three museums in the city.
While some say that the Met is still a steal at $20, we thought this quote in the NY Times article captured one potential problem: An artist and teacher, Jane Kaplowitz, said, "Working class people are so intimidated by the museum experience anyway, they don’t feel they can just give a quarter. It’s really unfair.”
What do you think of the price increase? What sucks is that many people who know about the suggested donation policy - and end up paying less - are the ones who don't need to. And the NY Sun had a good explanation of the pay-what-you-wish fee policy:
The suggested-donation policy is a requirement of being part of what is called the Cultural Institutions Group, a group of 34 New York City-owned institutions that also includes the American Museum of Natural History, the Brooklyn Academy of Music, the Brooklyn Museum, and the Bronx Zoo. As part of the same deal, the city provides 11% of the Met's total budget, according the Department of Cultural Affairs. In the last fiscal year, this came to about $24,598,000, an amount that contributed to general operating costs, as well as paying for heat, light, and power.
Aerial photograph of the Metropolitan Museum by atomische
|
“ The Metropolitan Museum of Art has raised its suggested admission fee to $20, up from $15.”
As a result of their recent raise in suggested admission, I will increase the actual admission I pay from 25 to 35 cents.
I hope my overly generous increase in admission will help the MET become an even better museum.
$20?! That's highway robbery! Honestly, I always feel guilty doing anything but the suggested donation. I wonder how many people actually do give anything since it is "suggested"
"While some that the Met is still a steal at $20, we thought this quote in the NY Times article captured one potential problem: An arist" - the first time I am commenting about errors, this is just silly.
"You know, tourists might look at museum admission prices and think, "Hmm, the MoMA costs more, so therefore it must be better!"
That doesn't make much sense. Nor does the complaint that working-class people are so intimidated that they'll pay more.
What I DO think is a little unfair is that tourists are somewhat unlikely to understand that the price is not manditory. But, whatever, it's not like they've been paying city taxes.
Ace, i just threw an MLA at jen - she's working on it.
To be honest, if their artwork had more displays of bare breasted women, I'd probably pay the full suggested fee.
The Met is absolutely worth it!
I alwasy wish that we had a British style system here, where a lot of museums are free and you only pay for special exhibitions...
When I first moved to New York I remember going to the Met and a man stopped me outside and said, "You don't have to pay the whole fee! It is suggested, so don't pay it."
I thought he was crazy, but his advice has saved me some $$ over the years, I now pay what I used to pay as a student (many mooons ago) $7.
I never paid $15 for the Met and I will not pay $20.
In London, all the musuems are free (again)! Many other cities do this too.
In Paris, you can buy one museum pass, good for the entire city, for a flat-price from any Metro (subway) ticket booth.
"we have to wonder if the Met raised its admission to compete with the Museum of Modern Art"
ms. chung, did you not take econ 101 in college or something?
Ace, I think an arist is one who talks like a pirate. An errist, on the other hand, is a so-called blog "editor" who doesn't even bother to read her own entries and therefore makes, on average, around 21 typos, word omissions and grammatical blunders per day.
kojak, that was good.
here's my take as devils advocate:
$20 for 2-5 hours in museum
or
$20 for four 1 pint beers or two mixed drinks.
I think the idea they wer trying to express was that working-class people are already potentially intimidated by the museum experience, so that "suggesting" a higher donation will only serve to drive them further away.
I'm amused by some people who don't blink to pay $10 to see Big Momma's House 2 for two hours of amusement... but then freak out that the MET wants to charge $20 for a half day to a full day's worth of "amusement".
I've been using the "I'm a poor student" excuse for many years now to avoid paying the full suggested amount. Although I think it's more to alleviate my own guilt than anything.
Since they are non-profit organiztions, I doubt they would raise or lower prices to compete with other museums. They might have looked to the MoMA to see if charging $20 helped or hurt that museum's attendance, but they probably didn't do it in the spirt of economic competition.
I apologize for the mistakes I make - and appreciate people pointing them out. I wish I could be better at catching all of them, but then again, I'm reading all of your comments too.
$20 for hours and hours of world-class art is hardly highway robbery. However, the City gives millions in operating expenses and funds capital projects above and beyond what was mentioned above, in exchange for "pay what you wish" entry fees. I abhor a sense of entitlement, but, if you pay NYC taxes, you are entitled to pay a guiltless penny for entrance.
not to mention complete brain farts
I think the suggested fee system is the best way to do it - people who can't afford it don't have to pay a dime, but the fee is a reminder that the institution does require money to run as it does.
