|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 12, 2015 20:00:16 GMT 1
I wonder if the handwringing wetnecks have ever considered the carbon footprint of a major work of art? The hideous Sunflowers or the Mona Lisa must be worth a few coal fired power stations each ... what with all the silly people flocking from every corner of the globe to gape at them.
Surely they should be burnt!
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Feb 13, 2015 9:34:15 GMT 1
But burning all those people would surely add even more CO2 to the atmosphere?
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 13, 2015 12:53:52 GMT 1
Ah yes, but it would be a one off release. Then we would be free from there life long emissions.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Feb 13, 2015 15:31:34 GMT 1
I think sunflowers are a perfectly suitable material for bio-mass power stations ......
|
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Feb 17, 2015 1:51:49 GMT 1
I've never understood the desire to go somewhere to look at something. Surely the camera and television have made rubbernecking pointless? Why stand in a queue of sweaty morons to get a five second look at a painting, however beautiful, when you can buy a perfectly good copy and hang it in your own room for less money, less effort, and everlasting pleasure?
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 17, 2015 19:59:13 GMT 1
I'm with you on that. I saw the sunflowers and various other impressionist paintings at the Reichsmuseum in Amsterdam years ago and was singularly unimpressed. The Jazz and beer in Leidseplein however...
|
|
