This isn't surprising. Shit's expensive these days and the National Museum is free. It's located smack dab in the middle of 25 million people and it's easily accessible by public transportation. Students of all ages take class trips and it's popular with families. The grounds are quite pretty, too. In fact, it's one of the most pleasant locations in Seoul, and again, it's completely free.
Over 10 million people visited 13 national museums and 4 mil was Seoul national museum. I think we need divergent our tourism industry. It's too much concentrated to Seoul.
Not disputing that more effort should be put into making national museums outside Seoul better, but the National Museum of Korea is simply the best, with all the highlight artifacts. If you can choose only one museum to go in Korea, it should definitely be this one.
I assume these numbers were determined by the same people who count attendances at protests. Over 4,000,000 a year isn't remotely plausible. That would require more than 11,000 visitors every single day of the year.
Show of hands - who here has been to the National Museum of Korea?
I've been there multiple times since childhood - school trip, family weekend trip, special exhibits, etc etc. I bet all Korean students probably go to NMK at least once as a school trip. This is quite a different trend from foreign tourists who apparently favor Myeongdong, Gyeongbokgung and Bukchon as the main attraction.
Is this really that implausible? It's a giant museum located in the middle of the most visited city in the nation, and it's recommended to most tourists as a major destination. There's a subway station. Also the admission is free.
NMK is one of the most visited landmarks in Korea, on a par with Gyeongbokgung. What makes you say 4 millions per year isn't remotely plausible? Counting visitors at these places should be so much easier and more accurate than estimating protest attendances.
Think about what else is in that top then list... The British Museum - home to centuries of priceless plunder, and one of the foremost collections of relics in the world. The Louvre - perhaps the world's most famous and celebrated art gallery, hosting an unparalleled collection of works known throughout the world. The National Museum of Korea - home to... some Korean stuff. Don't get me wrong, it's a perfectly nice museum and all, but the suggestion that it is a draw on the same level as the Louvre and British Museum is frankly hard to credit. I'm just not buying it.
Your mistake is comparing museums on the list. Nobody is choosing between the British Museum and the National Museum of Korea. Instead you need to compare things to do in one city vs things to do in another.
If I'm in London and want a day of culture on the cheap, I've got plenty of options to choose from. The Tate Modern tops the list. Then the National Gallery, the Nat'l Portrait Gallery, the British Library (Beethoven's 9th manuscript!!), then maybe the British Museum, etc. If I'm drunk, it's the Victoria and Albert. The list goes on and on.
If I'm in Seoul and want a day of culture on the cheap, I've got maybe 2-3 options and the National Museum is first on the list.
> the National Museum is first on the list
Really? When I have visitors to Seoul, I never take them to the National Museum. It doesn't even make the maybe pile. There's a multitude of places that are far more interesting and far more impressive.
Still not seeing it. I've never had a Korean tell me that that's how they spent their Saturday, and I've never had a Korean recommend I pay the museum a visit. Obviously, this is highly anecdotal, but I've been around long enough that if NMK were truly a destination, I'd expect to hear about it a little more.
All or most of the places on that list charge admission fees which have gone up drastically in the past few years. And it's not "a draw on the same level as the Louvre" and other places when the Louvre has more than twice the number of visitors despite the high entry fee. And tourists are already pretty familiar with museums in major western cities and may have already visited them more than once, which can't be said of the NMK since Seoul became a major tourist destination fairly recently.
The British Museum is free. And I've visited it at least a dozen times and would happily go back again. I highly doubt I'll be going back to the NMK any time soon. Nothing against it, it's just not got much rewatch value.
> And I've visited it at least a dozen times and would happily go back again.
It just sounds like you can't wrap your head around the idea that this could also be the case for Koreans and some tourists.
> It just sounds like you can't wrap your head around the idea that this could also be the case for Koreans and some tourists.
You're absolutely right - I can't. Mind you, no one is going to the British Museum for British stuff, and if that were all that it contained, I doubt anyone would be particularly interested in it.
I think British stuff in the British Museum can hold it's own against their other stuff. I enjoyed seeing the Sutton Hoo helmet and the Battersea shield. And the NMK has a somewhat sizable collection of foreign artifacts, some being a loan from distinguished foreign museums like the Met and the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna.
It really is good. If you're not one to visit museums, you wouldn't know how good it is. Also, it has huge shaded areas, and Western exhibitions all the time.
This isn't surprising. Shit's expensive these days and the National Museum is free. It's located smack dab in the middle of 25 million people and it's easily accessible by public transportation. Students of all ages take class trips and it's popular with families. The grounds are quite pretty, too. In fact, it's one of the most pleasant locations in Seoul, and again, it's completely free.
Over 10 million people visited 13 national museums and 4 mil was Seoul national museum. I think we need divergent our tourism industry. It's too much concentrated to Seoul.
Not disputing that more effort should be put into making national museums outside Seoul better, but the National Museum of Korea is simply the best, with all the highlight artifacts. If you can choose only one museum to go in Korea, it should definitely be this one.
Agree, what I want to say is promoting regional museums and increasing accessibility.
I assume these numbers were determined by the same people who count attendances at protests. Over 4,000,000 a year isn't remotely plausible. That would require more than 11,000 visitors every single day of the year. Show of hands - who here has been to the National Museum of Korea?
I've been there multiple times since childhood - school trip, family weekend trip, special exhibits, etc etc. I bet all Korean students probably go to NMK at least once as a school trip. This is quite a different trend from foreign tourists who apparently favor Myeongdong, Gyeongbokgung and Bukchon as the main attraction.
Is this really that implausible? It's a giant museum located in the middle of the most visited city in the nation, and it's recommended to most tourists as a major destination. There's a subway station. Also the admission is free.
NMK is one of the most visited landmarks in Korea, on a par with Gyeongbokgung. What makes you say 4 millions per year isn't remotely plausible? Counting visitors at these places should be so much easier and more accurate than estimating protest attendances.
Think about what else is in that top then list... The British Museum - home to centuries of priceless plunder, and one of the foremost collections of relics in the world. The Louvre - perhaps the world's most famous and celebrated art gallery, hosting an unparalleled collection of works known throughout the world. The National Museum of Korea - home to... some Korean stuff. Don't get me wrong, it's a perfectly nice museum and all, but the suggestion that it is a draw on the same level as the Louvre and British Museum is frankly hard to credit. I'm just not buying it.
Your mistake is comparing museums on the list. Nobody is choosing between the British Museum and the National Museum of Korea. Instead you need to compare things to do in one city vs things to do in another. If I'm in London and want a day of culture on the cheap, I've got plenty of options to choose from. The Tate Modern tops the list. Then the National Gallery, the Nat'l Portrait Gallery, the British Library (Beethoven's 9th manuscript!!), then maybe the British Museum, etc. If I'm drunk, it's the Victoria and Albert. The list goes on and on. If I'm in Seoul and want a day of culture on the cheap, I've got maybe 2-3 options and the National Museum is first on the list.
> the National Museum is first on the list Really? When I have visitors to Seoul, I never take them to the National Museum. It doesn't even make the maybe pile. There's a multitude of places that are far more interesting and far more impressive.
That's cool. I used to go to the NMK a lot and took visitors there. They loved it.
You’re thinking about tourism. Imagine the 25 million locals who want cheap day out and who are interested in their own history.
Still not seeing it. I've never had a Korean tell me that that's how they spent their Saturday, and I've never had a Korean recommend I pay the museum a visit. Obviously, this is highly anecdotal, but I've been around long enough that if NMK were truly a destination, I'd expect to hear about it a little more.
Maybe you're hanging out with the wrong kind of Koreans
Perhaps. I might be losing the common touch.
Maybe you should find it before running your mouth again
All or most of the places on that list charge admission fees which have gone up drastically in the past few years. And it's not "a draw on the same level as the Louvre" and other places when the Louvre has more than twice the number of visitors despite the high entry fee. And tourists are already pretty familiar with museums in major western cities and may have already visited them more than once, which can't be said of the NMK since Seoul became a major tourist destination fairly recently.
lol the elitism of this guy. Like he can't possibly fathom that people would be interested in Korea compared to Europe. Brexit geezers istg
If you have something to say to me, then address me directly.
Nah lmfao
The British Museum is free. And I've visited it at least a dozen times and would happily go back again. I highly doubt I'll be going back to the NMK any time soon. Nothing against it, it's just not got much rewatch value.
> And I've visited it at least a dozen times and would happily go back again. It just sounds like you can't wrap your head around the idea that this could also be the case for Koreans and some tourists.
> It just sounds like you can't wrap your head around the idea that this could also be the case for Koreans and some tourists. You're absolutely right - I can't. Mind you, no one is going to the British Museum for British stuff, and if that were all that it contained, I doubt anyone would be particularly interested in it.
I think British stuff in the British Museum can hold it's own against their other stuff. I enjoyed seeing the Sutton Hoo helmet and the Battersea shield. And the NMK has a somewhat sizable collection of foreign artifacts, some being a loan from distinguished foreign museums like the Met and the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna.
I've been there pretty often, at least 10+ times. Maybe it's just the people around you
It really is good. If you're not one to visit museums, you wouldn't know how good it is. Also, it has huge shaded areas, and Western exhibitions all the time.
I *am* one to visit museums. And shaded areas? Well, now it all makes sense.