If you can afford the $20, though, I think you should pay the whole thing.
my high school art teacher always told me to give them $5 at most
Back in my college days, I worked at the Met as one of the admissions cashiers. The vast majority of customers paid the full price. I'd always be able to tell, though, when someone has just heard that the admission price was a suggested amount and weren't sure if it was true. People would act all shifty and would silently slide a dollar towards me, mumbling, "1 general admission, please," almost anticipating me or one of the 4 GIGANTIC bodyguards to my side kicking them out. Then I'd slide them a button, and more often than not, I'd hear them laugh as they walked away, "HA! No shit! It worked!" That always brought a smile to my face.
I went to the Bronx Zoo last month and it didn't seem to have a suggested donation, they definately made us pay.
I find it amusing that they can charge that and get away with it, and the smallere museums of the city can barely afford a color printer. Keep in mind that their budget is astronomically higher than most small countries in this world and if you want to pay a dime, pay a dime sans guilt. And if you are going to feel guilty, and $20 is too high don't go!! Save your $ for the bar...
Back in my college days, I used to be an admissions cashier at the Met. The vast majority would pay the suggested fee. I found, though, that many people literally didn't see the price is suggested (the word "suggested" was in tiny print), didn't fully understand the idea of "suggested," or were too embarassed to be seen paying a dollar or 2. The price increase doesn't mean shit if you do your homework and get the balls up to just pay less.
As has been noted above, most museums around the world charge much less than $20 (or nothing, in the case of those supported by tax dollars) for entrance. Given the endowments of these institutions, and their mandate to serve the public, demanding a $20 "donation," when it is not made clear that any payment is entirely voluntary, is pretty outrageous. (And for those who think the price is a bargain for a day or half-day of wandering, I politely suggest that anyone who can view art for more than an hour and a half without sensory overload is not paying attention.)
I think $20 for a handy in a massage parlor is better spent.
I have never paid more than $2 to get into the Met, and I have never been intimidated by the booth person to pay more. On one occasion the person said to me, "The suggested admission is $15," and I just said "thank you!" and took my button.
Paying NYC Taxes on my paycheck along with NYS taxes makes me feel just fine about giving the Met $1 when I visit.
I visit about a half dozen times a year, and sometimes it's only to meet friends at the rooftop garden. I usually offer $5 to $10, and the museum staffers have always been happy to accept it.
at the new rate, the recommended admission rate for new york city residents should be $17.80 if the city forks over 11% of the funding.
As a New Yorker, $5 seems eminently fair for a long tour. However if I'm just going in to see just one exhibit (new or not seen for a while), $1 is OK. Out of twon tourists, though, should definetely pay the full suggested price.
Doesn't it feel great to pay less?
yes michael, it is curious why it is painful to pay a nonmandatory $20 to see almost endless amounts of historic/great/genious art but not to pay the same amount for a really crappy hollywood flick and exhorbitantly priced popcorn and soda.
culture should be accessible - I'm all for free admission - yet i do find it kind of pathetic that it's such a big deal if the Met suggests these rates. Maybe you mostly go for free, and pay full suggested admission once in a while...or pay a small amount each time.
It's not about competing with MoMA - MoMA's $20 is mandatory. If you are not a student and go more than 3x a year get MoMA's individual membership. Also, some museums give discounts if you are member of another museum, or NPR or Thirteen or even NYPL. Better yet, make friends with someone who works there or who has a corporate membership - best deal ever.
My high school art teacher told me never to give more than a dollar, because other than Smithsonians, the Met gets the most federal $ out of all US museums - anyone know if that's true?
I know that the Met isn't concerned with *direct* competition with the MoMA, but why raise the fee to $20? Why not bump it to $18? I suspect the Met decided to bite the bullet at $20 because, while there is sticker shock (even for a suggested donation), they perceived to be in the same league as the MoMA. I've actually thought it was weird that the MoMA would charge so much and the Met so little, because I think the experience at the Met is much richer.
The Met charges 2x the price of the Louvre (EUR 8.50, about $11).
Is the collection 2x as good? My personal opinion is that it is definitely not. The Louvre is also larger.
For a family of 4, it's $80 just to walk in the door. You can buy three multi-day passes that get you into dozens of museums in Paris (including all the majors) for that kind of cash. So I can see the Louvre, Musee D'Orsay, AND the Picasso Museum for about the same price as the Met alone.
