Archives for April 2011

Breaking now, with few details: Zahi Hawass, reappointed as Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs by the new Egyptian government, has been sentenced by an Egyptian criminal court to a year in jail, according to Al-Ahram — and he was fired.

The newspaper’s English website says he was punished for refusing to follow a court order over a land dispute.

The Egyptian criminal court also said Hawass must be relieved of his governmental duties and ordered him to pay a LE1000 penalty.

Hawass failed to adhere to a ruling in favour of his opponent over a land dispute when he was in charge of the Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA).

The SCA appealed the court ruling, arguing that the land includes monuments and therefore should be treated as government-owned land.

On his blog, Hawass denies that he is going to jail. He explains that it’s all a misunderstanding, related to the bookstore contract, which I mentioned here, and ends with:

Tomorrow, the head of the Legal Affairs Department at the Ministry of Antiquities will go to the court to file our appeal. He will present evidence that the bid for the bookstore contract was finished before the original court ruling, so therefore we could not follow the ruling to stop the bidding. We already had completed the bidding! I have every confidence that this matter will be cleared up very soon, so I want to tell everyone not to worry. I respect the laws of my country very highly, and the rulings of our courts. I intend to handle this matter entirely within our legal system. Nothing will cause me to lose focus from my goal of protecting the sites of Egypt.

  

I tend to be suspicious of some efforts being tried by museums to make themselves more “participatory” — today’s buzzword for increasing attendance, especially by younger audiences. My doubt stem from the fact that many of the initiatives seem to me to be outside the core mission. They may attract people, but not to art.

But here’s one I can get behind: On May 8, the Frick Collection* has scheduled a “Sunday Sketch” session. Between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m., people are invited to sketch in the Frick’s Garden Court and to visit the museum’s special Rembrandt exhibition.

Sunday Sketch is open to everyone over 10 years old, and no reservations are necessary. It’s scheduled once or twice a month, pegged to changing exhibitions.

Before receiving an email with a Sunday Sketch listing, I knew that many museums allow sketching in their galleries, but I wasn’t aware of that some regularly invite people in for it, as part of their educational mission. And in another plus at the Frick, the email said “Materials will be provided” free, with museum admission.   

So I checked out a few other museums to see how common this kind of participation with art is. I searched for “sketch” on various websites, perused their “events” listings and sometimes looked under “education” on the site. It’s not a foolproof methodology, but here’s what I discovered:

Museums that have sketch sessions similar to those of Frick’s (some include the provision of materials; others, not) include the Metropolitan Museum,* the Museum of Fine Arts/Boston (unclear how frequently); the Museum of Fine Arts/Houston; the Minneapolis Institute of Arts (classes); and the Peabody Essex Museum.

And among those that don’t (or none signaled on their website) are the Los Angeles County Museum of Art; the St. Louis Art Museum (the “make a mess” family program does not count); Denver Art Museum (sketching allowed, but no listing for group sessions or materials or guidance); the Seattle Art Museum; the Nelson-Atkins Museum (just kids’ workshops); the Cleveland Museum of Art (has a class series, with fee); the New Orleans Museum of Art; the Art Institute of Chicago; the High, and the Brooklyn Museum* (paid classes only).

These were random choices by me, but I tried to survey all parts of the country.

So the question is, why not? If museum experts are pushing museums to have more interaction with users and to provide more opportunities for social interaction, why not extend more invitations to sketch in the galleries? It’s one good way to learn about art.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Frick Collection

*Disclosure: I consult to a foundation that supports these museums.

Christine Anagnos is the new executive director of the  Association of Art Museum Directors, promoted from the deputy slot to the head.

Kaywin Feldman, AAMD’s president and director of the Minneapolis Institite of Arts, made the announcement in her April President’s Message.

Here’s what she said:

Hired in 1995, Christine has worked in various capacities for the Association of Art Museum Directors, which is the primary professional organization for 200 of North America’s leading art museum directors. Since 2002, she has served as the Deputy Director and chief administrator, responsible for overseeing and implementing the organization’s budget, finances, operations, and programs, including its annual surveys of museum salaries and statistics which serve as the industry’s standard for benchmarking data. Prior to working for AAMD, Christine ran an adventure travel company specializing in travel to Ecuador, Peru, and the Galapagos Islands. Christine majored in Psychology at Northeastern University in Boston, MA. She lives in New York with her husband and 6-year-old son.

This means, I believe, that whichever director occupies the president’s job will be the spokesperson for the group — not the executive director.

