Abstract
The decision has been made to relocate several cultural institutions in Oslo, without any existing plans for the old premises. In this article, the supportive arguments are analysed against the backdrop of the critical voices. The critics want to preserve the old buildings because they are embedded in the nation’s collective memory and have value as history. The supporters of the plans argue that the new buildings are bricks in a bigger city renewal project and shall generate synergetic effects beyond just functioning as cultural institutions. Critical discourse analysis is used eclectically as a methodological framework with a specific focus on what structural patterns of social change the arguments imply. The conclusion is that economy’s entry into the cultural sphere may be a threat to the cultural heritage.
Highlights
In recent years, organizational merging has been a popular instrument in order to achieve the benefits of large-scale concerns
If the costs per m2 of a new building at the West Railway Station site – stipulated by Statsbygg at 58.000 Norwegian “kroner” per m2 – were spent on the National Gallery at Tullinløkka, we prove that this would result in an efficient museum (Save the National Gallery)
Lauritz Dorenfeldt, head of the museum‟s friend foundation, shares his concern with a journalist for Aftenposten. He argues that Oslo will be a poorer city of culture if the National Gallery and The Museum of Decorative Arts and Design are jointly relocated to a building at the West Railway Station site (Andreassen 2009:6)
Summary
Organizational merging has been a popular instrument in order to achieve the benefits of large-scale concerns. The Museum of Decorative Arts and Design to a new building at the West Railway Station site in Oslo.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