I don't object to soaking tourists, but I would love to hear why a museum that gets substantial funding from the city and rents its very building from the City does not have a mandate to be affordable for working-class city residents.
"Suggested donation" is a complete dodge. Since it is not advertised or explained at the entrance, the museum has plausible deniability that they offer a discount for people who need it, yet, somehow, the people who need it never really hear about it.
Has anyone from the Met ever, in the history of the museum, gone to Washington Heights or East New York and told a group of schoolkids come on down, you don't have to pay the listed price, bring a dollar or told a group of adults in the Bronx greatest art in the world, right here, look, we'll take 3 bucks?
Does MoMA still have the friday afternoon/evening free admission?
$20 is outrageous if you regularly visit the Met. Like a previous poster, I often just pop in for an exhibit, happy hour, or the roof. However, I always just flash my corporate ID for admission - good for me + 4 of my friends. A lot of companies offer that program - it's a good, guilt free to visit often.
DC museums, including the various Smithsonian ones, are totally free! Yipee!
MoMA is still free on Fridays from 4-8.
I also agree with photogirl on comps. I work at a museum, and I can comp my friends. It is always worth making friends with someone there. Corporate memberships are great as well.
Another suggestion would be to volunteer (or work) at a museum. Our IDs are good for free entry into all NYC museums as reciprocals (plus guests), and our volunteers have them too.
For a family of 4, it's $80 just to walk in the door. You can buy three multi-day passes that get you into dozens of museums in Paris (including all the majors) for that kind of cash. So I can see the Louvre, Musee D'Orsay, AND the Picasso Museum for about the same price as the Met alone.
Subway ride to the Met, family of four: $8
Approximate cost of flights to Paris, family of four, assuming average ticket price of $600/person, travelling economy, and not counting fees (not to mention food, hotels, and transportation while in Paris): ~$2000
Suddenly, eighty bucks is lookin' like a bargain.
In response to native new yorker, with whom I largely agree, yes, curators, fellows, interns, and docents do a fair bit of outreach to the boroughs. They give free lectures in lobraries, visit schools, give out passes, and talk about admission policy when they are there. Philippe de Montebello many years ago on Leonard Lopate (i think) talked about the ideal visit lasting about 1-2 hours. More was too much. He also acknowledged that the museum did not expect all visitors to pay the full price, and that a regular visitor could, even should pay less than the full fee, but that an infrequent visitor who CAN afford it (and a visit to the Met suggests that's quite a few visitors) should pay the full suggested price. As for the suggested business, it is on the sign, it's perfectly readable, and if you speak English it takes only minimal interpretive skills to figure out. Now, if your English is not good or you don't speak English, that's another story. All the same, it's gross to charge $20, but I'd shell that out for the Met much more happily than for the quickly becoming irrelevant MOMA.
Yes, it would be nice if all the museums in New York were free. It'd also be nice if all that money the U.S. government is spending on the war in Iraq went to things like education, the arts, and universal healthcare. The reality is that it costs money - a lot of it - to acquire, preserve, and maintain priceless works of art on the scale of the Met, and our government is not looking to pay for it. I think that we've got a long way to go as a country before the government decides to foot the bill for museum admission.
The Met also gives discounted rates for seniors, students, and groups. It also gives lots and lots of free visits and lectures for NYC school kids and other non-profit organizations. It's also been working on a $3 million dollar a year deficit since 9/11; if the Met were a business and tried to actually make money instead of breaking even every now and then, their accounting department would be mass-fired.
Also, the Met's special exhibitions, as well as guided tours, family programs and lectures are free with admission, whatever you pay. There's a exhibition going to be there in October that's currently in the Boston Museum of Art; the admission price is less but you have to pay a whole lot more to see the exhibition. MoMA is $20 MANDATORY and their special exhibitions are NOT free.
It's also nice to note that MoMA raised its pricing from $12 to $20 after they made huge renovations to their building. The Met is supposedly doing it just to keep up operating costs.
Compared to what people are paying this summer for a Broadway show, a Yankees game, a Madonna concert, and even for the Wayans' brothers' new debacle Little Man, seeing the best collection of art in America is certainly worth the money.
Last weekend, gf and I went to the Met. I gave six dollars and she gave ten. I always tried giving the suggested amount, but money is tight for us at the moment and a long weekend in Gotham can get costly.
The employees at the admission kiosk didn't bat an eyelash. All is well!