Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="moreotherstuff, post: 5908, member: 56"]Back in the '50s, when I was a kid, my walk to school took me past an exhibition hall.  I can't remember what the show was at the time in question, but the big draw was a display of $1,000,000 in gold bullion, a very big deal back then.  One day, on my way home from school, I decided to go in and see, a risky proposition as I was an unaccompanied child.  I was greeted at the door by the beautious Miss Something-or-other, who seemed a nice enough grown-up to me.  She took me and showed me the gold - a very small pile of yellow bricks.  All-in-all it was a disappointment.  In the '70s (as I recall) Piaget produced a $1,000,000 wrist watch that was put on display in a downtown store.  Having not learned my childhood lesson, I hied me hence to view this marvel.  What I saw was a bracelet of graduated baguette diamonds with a watch in its center.  Another disappointment.  One of the big draws at the Ontario Gallery of Art is a painting attributed to Reubens - The Massacre of the Innocents - which cost $80-90 million when purchased by the donor.  Despite it's grisly subject matter, it is a wonderful thing.  But I confess that when I went to see it, I couldn't get over the cost. The value of the object is not intrinsic in its nature, it's intrinsic in the economics of the day.[/QUOTE]