You’ll recall that Janet Landay left this job in February, though it that escaped notice until early March. She hadn’t been there long, just two years, and I understand that there was both disappointment about her handling of the job and some personality differences with Feldman.

Landay had worked in museums, and presumably expected to speak for the group sometimes — as Mimi Gaudieri, her predecessor had. But there was some “who’s on first” aspect to the AAMD in the last few years. In recent years, AAMD became less open to outsiders like the press, and less of the go-to place for comment on general museum issues — partly because what was said was either party-line predictable or too little, too late.

Agnagnos, I am hoping, will be more open to sharing information with the press, for one thing.

One director I spoke with, however, says the AAMD board is following the strategic plan it adopted a while ago, and there’ll be no noticeable deviations from that.  

 

Uh oh. A couple of weeks ago, when I wrote about the ham-handed opening of Carlos Slim’s Soumaya Museum in Mexico City, I noted that we shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth — and said that, with regard to the museum and collection itself, I awaited reviews from people who had seen it in person.

Now those comments are starting to come in. And they are bad. I recently spoke with two people who made the trek to Mexico City, and both were negative about both the building and the collection.

Then, earlier this week, Benjamin Genocchio, editor of Art + Auction, published his review on ArtInfo. It began, tragically:

There is something tragic about the Museo Soumaya, the spectacular-looking private museum in Mexico City that opened to the public on March 28. It is owned and operated by the Carlos Slim Foundation and contains the collection of the world’s richest man, Mexican business magnate Carlos Slim. With so much money at his disposal I was expecting to see something extraordinary. But unfortunately it falls short.

And on many levels, as Genocchio goes on to detail. Though many of the galleries are only partly installed, he said those he saw were largely populated with second-rate works by Impressionists and Modern masters. His bottom line: “a vanity museum gone right in some areas, but in too many other aspects gone wrong.”

I would be surprised if there’s divergence of opinion on this in the art world. Then again, the public may love Soumaya…

UPDATED, on 4/18/2011: opinion from Art in America doesn’t disagree.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of Getty Images

 

For a long time now, when people think of museum architects, the first names that come to mind are Frank Gehry and Renzo Piano. In the past, also Richard Meier. Of course, there’ve been others (some whose buildings haven’t been built), but still…

I am not along in thinking that some of their buildings are overrated.

That’s why I was pleased to see that the 2011 European Union Prize for Contemporary Architecture – Mies van der Rohe Award has gone to the Neues Museum in Berlin, whose 19th century building was restored and recreated by David Chipperfield of the U.K.

This prize is given every other year and comes with a 60,000 Euro award. From afar, the Neues Museum looks to be a good choice.

I’m no architecture expert, but given the deficiencies of some recent museum construction projects perhaps Chipperfield should have a higher place on the go-to list of museum architects here. Some smart art-world people I know think that so; they’d like to see more of his work on these shores.  

Chipperfield has done some projects in the U.S.: the master site plan for the Menil Collection in Houston, the Saint Louis Art Museum expansion, the Figge Art Museum, the Anchorage Museum expansion, among them. But most of his work is abroad. His Turner Contemporary gallery in Margate, England, opens on Saturday.

Announcing the EU Mies winner, Androulla Vassiliou, the European Commissioner for Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth, said “The Neues Museum brings the past and present together in an stunning mix of contemporary architecture, restoration and art.”

And Mohsen Mostafavi, the chair of the jury, said: “…Rarely have an architect and client succeeded in undertaking a work of such historic importance and complexity; especially one that involves both preservation and new building. The project raises and addresses many aesthetic, ethical, and technical issues. It is an exemplary demonstration of what collaboration can achieve in the context of contemporary European architectural practice.”

Says the release:

The original Neues Museum, designed by Friedrich August Stüler, was built in the mid-19th century. The building was severely damaged in the Second World War and reconstruction began in 2003, with the aim of restoring the site to its former glory. David Chipperfield, who worked on the project in collaboration with fellow British architect Julian Harrap, adopted a dynamicapproach in his restoration. Rather than attempting to conceal the difference between the old and new elements, the past and present are beautifully combined to create an unforgettable building with multiple layers.

Some 343 buildings were nominated for this award and the Emerging Architect award, which went to Ramon Bosch and Bet Capdeferro for the Collage House in Girona, Spain.

Photo credit: Courtesy of the Neues Museum/European Union Prize for Contemporary Architecture – Mies van der Rohe Award