I’ve been thinking about the Museum of Contemporary Art’s struggles in Los Angeles since news broke in the Los Angeles Times on Thursday that the LA County Museum of Art had essentially made a takeover bid for the troubled museum. In case you missed it:
…The acquisition offer was made in a letter from the leaders of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, or LACMA, to the co-chairs of the MOCA board.
LACMA would preserve MOCA’s two downtown locations and operate them under the MOCA name. With money an obvious issue for MOCA’s future, the letter guaranteed that LACMA would raise $100 million for the combined museums as a condition of the deal.
“MOCA has a great brand, a great history and its art collection is known and loved internationally,” Michael Govan, LACMA’s executive director, said. “Combining the two museums would create one of the largest and most significant art museums in the U.S.”
It’s not a bad idea. Govan argues, in a post on LACMA’s website, that
Combining LACMA and MOCA would strengthen both. LACMA’s mission is to share world-class art with the widest array of audiences possible. MOCA’s downtown location, extraordinary collection and devoted constituency, combined with LACMA’s modern art masterpieces, large audiences and broad educational outreach (especially in schools near downtown L.A.) would create a cultural institution that is much more than the sum of its parts. LACMA’s strong leadership, its history of fundraising, and its support from Los Angeles County and other donors will provide MOCA with the stability it deserves.
It’s not the best solution, either. I’d rather have more, rather than fewer, views of contemporary art. I think Govan has plenty on his plate already without adding MOCA.
So how to preserve MOCA’s independence? First, Jeffrey Deitch has to go. Now. The museum cannot afford to lose any more people, and it must return to a respected exhibition program.
Then, it needs a new director who, with the board, will be able to stablize the museum. Someone who knows the lay of the land. Someone with directorial experience. Now, what experienced director would take this job? Only one: former MOCA director Richard Koshalek, now running the Hirshhorn Museum. Soon, Koshalek’s contract will expire, I understand. His dream of erecting an Inflatable Seasonal Structure at the Hirshhorn for programming and creating a culural think-tank, is all but dead. He has no reason to stay, ifhe;s asked, so he’ll be free to leave Washington.
But Koshalek, I’m guessing, is thinking about his legacy. He’s past 70. Although he had a troubled time as president of the Pasadena Art Center College of Design, when he left MOCA in 1999, after 20 years, it had a healthy endowment (about $50 million, I’m told), and was well-respected for its collections and its exhibitions. And his hires, including Paul Schimmel and Ann Goldstein.
Sure times have changed since he left LA, but his return to MOCA for the next couple of years might be just the way to stop the civil war at the museum, get it back on its feet, raise a substantial amount of money, take its time developing succession plans, etc.
Would Koshalek take it? I’m betting yes.
Seems like it’s my week to boorishly pester you. “…and it must return to a respected exhibition program.”
I don’t think that’s possible to return to anything. It’s really all over for the era of you’re yearning for except the funeral. it’s a dead era. I’ve been ranting for years now that all this ruckus is simply an attempt to retain inflated values for a collection that while regaled in the past is struggling to stay relevant in the current aesthetic reassessment. How many more Millions will be squandered before these boards allow the natural devaluing to take place.
When Jeffrey Deitch was appointed to direct LA MoCA more than a few questions arose regarding his lack of museum employment experience, especially as a director. His track record illustrates the pitfalls that result when boards of trustees assume anyone can run a museum and hire according. Leading a museum is a nuanced complicated art that requires a specific set of people skills, an outgoing energizing personality, devotion to the cause, knowledge of the subject of a particular museum and a complete understanding of what museums are and why. Success in the commercial sector, be it in the art world or any other endeavor, is no indication that a person will succeed in the nonprofit museum sector. Time and time again we see museum disasters when non-museum-experienced directors are hired. Just look at the Smithsonian Institution some years ago or more recnetly the Corcoran for examples. Mr. Deitch may be a bright businessman but his track record as a museum director so far suggests he is operating on a basis of short commecrial motivations rather than a long commitment to the substance of art. The idea of seeking a new director such as Richard Koshalek is an excellent one.