Let’s consider the “deaccessioning” situation at the Clyfford Still Museum in Denver. The other day, it emerged that Dean Sobel, the director, has a plan that would allow the sale of four works — before they are officially accessioned — to raise money for the museum’s endowment.
Here’s the gist: The Still Museum will soon receive 825 Still paintings from a bequest of Still’s widow, Patricia, who died in 2005 — plus more than 1,000 drawings. However, the museum has petitioned the court to release four paintings to the city of Denver before official distribution of her estate, so that the museum does not violate museum ethics policies against deaccessioning for purposes other than buying new works of art. The city would sell them for the benefit of the museum. The take could be as much as $25 million, according to published reports. The museum would use the money for all museum activities, including research and publications.
Still (seen at right in a 1940 self-portrait) wanted all his works in one place. On the other hand, his widow has already donated or sold 13 of them.
A few other factors to consider: the museum is making — or rather enabling — the sale openly, announcing it. Sobel chose the four works carefully, according to a report in the Denver Post, making a package that covers all three phases in Still’s career. They will be sold in a group, and only to another museum.
Critics have called this “problematic” saying that Sobel is using a “loophole” in standard museum policies. The second part is true, for sure. The first — let’s say it’s not ideal.
But nobody is going to walk through an exhibit of nearly 2,400 Still works, the total of its holdings. The museum is only 28,500 sq. ft. all told anyway. So many works will go straight into storage. Why shouldn’t the Still Museum sell a couple to a museum that will put these paintings on display? They would not be leaving the public trust.
A bigger question, to me — can any museum plunk down $25 million for the paintings? And if not, what does the Still do? When it opens late next year, will it start out behind?
The museum has already cut back. Last November, the Denver Post reported that it had trimmed its cost from $33 million to $29 million, and quoted Sobel saying, “It was very difficult to get to this point in this economy.” This point is $26 million, so there is still further to go. Sobel talked hopefully about raising a $10 million endowment, but figured he might have to settle for $5 million.
I would rather see the sale of four paintings from the collection than see the museum start out life shakily. Besides, I have heard that selling donated works before official accessioning — which sometimes takes place years after the initial gift or bequest — is hardly rare among museums. It just happens in secret.
So, in this case, and as you may have imagined, given my advocacy for a rational, difficult process to consider deaccessioning, which should be rare, I’m siding with Sobel. If we had a real process, we wouldn’t need loopholes.
Let’s hope Sobel can find a museum with the bucks.
Photo Credits: Courtesy Clyfford Still Estate (top); Untitled, 1957 — SFMoMA (bottom)