£14 is for the year to be fair, but I think they would be better off charging a fiver per visit. Not enough there for me personally to go more than once every 3 years never mind a year.
I doyou aren't going to be going back every few months.
City only, i thinkAlso, just what is this Go CV thing? I've checked the CCC website and it's not exactly illuminating as to whether you have to pay for it or not. Is it just Coventry, or for Warwickshire too?
Go CV card | Go CV card | Coventry City Council
From nothing to £14 per visit will see visitor numbers PLUMMET! I would pay a fiver but not £14, and people from outside the city (i.e. those who might come as part of City of Culture) will not need the mutliple visits thing, and will stay away in droves.
Hmm, so WCC investing £1mil in City of Culture doesn't count for much, then.City only, i think
Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.That's the thing, people might plan a day in Coventry with the transport museum, herbert and a walk around the cathedral. When you make it £14 a pop to go into the Transport museum then people will stop going or take it off their list.
City of Culture's virtually ignoring what's already there. We also have the problem with the Grammar School, which barely opens now because they can't afford it, not what was intended.Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.
Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.
It’s cause coventrians talk about caring about the arts and supporting history but don’t put their money or their feet where their mouths areCity of Culture's virtually ignoring what's already there. We also have the problem with the Grammar School, which barely opens now because they can't afford it, not what was intended.
On the plus side, a couple of restorations going on (Drapers Hall and Charterhouse) but they've been farmed out by the council to get them done.
As ever, Coventry doesn't pay attention to what it has, so risks doing a lot of things badly rather than a few things well.
It's an old article (the figures have gone up since, I think) but tourism brings in a hell of a lot to the place.It’s cause coventrians talk about caring about the arts and supporting history but don’t put their money or their feet where their mouths are
Unbelievably short-sighted. Typical of council-backed initiatives.
Did you hear that the Priory is having to close again as they have no funding. Fucking astonishing and scandalous that the council will not support one of our most historic buildings.
I never said it was about old builkdings, but they're completely ignoring those parts of it to do with heritage... which is our culture - it's Culture Coventry after all! And that incorporates insights into our culture to be found in its archive, its museum, places such as the Weaver's House for that matter.Last point is City of Culture isn't about old buildings - it's about the many varied ways we live - entertainment like theatres to sporting events, art from masters to graffitti, cuisine from high end nosh to street vendors, all the different customs from various countries and religions. The old buildings form part of it and are selling points, but it's only a minor part of the story. If it was it'd be City of Heritage or City of History, not City of Culture.
Gaydon does alright. £14.50 that is, so obviously set with that in mind.£14 a pop for the museum is madness and will kill it.
I never said it was about old builkdings, but they're completely ignoring those parts of it to do with heritage... which is our culture - it's Culture Coventry after all! And that incorporates insights into our culture to be found in its archive, its museum, places such as the Weaver's House for that matter.
You can't just ignore what's already there and margibnalise it for something bright and shiny.
The structures they take place in are integral to what happens in social history, and also cultural history. They're the physical embodiment, and the conduit.I'm saying it should be more about WHAT we do/have done rather than the structures they take place in. Obviously the museums etc are part of that.
It's not a bad price considering you get to see the two fastest land speed record holders. Especially when you look at the cost of some of the things in London like Shard/Eye.
The structures they take place in are integral to what happens in social history, and also cultural history. They're the physical embodiment, and the conduit.
They also enable a sense of place to be magnified, a sense of 'Coventry'.
I'm not saying ignore Coventry now, I'm saying don't trample over whatever's there and ignore it when you have the opportunity, for once, to give it much needed funding and, dare I say it, introduce a legacy.
No, it's City of Culture, in the year 2021.It's City of Culture 2021 - ie culture in the present day.
But it's not just the buildings is it? it's the staff who come up with the activities in the archives, in the museums, in the Transport Museum.I agree with you completely about history and culture but that's not the point I'm making!
I'm making the argument of what to spend the funding for the city of culture on. We could spend the lot on tarting up a building or two or on actual activities and things to do.
Do a building up and visitors will visit it once, go "that was nice" and then not come back because they've seen it now. Give them a variety of restaurants/eateries and a decent offering of various things to do or performers to see and there's a reason to come back and spend more money. I go into the city a fair few times a year to see stuff at the Belgrade or eat out with people. Not been to places like the cathedral, Motor Museum, Guildhall, Undercroft etc for years because I don't need to - I've seen them. And those are ones you can enter, let alone all the structures which are closed and you can just walk past.
As I've said above, I'd love to see these old buildings utilised as it's the only way they'll actually stand any chance long term. But all we seem to want to do it tart them up for posterity and then let them rot again rather than use them because it's 'not in keeping with the history'. That's madness and totally unsustainable.
There's at least one person on this board who'll be able to correct my timelineSurely the whole idea of a city of culture isn't to just put a few shows on and open a few places to eat?
But it's not just the buildings is it? it's the staff who come up with the activities in the archives, in the museums, in the Transport Museum.
Or, as at present, the lack of staff, so lack of activities!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?