UIMA's director: 'Unconditionally' opposed to sale

This is the first extended interview with University of Iowa Museum of Art interim director Pam White about the University of Iowa regents' plans to explore the potential sale of Jackson Pollock's 1943 Mural. White is also the director of the Pentacrest Museums and is the head of museum studies at the University of Iowa. 

MAN: Are you unconditionally opposed to a potential sale of Mural?

Pam White: Yes I am.

It's my duty to be a very strong voice against a sale. If it was the very survival of the University of Iowa, that changes the complexion of the issue doesn't it? But that's not what we're talking about here. We are talking about the collection being minimized by a sale like this, which creates a very slippery slope. The next question many of us work in the field is what's the next thing somebody decides to sell?

Our responsibility, when you have something in your collection that is iconic, increases exponentially. In many ways you become a museum about that object. This painting does have that that stature. That's what our goal is as museum people, to enhance a piece of history and to enhance its stature and reputation when we do it.

Why do we do it? So we get a higher price at the auction house? I think not. That's abhorrent to me.

One thing to keep in mind: Most of the university spaces that aren't classrooms here are privately funded. And it looks like we're going to need a new museum. I don't think this is a good way to elicit private support for a new art museum.

We had a significant donor tell us: We'll buy prints and give them to you for your collection. But if the Pollock is sold we'll never give to the University of Iowa again.

MAN: Are you unconditionally opposed to efforts to put a dollar value on the painting, or, for that matter, any painting in the museum's collection?

White: Well, we've had to come forth with an insurance value... in some ways that's very rhetorical. Pollock's Mural is irreplaceable. It's priceless. But for insurance we have to have a monetary value, which is technically what the replacement value would be, which is impossible.

So we've disclosed $100M. That's what it's been appraised at solely for insurance value. I think it's worth far more than that, but trying to appraise it and treat it like something on the market is a misnomer. It's not a can of peas. We get into these very strange situations when we start thinking about our museum in an asset- or economic-oriented way.

MAN: What efforts is UIMA taking in an effort to make sure that this doesn't go very far?

White: I have sent messages to the University of Iowa president [Sally Mason] and she says that she's not interested in selling the painting. Indeed, she's deferring all questions to me. We've copied our friends and members on that. We haven't done anything nationwide, but I think what you're proposing is a great thing. We'll get a letter out asking for support from museum directors.

I think what [other directors] are fearful about is various museums being forced, through one way or another, to sell aspects of their collections. It just strikes fear into the heart of all of us. We're all worried that whoever the powers that be that control us are going to say, 'Well a sale has to happen.' I think that's one of the reasons there's reluctance on the part of museum directors to say something. They hope that if they don't say anything, maybe no one will think of this in regard to their collections.

MAN: Have you heard from your peers at other museums and from university art museums especially?

White: No.