Comments for en-gb 30 Sun 01 Feb 2015 11:14:18 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at newsjock Scotland's Titian contribution does not fall out of the sky. The money comes out of my pocket, your pocket and Scottish industry's overdrafts.We CANNOT afford such highfallutin' gestures at this time ! Thu 05 Feb 2009 16:33:16 GMT+1 Gert Berden The Titian paintings are remarkable and I think that Scots should be glad they are staying in Scotland - at least for now anyway. However, I understand people's discomfort at so much being paid to one person. Especially one who's ancestors showed themselves to be more interested in profit than people. It is perhaps a shame that a compulsory purchase order for the paintings can't be served on the Duke, with the price taking into consideration an amount for reparations to his fellow countrymen for the actions of his ancestors. Tue 03 Feb 2009 12:38:17 GMT+1 Taldor83 So...we have a bargain...and the best thign to do withy a bargain...Sell it on for a profit! That's Capitalism isn't it?Although very good arguments ZestyWhite:)I do concur that you can't hold someone accountable for something that their ancestors did long ago. Different times, Different outlooks. Tue 03 Feb 2009 12:36:34 GMT+1 redrobb FAO Zestywhite - General public opinon of Titian.... Titian who? look at other bloggers comments. However I do agree with comments relating to Scottish carbuncle, I got the stereo typical public servant reply when I mailed my views upon it. Tue 03 Feb 2009 12:25:54 GMT+1 ZestyWhite I dont understand why everyone is getting so worked up about this. Firstly, the market value of this work is three times what we have paid for it (and let's not forget that substantially less than half of the money came from the Scottish government), so we have a bargain. Yes, in this economic climate some art is not selling as much as its owners expect, but this is a fantastic painting by an old master and I cannot imagine some of the bigger galleries in the States not paying a 9 figure fee for it.Secondly, as part of a good collection it is a tourist attraction that will bring people into the country to see it and over a long period of time. We assume that 2 or 3 week events like the Commonwealth games are great for the income of our cities but cant understand that a masterpiece can act as a draw over a far longer period of time.Thirdly, it may be the case that no-one held a vote as to whether to pay for it, but £7.4million of the fee was raised by the public so surely that suggests that a few people want to have it here. I didnt vote to spend £400million on a monstrosity of a Scottish executive building, but it's there.And lastly, the Duke of Sutherland's family may have done a lot of things, but it's a bit ridiculous to hang that round his neck, is it not? I'm sure many of all our ancestors have done wrong to some level that we wouldn't want or expect to have to answer for. Tue 03 Feb 2009 11:47:07 GMT+1 Jim Currie It all seems rather unfair. The money to buy it was presumably the profits from the land of the then Duke of Sutherland. The ancestors of my wife were ethnically cleansed from their homeland by either him or his close relative. That person favoured sheep over people. It's surely ironic that his decendents and relatives are once again helping to swell the coffers of this very same family. Perhaps the Governments involved are not so daft! They will, after all get their (our) money back in the form of death duties unless the persons involved have time to spend and enjoy until there's nothing left to tax. As for the people of Scotland enjoying this rather poor painting - who's kidding who?Only the people of Edinburgh and London (as usual) will benfit from this Art Club farce. The rest of us who live remote from these grand centres will have to fork-out yet again and perhaps not be able to afford to go and see what is, after all, our own property.Reminds me of Mr. Burrel!Who says 'you can't take it with you'? As far as I'm concerned this is the nearest thing to it!Here's a test - ask how many new about the painting before all this obvious publicity! Tue 03 Feb 2009 11:42:30 GMT+1 SuReid The Titians and Rembrandt and, especially, the Poussins in the Bridgwater Collection are stunningly beautiful and very easy to get to - walk straight in from Princes Street or Edinburgh Waverley Station. Why suggest that 'It'll be interesting to see what the view is in other parts of the UK - with little access to the Titian'?? Edinburgh is easy to get to, and nearer than London for most of us. Tue 03 Feb 2009 11:15:55 GMT+1 Camperoo Assemble people of Scotland, let's all shuffle past and hae a good look and not spend any money at all. Tue 03 Feb 2009 10:29:28 GMT+1 abigdoob Any money that is paid to the Duke of Sutherland should be conditional on every single penny being spent on quality affordable housing. This might at least go someway to making up for the devastation wrought by his ancestors on communities in the North. Tue 03 Feb 2009 10:14:33 GMT+1 Taldor83 "Most of the people we spoke to on the streets of Edinburgh were quietly confident the right decision had been taken, although some questioned the timing."Not one person I know of says anything of the sort. Complete waste of money ESPECIALLY at this time! Use it to do..well..anything that will actually beneift people who have more to worry about than a couple of pieces of art. Tue 03 Feb 2009 09:16:55 GMT+1 edinbloke Stop wasting 'our' money. If this had gone to a vote - not a penny of public money would have been sanctioned. If this picture had gone to private sale in these economic times £50m may not have been achieved. Get a sense of proportion on this. Art is not worth this amount of real money. You could have had 2 new schools for that! Tue 03 Feb 2009 09:06:23 GMT+1 roy I'm disgusted. How far out of touch are the ruling elite of this country if they think the public would support the further squandering of their taxes to pay the ransom demands of one of the richest people in Britain? Tue 03 Feb 2009 08:35:42 GMT+1 redrobb Saved for the nation! an own goal me thinks. How many people of Scotland will actually visit this establishment, just slightly more than the overseas variety a coupla thousand those sheltering from the rain don't count. These particular items should have been returned to its original owner for him to insure, care for or sold on to a shrewd (dumb) collector with more money than sense variety, don't forget the Tax element that would perhaps come HM direction. Tue 03 Feb 2009 07:07:28 GMT+1 uilleamalsadair Renting this painting plus the others is such an obscene thing for the Scottish Government to do I am lost for words. Is the Government so wrapped up in themselves that they failed to consider what this family has done to the people of Sutherland in the name of profit and sheep.If the Duke of Sutherland was a proper Scotsman he would donate the pictures to the Scottish Nation. Mon 02 Feb 2009 22:57:01 GMT+1 Jamie_V £50 million for a single painting and another £50 million for one just like it in four years time ? That's a £100 million pounds in total. What a joke !The Duke of Sutherland, what a patriot ! He must be down to his last £200 million. Let's hope he does'nt have any more like it up in his loft.And there was me thinking there was a recession on. Can't be all that bad. SNP, you've lost the plot. Mon 02 Feb 2009 19:49:36 GMT+1