Which city has the best collection of art?
That's debatable
I'd say either Florence, Rome, Paris, London, St. Petersburg or New York
>>337028
>florence
no. all of its art was basically looted by france. the uffizi has some great stuff admittedly, but it is small relative to the british museum or the louvre. its the architecture is influential no doubt, but a lot of it makes no sense with all of its churches stripped of all of its fine art and most of medieval florence demolished after risorgimento baka. and a lot of its buildings can be seen in three days or so, very provincial imo
>>337022
Rome, then Paris then London.
probably paris
only center of culture that:
(a. has plentiful artworks
(b. didn't have most of their artworks destroyed/looted by other countries (as opposed to Italy and a lot of middle eastern countries that's probably going to lose all of their shit after the war on terror).
London has a huge amount.
The British museum alone has a vast collection, and then there's the V&A, the Tate, the Tate Modern, the Tate Britain, National Portrait Gallery etc.
London has 3 of the top 10 most visited art museums in the world vs Paris with 2
>>337632
always the taker never the taken
u mad rest of the world?
>>337632
sort of jelly, now i want to visit london more than ever to see all its museums. luckily i have a friend who lives there so i can crash at his place after i graduate
>>337632
You missed the National Gallery you big silly, but yeah, this.
Paris might still top it though
Paris, obviously
>>337028
What about Amsterdam?
Rijksmuseum, Van Gogh museum, Stedelijk etc.
>>337640
cus british history sucked?
>>337028
no Florence, else
/thread
ITT: frenchs ans brits congratulate themselves for being good at stealing.
>>337910
>implying the Greeks wouldn't immediately sell the Aegean marbles
>>337910
Difference is france actually produced art unlike memegland
>>337910
Most of these "stolen" art works are actually regular acquisitions, at least for the Louvre.
>>337927
Same for the British ones, many have been in the British Museum for longer than Greece has been a country again.
>>337804
Too small
Like, it´s great on its specific themes (Dutch Golden Age, Van Gogh and Modern), but because of their seze they have to focus on those things
>>337910
how else are city's supposed to accumulate art and relics?
Pic related
>all that sweet antiquity and Byzantine loot
>>337022
Rome, for the pure reason that the Vatican is bar none the most grand and famous art gallery on the planet. I'd say it's the best, in the most detached sense possible.
London could potentially be the best given the thousands of masterpieces owned by the royal family on top of the already impressive amount of art galleries.
>>339017
>Jew York
Los Angeles is better.
>making fun of New York because of Jews and highlighting L. A. instead
kek
>>339263
Just my observation as a flyover state resident.
New York has quantity, but LA is all quality.
>>339467
fair enough
I've never set foot in the states tbf
Paris most likely.
The city itself is covered in monumental art, and the Louvre is without doubt the greatest museum in the world, with enormous art collections from every civilisation, from ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, and Rome, to every Western art period since the Middle Ages. Though for the extremely rich 19th century French art most of it is at the Orsay museum.
There's also the largest museum of modern art in Europe, if you consider that art.
>>340034
British Museum is a better overall Museum if imho, but the Louvre has better art.
>>337022
Technically, Chicago has the best art museum on the planet right now
>>340975
What does it have that isn't art? You mean like coins and prehistoric tools?
>>340034
>There's also the largest museum of modern art in Europe, if you consider that art.
:^)
>>340034
Spoken like a true french shill
>>341995
Yeah, general historical artifacts and items of interest as well as art. The British museum is where you go if you want to learn something, the Louvre is where you go if you want to be inspired.
