Hidden away

Liam brought up an interesting question about art. Should private individuals be allowed to buy up as many famous paintings as they like and keep them hidden away, or should those iconic artworks be on permanent public display in museums and galleries?

A tricky question. There are strong arguments on both sides.

• Don't individuals have the right to buy whatever they choose, even if it's something other people would love to look at but can't? After all, there are thousands more remarkable paintings for people to look at, so what does it matter if a small fraction of them are stashed away somewhere inaccessible?
• On the other hand, shouldn't the public have the right to view famous masterpieces whenever they like without their being squirreled away for the benefit of half a dozen lucky people? Why should we be deprived of a celebrated painting people want to study more closely and marvel at?

Well, we have several original paintings hanging on our walls, and intend to hang on to them, which is easy enough as none of the artists are well-known and nobody is clamouring to see them any time soon.

A bit of a shame as we can't make shedloads of money out of selling them to the highest bidder. The Van Gogh in the article mentioned was last sold to a Japanese paper tycoon for $62.5 million and today would probably fetch about $300 million.

I think a compromise solution would be for private collectors to be obliged to exhibit their art works publicly for at least a few months every year, to give people a chance to see them. Anything else is just selfish hoarding.

Pic: Portrait of Dr Gachet by Van Gogh. Thought to be owned by an Italian family.