MSN?
The above is a link to an article about how a pair of the ruby slippers(if I have to explain them, your don’t care) in the Smithsonian are in need of a refurbishing.
I loved the movie, still do, but I just can’t see spending that kind of money on a pair of shoes
Would you donate to such a cause? Poll to follow
Absolutely … though it’s not the only pair Garland wore in the movie.
The time has passed.
Let them be cherished memories, not current touchstones.
It doesn’t bother me that some people would want to donate to the cause but I don’t feel strongly enough to put in any money myself.
I said “no” - I can understand the cultural significance and certainly don’t care if others want to, but if I was going to donate it’d be to something I find more important. Also, I never cared for the movie.
I probably would and possibly will; it’s 3:23AM for me and I don’t decide things well at this hour. Yeah – it’s a pair of shoes and not some endangered species or anything. But its still something I hope people can see for themselves a hundred years from now.
I donated to help preserve Neil Armstrong’s spacesuit but I’m passing on the ruby slippers.
I will warn people that donating will put you on the Smithsonian’s email list and they will send you a lot of emails.
I’d consider donating purely for the fact that I’m being asked for the money rather than it being taxed away from me forcefully. I’d like to see a world where most government money came from crowdsourcing instead of taxes.
Holy crap, $300,000 to restore a pair of slippers? Why not just buy a new pair? 
What’s the name for the belief/feeling that an object has value because of its past associations (like a religious relic or a baseball that was used to break a record)? Is it a form of magical thinking?
Surely $300,000 exceeds the original slipper cost?
The government would go broke…
Let us devoutly hope so.
In the book they’re silver shoes. I read the book before I saw the movie and that was one of the many changes that stood out. I guess ruby works better in color film than silver.
“Recognizing that historical artifacts (even ones from pop culture) serve a purpose to people who wish to study the past and learn new things?”
:dubious:
Well, it exactly matches the original film profit ($3m against cost of $2.7m - something of a flop at the time).
I’d like to see a breakdown of how this restoration could cost so much. Where does the money go?
I wonder too. Cutting rubies into dozens of little buttons can’t cost too much. Even if you paid several craftsmen $100/hour, that couldn’t be more than what, $40,000.
They are just simple slippers covered with sequins sewn on. There is no ruby involved. Even if the sequins were ruby, they intend to reuse them I would assume. If not, heck any Chinese knock off house could duplicate them for less than 100 bucks. I’m into antiques and conservation, but this is ridiculous. Yes, please, give us a break down of the expected costs.
Dennis
Part of it is supposed to go for a climate controlled display case.
Well maybe it should go broke if the only way it can get money is to point a gun to your head. If the red cross does well enough, although they do get the government to hold a gun up to your head for some of their funding.
Hello? The shoes are wearing out while nobody is wearing them? Nobody is dancikng in them on yellow bricks? While they’re in an exhibit at the Smithsonian? What exactly is happening to them?
Guys, these shoes were made as a PROP. They are not made of actual rubies. The amount requested is insane. The amount collected is…wow, really? To sew some sequins back on some shoes? Really?
A new pair would be indistinguishable, although of course it wouldn’t have Judy Garland’s foot sweat inside. Can’t imagine it would cost more than $1000 even if custom made by Christian Louboutin.
None of you have ever worked in a museum, have you? The environment does indeed effect the shoes – discoloration and detioration of material happens over time. That’s one of the reasons flash cameras aren’t allowed in museums – all those flashes will fade an item, like any other bright light.
Okay, while we’re not talking about archaelogy, these shoes do have sentimental value to people – think of them like your great-grandfather’s pocket watch, or your grandmother’s engagement ring. It’s not magical thinking – it’s sort of a link to the past. You may not have been at that baseball game. But you see the actual ball that was there, and it’s a way of being part of it.
Just like seeing Neil Armstrong’s suit. I may not have been able to go to the moon, but I’m able to see something that was there. People aren’t robots – these things have an emotional impact on us.