• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Kelly Clarkson buys Jane Austen ring, England won't let her leave country with it

Status
Not open for further replies.
Did I miss something? She won the auction, they place export ban so they can save up money to match (or beat) her winning auction.

So where is the part that she agrees to sell it back or that she just won't outbid them again on this 'extended' auction?

Feels like I am missing something because they are making it seems since they got the donation, they only have a little more to go to match her bid.

It's just a ring. I could see if it was a notepad of Jane's story ideas, etc. But jewelry that she wore? Maybe it's really a Mandarin ring and someone is trying to collect them all.
 
Someone should write a letter cos if Pride and Prejudice taught me anything it is that writing a letter solves everything.
 
Did I miss something? She won the auction, they place export ban so they can save up money to match (or beat) her winning auction.

So where is the part that she agrees to sell it back or that she just won't outbid them again on this 'extended' auction?

Feels like I am missing something because they are making it seems since they got the donation, they only have a little more to go to match her bid.

If the money can be matched by someone who isn't going to whisk it off to America they get it full stop, she won't get another chance to bid.

May not seem 'fair' to her but who cares.
 
People say it's not historically significant because it's not one of her books or something? How does that make it insignificant? And why is it you that gets to decide how significant it is?

Maybe it's not the most significant part of her life, but it certainly is an interesting part of it. If we only kept things deemed incredibly significant, museums would be very boring places.

It's like saying "Nothing on the Titanic was historically significant. The only significant part was how it sank". Which would be equally stupid.

Besides, I'd rather see these things put in a museum for generatiosn to enjoy than taken to someone's private house and never seen again.
 
People say it's not historically significant because it's not one of her books or something? How does that make it insignificant? And why is it you that gets to decide how significant it is?

Maybe it's not the most significant part of her life, but it certainly is an interesting part of it. If we only kept things deemed incredibly significant, museums would be very boring places.

It's like saying "Nothing on the Titanic was historically significant. The only significant part was how it sank". Which would be equally stupid.

Besides, I'd rather see these things put in a museum for generatiosn to enjoy than taken to someone's private house and never seen again.

How so? Are we going to put famous people's toilet paper in museum.
 
If the money can be matched by someone who isn't going to whisk it off to America they get it full stop, she won't get another chance to bid.

May not seem 'fair' to her but who cares.

That's crap. Should have just stipulated that the sale was for citizens only.

People say it's not historically significant because it's not one of her books or something? How does that make it insignificant? And why is it you that gets to decide how significant it is?

Maybe it's not the most significant part of her life, but it certainly is an interesting part of it. If we only kept things deemed incredibly significant, museums would be very boring places.

It's like saying "Nothing on the Titanic was historically significant. The only significant part was how it sank". Which would be equally stupid.

Besides, I'd rather see these things put in a museum for generatiosn to enjoy than taken to someone's private house and never seen again.

Meh, I generally don't get the attachment to material things so I find it a little difficult to understand why someone would care about something like that or a lamp post that their great grandfather found in a run down factory and decided to take home. Whatever floats their boats I guess.
 
That's crap. Should have just stipulated that the sale was for citizens only.
It was stipulated, because this was an export law that already existed. That's how this all happened. They didn't pass a new law just to piss off some C teir pop star I've never even heard of.

And it has nothing to do with her being a citizen, it's to do with her taking it out of the country.
 
England's LAW won't let her

ignorance is bliss, but in her case, just fuck off and learn to read Clarkson
 
if you open the bidding to people from other countries, you can't then keep them from taking what they bought

how ridiculous
 
It was stipulated, because this was an export law that already existed. That's how this all happened. They didn't pass a new law just to piss off some C teir pop star I've never even heard of.

And it has nothing to do with her being a citizen, it's to do with her taking it out of the country.

En nou ek is opgevoed. Thanks!
 
People say it's not historically significant because it's not one of her books or something? How does that make it insignificant? And why is it you that gets to decide how significant it is?

Maybe it's not the most significant part of her life, but it certainly is an interesting part of it. If we only kept things deemed incredibly significant, museums would be very boring places.

It's like saying "Nothing on the Titanic was historically significant. The only significant part was how it sank". Which would be equally stupid.

Besides, I'd rather see these things put in a museum for generatiosn to enjoy than taken to someone's private house and never seen again.

What makes the ring an interesting part of her life?
 
Maybe the UK should give India its fucking jewels back.
Return Koh-i-Noor!!!!

kalima.gif



Give us back America then we'll talk.
You are so greedy England, give America back to the native Americans.
 
This isn't unusual. If you want to take something of historical importance out of the country there's a waiting period where other people who are going to keep it in the country can match your offer.

I'd rather our historical heritage stayed here rather than being a curiosity of some pop star on another continent.

This is how it worked for the Elgin marbles.
 
It was stipulated, because this was an export law that already existed. That's how this all happened. They didn't pass a new law just to piss off some C teir pop star I've never even heard of.

And it has nothing to do with her being a citizen, it's to do with her taking it out of the country.

What are you even talking about?.

It was not stipulated. It was not declared to be an artifact of historical importance to the country until AFTER she purchased it. Which then resulted in it being impacted by the export law. Thousands of English antiques are bought and sold to foreigners every year. There is no reason why she should have expected/knows that in this particular instance they would put their foot down.

In fact, I doubt it would have occured at all if it wasn't for the fact that it was an American celebrity. It is 100% for publicity and if it had been an American business person who had purchased the ring it never would have been an issue.
 
What if she sneaks it out of the country, takes a film crew out to the banks of the Mississippi and throws it in while saying "haha, fuck you Britain!!!"
 
What if he sneaks it out of the country, takes a film crew out to the banks of the Mississippi and throws it in while saying "haha, fuck you Britain!!!"

Kelly is a saint though.

I actually half expect her to give the ring back even if the museum doesn't quite raise enough money.
 
i've read four of her novels and for the life of me couldn't remember who tried to marry who in which.

The girl who secretly loves the guy but never wants him to know that she does marries the guy who secretly loves the girl but never wants her to know that he does.
 
She was singing a song out of nowhere, in a key that isn't what she would have chosen to sing it in. She also didn't know the lyrics.

Completely unfair example. Kelly slays pretty much every artist out there today as far as vocals go (with the possible exception of Beyonce).

Oh believe me I know :D I meant butchering in jest, cause I've been stanning for Kelly since AI :P
 
Can she withdraw her bid? I can't imagine the ring being that important to her to the point where she'd risk the bad publicity.
 
She should just accept that this thing has more significance than flattering her ego. That being said, they dun goofed by letting foreigners at the auction?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom