Kelly Clarkson's £150,000 gold & turquoise Jane Austen ring stays put in UK for now

wfgodot · Aug 1, 2013

Government bans U.S. singer Kelly Clarkson from taking £150,000 gold ring once owned by Jane Austen out of Britain. (Daily Mail)

The singer bought the jewellery at auction last year
Culture minister Ed Vaizey has put a temporary export bar on the piece
The ring is one of only three surviving pieces of jewellery known to have belonged to the Pride and Prejudice author

Interesting reader comments as well, plus pictures, at the link.

Donamena · Aug 1, 2013

wfgodot said:
Government bans U.S. singer Kelly Clarkson from taking £150,000 gold ring once owned by Jane Austen out of Britain. (Daily Mail)

The singer bought the jewellery at auction last year
Culture minister Ed Vaizey has put a temporary export bar on the piece
The ring is one of only three surviving pieces of jewellery known to have belonged to the Pride and Prejudice author

Interesting reader comments as well, plus pictures, at the link.

Does this mean she can have her money back?

wfgodot · Aug 1, 2013

Donamena said:
Does this mean she can have her money back?

If someone ponies up the cash, she'll take the proceedings and get the ££ back; and if they don't, presumably it can be exported.

---
[Culture minister] Mr Vaizey said: '... I hope that a UK buyer comes forward so this simple but elegant ring can be saved for the nation.'

The decision on the export licence will be deferred until September 30 and can be extended to December 30 if proof emerges of a serious intention to raise funds to match its six-figure price tag.
---

josie1986 · Aug 1, 2013

i read about this earlier,i don't get it.

she bought it with her own money,she can do what she pleases with it and take it wherever she wants imo.

if british people wanted it kept here surely one of us would have purchased it.

wfgodot · Aug 1, 2013

I'm assuming the auction was known to Austen experts and aficianados there; I'm assuming they had either no interest or no money.

Don't blame them a bit for stepping in and keeping it in-country for now though; though if one googles "Elgin marbles" (etc.) one can find evidence of cultural plundering by the country here in question.

Donamena · Aug 1, 2013

And the seller didn't think there might be a problem selling it to an out-of-country buyer?

STANDREID · Aug 1, 2013

I don't see why it was put up for sale if they didn't want it gone but maybe they didn't know in time. That said, you don't always have the right to do whatever you want with something just because you pay for it. Some things also belong to mankind so even after you've taken possession of it the item isn't only yours.

wasalurker · Aug 1, 2013

It says it was passed down through the family before they put it up for sale. If it was at an auction and KC knew about it, then it was probably listed as hers and advertised. The gov't should have purchased it at auction if they wanted to keep it there and make sure it stayed in the country. Only after someone from another country purchased it did they make a stink...

If it was the family's then they should be able to do what they want with it. If the gov't wants it then they should pay for it.

JMOO

UKgirl · Aug 2, 2013

The words does it realy matter apply here. THe family didnt want it so let her have it, thats what i say

wfgodot · Aug 2, 2013

Jane Austen's ring matters far less than the objects in her fiction. (Guardian)

---
In the end, this ring tells us less about Jane Austen than about our desire to hold on to her and give her physical life beyond the page. If the ring leaves the country, Jane Austen won't be any less English; if we "own" her at all, we won't own her any less.
---

LadyL · Aug 11, 2013

well, it appears it isn't worth anywhere near what she paid for it so I think perhaps her rep. pushed the price up at auction beyond anyone else's ability to afford it or beyond what anyone else was authorized to spend

however, it's her ring

license to export? couldn't someone just put it on their finger and fly home?

LadyL · Aug 11, 2013

Miss Clarkson encountered a similar problem when she bought a first edition of Jane Austen’s novel Persuasion, saying last year: ‘We put in an export request but I can’t take it out of the UK as they’ve named it a national treasure.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aking-Jane-Austins-ring-UK.html#ixzz2bgl5UkEp
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[bbm]

seriously, if they want to declare everything 'national treasures', then perhaps they should already have these items in a museum

ArianeEmory · Aug 11, 2013

Yes, this seems like a particularly weird and arbitrary bait-and-switch. I get that saying "private property is private property" is a bit naive, but I wasn't aware they could go this far. And it's just a ring. I can see the historic preservation of sites and buildings, and I'm slightly more understanding regarding the manuscript, but a ring isn't going to teach anyone about Jane Austen, and it wasn't part of the Crown Jewels or anything.

wfgodot · Aug 13, 2013

Anonymous donor gives $150,000 to stop U.S. singer Kelly Clarkson buying Jane Austen ring and keep in the UK. (Daily Mail)

• Jane Austen House museum had hoped to buy the ring last year
• Outbid by Kelly Clarkson who bought it for five times the estimated price
• Government placed a temporary export ban on the gold and turquoise ring
• Clarkson will sell the ring for £152,450 should a buyer come forward
• Anonymous bidder gives museum £100,000 so it may try to purchase it

wfgodot · Aug 14, 2013

England Prepared to Nuke Kelly Clarkson For Buying Jane Austen's Ring. (Gawker)

One piece of information that your neurons probably never fire about is that Kelly Clarkson is worth a million billion dollars. She may seem like just a girl you went to high school with who later became a hairdresser, or your rural cousin's girlfriend who already has a 2-year-old named Braylee from a previous relationship, but know this: Kelly Clarkson has enough money to have you killed and then pay to "make it go away" six times over.
---

much more at the link

ArianeEmory · Aug 14, 2013

"Austen House curator Louise West told the AP that the museum has invited Kelly Clarkson to come visit the next time she's in Britain, which is exactly the same thing as the Louvre inviting her to come visit the next time she's in France, because it is a museum, hence, already open to the public."

Heh.

wfgodot · Sep 23, 2013

Jane Austen ring to stay in Britain after museum beats Kelly Clarkson's £150,000 bid. (Evening Standard)

---
The museum, in Chawton, Hampshire, had tried to buy the ring at the original auction but could not raise the money in time.

After the temporary export ban, an anonymous donor came forward with a pledge of £100,000 to kickstart efforts and further donations came from around the world.
---

the story and pics, at the link

Woe.be.gone · Sep 23, 2013

It seems like a trick of some sort from the beginning to try get more money for the ring. A portion may have been intended to fund the museum - something like that. Now someone has offered one-third of the price KC paid for the ring so the museum still has to come up with the rest. That portion is still beyond what they estimated the ring would sell for at auction. How can the British government keep the seller from collecting top dollar in a free market? That's what I'm trying to figure out here. Because the family could have offered it to the museum at a fair price in the first place if they cared about preserving the treasure aspect of their famous distant relative. Were they already paid, to include Sotherby's cut, and now the government refuses to turn the ring over to KC? (meaning KC's money is tied up in this mess)

I'm not sure if my post makes sense but, to me, it seems like a publicity stunt using KC as a tool. Obviously she admires JA as she tried to purchase a different relic earlier.

Woe.be.gone · Sep 23, 2013

UKgirl said:
The words does it realy matter apply here. THe family didnt want it so let her have it, thats what i say

Then let them settle for a lesser price and give the money back to KC.

Kelly, keep your money in the United States, please? lol!

Kelly Clarkson's £150,000 gold & turquoise Jane Austen ring stays put in UK for now

Former Member

Former Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Former Member

A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

New Member

For you little sky.

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics