Real Clear Arts

Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture

Archives for April 2013

Art Exhibitions And The Movies: Problems And Prospects

A couple of weeks ago, I had a chat with Phil Grabsky, the British filmmaker who has started “Exhibition: Great Art on Screen,” a series of what he calls “event films” that will bring some of the very best art exhibitions to the public via films analogous to the Metropolitan Opera’s simulcasts (and post-produced filmings of live opera, as La Scala, among other opera companies, does it).

manet-exhibitiononscreenGrabsky made Leonardo Live last year, and I mentioned his new effort in passing here at the end of January, while writing about the opening of Manet: Portraying Life at the Royal Academy in London. His film of the same name as the exhibition premiers this coming Thursday, Apr. 11,  on about 1,000 movie screens in 28 countries, including the U.S. (You can see a list of the countries, with links to the cinemas, here, except, oddly for the U.S., for which you should go here.)

My talk with Grabsky was for an article in The Wall Street Journal published last week. In it, I describe what he’s doing, mention his next two efforts in the series (on Munch in Oslo come Juner and Vermeer, again at the National Gallery in London, in October), and discuss why, although he corrected many of the criticisms about Leonardo Live, he still faces problems inherent to art exhibitions that operas do not have (they already have a narrative). Manet, and his upcoming efforts, however, do have a big plus: those high-definition lingerings on the paintings. As I write in the Journal, “…Mr. Grabsky often holds the camera on a painting, full screen, for as long as 30 seconds. That’s much longer than most people spend with a painting at an exhibit.”

Let me explore that, and a few other issues, here that I couldn’t get into in the Journal piece.

As museum professionals know, most people spend only a few seconds with each painting in an exhibition, and even at the Leonardo exhibition at London’s National Gallery last year (see here and here) — where the NG, trying to avoid what “gallery rage,” rationed the number of timed tickets sold to 180 per half-hour, much lower than its normal limit of 230 entrances per half-hour — officials figured that people spent, on average, just 18 seconds with Leonardo’s paintings, according to Grabsky.

Will these shows succeed, and should they? One editor I work with declined to publish an article on “Exhibition: Great Art on Screen” because, he said, he didn’t want to discourage people from going to see the real thing. Is that a worry? I asked Nicholas Penny, the director of the National Gallery, about that and about why he likes these films. Here’s what he wrote back:

The films can help people understand the work behind an exhibition which in turn promotes awareness of the special character of these events – some of their limitations as well as the unique opportunity they provide. I’m not in the least worried that viewing the films will become a substitute for going to the exhibition.

Me, neither. I think they’ll encourage people to visit museums — afterall, one reason people have switched from the real opera to the simulcasts is the cost differential. For Grabsky’s art movies, the cost is about the same. Second, there’s no way I am going to get to that Munch show this years — the 150th anniversary of his birth — I simply won’t be in Oslo. I suspect I’ll face that same travel barrier for most of Grabsky’s chosen exhibitions.

GrabskyGrabsky told me that most museums are enthusiastic. While not all of those he contacted have agreed to meet, of those that have, he
said, “None has so far said anything but ‘I think it’s a great idea and I want to be part of it.’ ” There is something it for them, aside from exposure: Grabsky plans to share a small percentage of any profits he makes with the exhibition’s museum, though it is very unlikely that dollar number will be substantial. (It will never, imho, reach the Met’s success, which last year the series generated $11 million in revenue for the Met, according to a recent article in the Journal.)

Here’s another reason people may want to watch: changing technology. Grabsky told me that digital camera technology he’s deploying for the Vermeer film is four times as good as the high-definition technology used for Leonardo and Manet.

In any case, Grabsky seems hellbent, a man on a mission. “In the beginning we have to go with big-name artists,” he said. But, he added, “We want to get to a point where people say ‘Exhibition is doing Bernini. I don’t know who Bernini is, but I love Exhibition, so I’m going.’ ”

That would be something.

Photo Credits: Courtesy of Phil Grabsky

 

 

Exhibitions I Wish I Had Seen — Or Could Still See

Let’s talk positively (the news can be so negative). Among the riches at American museums at the moment, here are three innovative or unique ones I’d really like to see:

1955.1079SaucerVersoBackstories: The Other Side of Art at the Clark Art Institute – Most museums visitors, I’d wager, don’t think much about what’s on the back of the art thery’re staring at. Too bad, as this exhibition demonstrates. The backs often show how or when something was made, whose collections they’ve belong to, or which galleries/auction houses have handled them, how they have been cared for and the changes they may have undergone. The Clark went into its permanent collection and found paintings, works on paper, sculpture, silver, and porcelain with interesting backsides, and is displaying them mostly on pedestals. They span five centuries and include works by Durer, van Gogh, Sevres porcelain made for Catherine the Great (verso, shown at right), Nolde, and Memling. When the exhibition was announced last December, Michael Conforti, the Clark’s director explained its origin:

The acquisition of a two-sided painting by Giovanni Battista Cremonini spurred our interest in the backs of other objects in our collection. As the curatorial team began to think about the objects in a different way, Backstories was born.

Kudos. If you, like me, can’t get to Williamstown before the show closes on Apr. 21, you’ll get a flavor of the show at the link above — it has several pages and examples and, very handily, a checklist.

vatican2Objects of Belief from the Vatican: Art of Africa, Oceania, and the Americas at the deYoung Museum in San Francisco — At the Vatican Museums, many of us are too busy marveling at the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and the Raphael rooms to get to the Ethnocological Museum there. This exhibition shows what a mistake that is. For the first time, the Vatican has sent 39 of its treasures, drawn from a collection that numbers more than 80,000 objects from indigenous cultures in Asia, Oceania, Africa, and the Americas, to the United States. Many are unique. According to the press release:

Highlights include two masks and three shrine carvings obtained in 1691 by Fray Francisco Romero in Colombia’s Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta; three figurative sculptures representing the gods Tu [one, at left] and Tupo sent by the first missionary in Mangareva to Pope Gregory XVI in 1837; and a 15th-century stone sculpture created in Mexico of the Aztec god Quetzalcoatl.

There are paintings on bark and stone from Australia, and on silk from China and Japan; wooden statues from Polynesia and stone ones from pre-Columbian civilizations; feather-works from Papa New Guinea and majolica from the Middle East. It remains on view until Sept. 8, while the Vatican museum is under renovation (reopening next year).

PiranesiOf course you know Piranesi well, why go to the San Diego Museum of Art, where Piranesi, Rome and the Arts of Design opened on Saturday? Because this Piranesi show is different. It begins with 300 original prints from the renowned collection of the Fondazione Giorgio Cini in Venice, and it goes on to offer modern-day interpretations using “new technologies such as video, photography, and digital modeling.” That means that a vase or teapot or fireplace, say, drawn by Piranesi, is present in the flesh, so to speak — in three dimensions. According to the museum:

These never-before-seen and never-before-crafted objects take center stage in the exhibition and attest to the creative intellect of Piranesi’s designs. In addition, the exhibition brings to life Piranesi’s most famous works, the Carceri (Prisons), in the form of a virtual reality 3-D installation.

Somewhere a 3-D printer must be involved. Already shown in Madrid and Barcelona, the exhibition has gotten rave reviews in Europe. It’s in San Diego until July 7.

Photo Credits: Courtesy of the Clark, the deYoung and the San Diego museums, top to bottom.

 

 

Corcoran Board Makes A Decision — UPDATE TWO

It’s happening as previously suggested in many places: The Corcoran’s board plans to merge its art school with the University of Maryland — or, “join forces,” as people in the know appear to prefer.

Trustees are apparently meeting this very afternoon to approve the deal, and the announcement is expected around 4 p.m., following the board meeting. Here’s the item in Washingtonian.

Further evidence, “the Corcoran community” will “will have an opportunity to meet with Mary Ann Rankin, Senior Vice President and Provost of the University of Maryland” on Monday. She’ll be at the downtown campus to meet with students, “learn more about you and the Corcoran, answer your questions, and have a discussion about the process of developing an academic partnership.” That was the message this noontime from Catherine Armour, the Corcoran’s Provost and Chief Academic Officer.

Trouble is, the whole thing on Monday lasts just 45 minutes — from 1 to 1:45 p.m. And it’s mediated — questions are to be sent in advance via email. Not a way to start establishing trust — it should go on as long as there’s a single (good) question in the room.

I guess one can’t have everything. Now to the future of the Gallery.

UPDATE: Looks as if the students are having none of this. They protesting, set to gather at 2 p.m. today, outside the trustees meeting, at Paul Hastings law offices on 15th Street NW in the District. They have three demands:

1 – Implement structural changes with the goal of creating transparent and democratic decision-making process.

2 – Demand the immediate resignation of Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Harry F. Hopper III and Director Fred Bollerer.

3 – Appoint Wayne Reynolds as Chairman of the Board of Trustees.

I think they are misguided on No. 3.

UPDATE 2: Here’s the official Washington Post story on the matter. The nut grafs:

The Corcoran’s board of trustees voted 13-to-0 Wednesday afternoon to sign a preliminary agreement to explore a long-term partnership with Maryland that could include shared faculty; joint student degrees; cooperation on developing new courses; pairing interdisciplinary teams of artists, engineers and computer scientists on projects;  and expansion of the Corcoran College of Art and Design by several hundred students, Corcoran and Maryland officials said….

…A Maryland official said that the university would be willing to commit unspecified resources to the partnership. But before the partnership takes effect, the parties must hammer out a more detailed legal agreement, which could be signed this summer.

…Under the agreement, Maryland would also be able to nominate trustees and thus influence the direction of the Corcoran. The Corcoran board has 13 voting members and four unfilled openings.

…At the same time, the Corcoran made three other significant announcements:

It will exhibit a number of the paintings from the National Gallery of Art during the three-year period, beginning in January, when the East Wing is closed for renovation. Hopper said the Corcoran has room in the upstairs galleries where traveling exhibits normally are displayed because there are gaps in the traveling exhibit schedule. Corcoran curators would curate the works, which would probably be from the post-World War II period, in keeping with the Corcoran’s modern-contemporary focus, Hopper said…

…Corcoran also announced the appointment of a new, temporary director to replace the retiring Fred Bollerer. She is Peggy Loar, who until recently was director of the National Museum of Qatar. Loar will serve at the Corcoran for at least several months as the partnership with Maryland is established, Hopper said. A permanent director will be named later.

Finally, the Corcoran released a “Strategic Framework for a New Corcoran,” an approximately 10-page document (also to be posted online Wednesday evening) that is the distilled fruit of two years of research and some $1.5 million in consultant fees. It is the long-awaited new roadmap for an institution that has been casting about for an updated vision for decades, as it lagged behind publicly funded museum rivals in Washington.

The framework, in full, is here. Read for yourself, but on first glance it seems to general to mean much, at least to me.

 

Not A Skeleton: Another Museum Discovery In Storage

CanalettoI wish I had closets like this. The news recently emerged from Denver that Timothy Standring, the curator who organized Becoming van Gogh, was rummaging around in the museum’s storage bins a while ago and pulled out not a plum but a Canaletto. As related last week in the Los Angeles Times:

It all started in 2000 (actually a couple centuries earlier, but that’s getting ahead of the story) when a canvas in dreadful condition called “Venice: The Molo from the Bacino di S. Marco” was bequeathed to the Denver Art Museum from a deceased local collector’s foundation.

The accompanying paperwork was vague and referred to it as “from the studio” of Giovanni Antonio Canal — known as Canaletto — an important Italian painter in the mid-1700s.

Because it was assumed to be a student rendering, the painting was relegated to storage. And obscurity.

Seven years later, Timothy Standring, curator of painting and sculpture at the Denver museum, ran across the piece while doing routine inventory. It was so discolored and coated in grime, he later joked, it looked as if it had been “in someone’s home who smoked Marlboros for 50 years.”

Still, he saw something in it, that prompted an investigation — though there was no record of this painting. He showed it to “Charles Beddington, one of the world’s foremost Canaletto scholars,” who authenticated it — pronouncing it “one of the artist’s earliest undocumented works,” from 1724. Now cleaned and conserved, it’s on view at the museum.

In July, 2010, I wrote here about the Yale Art Gallery, where former curator John Marciari, had discovered a painting by Velasquez, named The Education of the Virgin, in a closet. It has been given to the museum in 1925, but being poor condition and damaged by water, it was sent to storage, and remained undisplayed until Marciari, as part of a review of the collection in 2004, discovered it — he studied it, identified it, and published it as a Velasquez.

Less than a year later, the Brooklyn Museum announced that a painting that had entered its collection as a bequest in 1932 as an early self-portrait by Gerrit Dou, which was later downgraded, had been rediscovered in storage and actually was a Dou. Richard Aste, the museum’s curator of European art, had also begun a review of his department’s holdings. Fascinated by the little portrait, Aste decided to investigate and his suspicions were confirmed by other experts.

I know it takes time and a lot of effort to review collections, and some museums are doing it (here’s one example). But stories like these always make me wonder what other gold is there in those storage bins?

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Denver Art Museum

 

UK Museums Learn How To Ask For Money

British art groups are, like their counterparts here, experiencing economic difficulties, not least there because the government, including local councils, have slashed the amount of aid it provides.

imagesPartly in response to a comment made last year by culture secretary Maria Miller — that arts groups must “get better at asking, not just receiving,” 11 museums and theatres in Britain have developed a new smart phone app, designed to trigger on-site giving — while people are appreciative of what they are seeing. It’s a new National Funding Scheme, and it charges each participating institution 4% to be part of it. There are more details about the scheme in this press release.

According to a report in last Wednesday’s Independent, the day the app went live, the groups — which include the National Portrait Gallery and the Victoria and Albert Museum —

hope to play on “emotionally charged” culture lovers and persuade them to support exhibits and performances with a touch of a button on their mobile phone….

…In the participating venues will be a panel next to an exhibit, or in the auditorium explaining the cause highlighted. Each case has a unique code which can be texted in from any mobile phone, or scanned in using android or apple smartphones.

This is a six-month “trial run,” The Independent said. If you go here, you can see that the National Funding Scheme also suggests ways arts enthusiasts might be otherwise involved, doing simple things like spreading the word. (While I was on the site, I clicked on the “Culture Juice” link to see what that was all about — it has a few lessons in social marketing, the best one of which is about email marketing.)

I think this scheme has to be done with care. A really big “panel” asking for donations could be offputting. Putting one before and after might also be obtrusive.

Two years ago, though, the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston put a collection box near Chihuly’s Lime Green Icicle Tower and activated its first mobile giving scheme, allowing people to give $10 with a text message. Many other causes now ask for donations by text.

So it can be done well. Also, I don’t see why museums can’t do this on their own, without a national scheme. Maybe some have already. I don’t think it’s that hard to set up.