CORRECTION APPENDED SEE BOTTOMI am regularly shocked when faced with the concept that art has a price tag. When art is for sale, at least to me, it seems like the clashing of two worlds, the commercial and the artistic. When merged capably, this clash can comment on both worlds, but when art is auctioned off hurriedly, its vendors eager to convert it into liquid cash, I am left with a bad taste in my mouth.

I am not writing to argue the merits of art and commerce. I only want to present three arguments that I have with the decision to close the Rose Art Museum and auction off its paintings: first the issue of image, second the lack of transparency in the decision-making and third the doubts this decision raises about the University's commitment to the arts.

More than anything else, this hurts Brandeis' public image even further. Our image is a moneymaker, in terms of attracting both new donors and prospective students, and a highly publicized auctioning of priceless, high-profile works of art is only going to make it worse. At the time of this writing, The New York Times and the Boston Globe have already published stories about the Rose. With newspapers across the country digging for stories that illustrate the effect of the financial crisis, more bad press for Brandeis is sure to surface. The timing of the announcement could not be worse.

Like most Brandeis students, the first notice I received regarding the Rose was a Monday night e-mail from University President Jehuda Reinharz. This e-mail simply informed the student body of the Board of Trustees' decision to close the museum. The closing reached the student body as a fait accompli, with no room for discussion.

This decision from on high came as a particular blow to students who have been fighting for greater transparency in the budget cut decisions. If the administration truly has at heart "an unwavering commitment to the students," as a press release from the Office of Media Relations claims, it should be willing to involve the students in major University decisions-especially those that affect our Brandeis experience as much as the closing of the Rose.

In these precarious financial times there is a lot of doing without. This is something we are all prepared to do. There are many services and institutions on campus that I could do without. The Rose is not one of them. The University does not seem to recognize its students' willingness to see cuts in other areas, such as student services and student activities, rather than in academic and cultural areas.

By cutting the Rose, Brandeis is losing sight of what is vital to the experience of many students. In order for the University and student body to work together toward our core academic mission, we should have some discussion about what that mission is. For many students that mission involves a strong commitment to the arts, which Brandeis has faithfully displayed up until now.

I feel like the sanctity of art has been part of the communal liberal consciousness for a long time. How the administration can see the value of its art collection in dollars and cents is beyond me. Universities are charged with the task of protecting and disseminating knowledge to all who seek it. The Rose is a key teaching tool. Art is not just something that hangs on the walls and looks pretty. It teaches. Just as our school's best faculty change hearts and minds with their words, so do the great artists of our time change us with their works. Having these works on campus is vital to our education.

If we want to maintain the strengths this University was built on, we need to keep a dedication to the arts, a dedication that can withstand monetary adversity. I ask that other options for budget cuts be reconsidered. The Rose is something I am very proud to have. Art will never be as physically accessible to me as it has been on this campus. I am sad to see that go and to know that future classes won't have the pride of going to a school with such a comprehensive art collection.

Correction: The article originally referred to Emily Leifer as a blogger for Innermostparts.org. She is not.