Return to Front Burner

RE: BIBLICAL ARTS FIRE

Was the art "priceless," or was it simply "irreplaceable"? Channel 11's Sarah Dodd was the one who called it the former. She defends her word choice:

DODD: The reason I used the word "priceless" is because you cannot put a monetary value on some of the things lost. Including a skull cap that belonged to Pope John Paul. Obviously he is deceased, and that item cannot be replaced, making it PRICELESS. Additionally, the Center housed one one of the world's largest oil paintings where Dallas legends, including Stanley Marcus, posed as models. Again, he is no longer living, making his participation PRICELESS.

ME: You're wrong there, friend. "Priceless" and "irreplaceable" aren't the same thing. Everything has a price. JP II's beanie, for instance: you can't get another one, but if we still had that first one, I bet someone would buy it on eBay.

DODD: Webster's online dictionary: "Priceless: worth more than can be calculated in terms of money." Post your apology now, please.

ME: Sarah, don't be dense. Give me a Pope beanie. I'll put it on eBay. The highest bidder will win the auction. Whatever that bid is, that's the price of the hat. We just calculated it. In terms of money. If you want to get down to the nitty-gritty of this debate, the only things that are priceless are things like happiness and love. Like the Beatles sang, you can't buy love--literally. Because it can't be sold. I mean, obviously that's a fairy tale. Because everyone knows you CAN buy love. But you get my point.

DODD: We can agree to disagree, but you've seen the MasterCard commercials. Some things are priceless:) Besides, I've got Webster's on my side. You are using a subjective definition. I still love you though.

ME: [closing door to office, dimming lights ...]

Tim Rogers · June 29, 2005 01:04 PM