Real Clear Arts

Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture

Museum Funding-Fundraising

It’s Far From Over Yet: LA-MOCA’s Independence Campaign

It’s a journalistic convention: after an election, the emergence from bankruptcy, or some other momentous change, we often write headlines that say something along the lines of “Now Comes The Hard Part.” It’s common because it usually happens to be true.

JeffreySorosEarlier today, the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles announced that it had received pledges from donors that would place its current endowment above $60 million (versus $23 million earlier this year), and that it was building toward a goal of $100 million. You can see various versions of the story here — from the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Here is MOCA’s own press release.

The fundraising campaign is being called “MOCA Independence.”  In the release, Jeffrey Soros (pictured, left), the board’s president, said, “The financial support we have already raised demonstrates the commitment of the board to ensuring that MOCA remains a world-class independent contemporary art museum, and we call on others to join in this campaign.”

It’s great that this board has finally stepped up to the plate. But now comes the hard part — really. Not only do the trustees have a long way to go to get to $100 million, but that will generate only about $5 million a year if the trustees are lucky. MOCA’s budget is about $14 million annually. Getting about a third of your revenue from the endowment isn’t bad — many museums don’t achieve that — but it means that trustees will have to keep opening their wallets in annual contributions.

Plus, even if trustees are intent on turning down the merger offer from Michael Govan at the LA County Museum of Art, they still must deal with Eli Broad and they still must heal the divisions in the board. Not to mention addressing the directorial question – in my opinion, Jeffrey Deitch is a bad match for the job, part of the problem, not the solution.

So, thanks to the trustees who have pledged more than $35 million in the last few weeks. But now comes the hard part.

 

 

 

Bread And Circuses: A Coup At The Corcoran?

Even if you disliked Nicholas Sarkozy, in one way you couldn’t help rooting for him to win the presidency of France a few year back because he was so entertaining. Loud, outspoken, a shameless self-promoter who liked to challenge convention, he was great to write about and read about.

ReynoldsThere’s more than an element of Sarkozy in Wayne Reynolds, the brash Washingtonian who wants to be chairman of the Corcoran Gallery of Art. Late last week, he began emailing potential supporters of  his quest with an invitation to an open bar reception on the top floor of the ­Hay-Adams Hotel next Friday, which he is paying for and organizing with the Save the Corcoran group. The recipients included the Corcoran’s students, faculty and staff.

“Do I have a choice?” Reynolds [told a Washington Post reporter]. “Harry Hopper [the current chair] has told the board not to talk to me, not to meet with me. It’s not really a reflection of me. It’s a reflection of the way they operate their board. . . . We’re staging a revolution. ”

He also told the paper’s David Montgomery that he will pay the $10,000 cost of the party, and that he’s worried that the 300-person capacity of the banquet room might be exceeded.

In the Post article, Reynolds elaborated a little on his plans — and here’s where the worry comes in:

Reynolds says he will explain at the reception his vision for what he calls a national Corcoran Center for Creativity. He would expand the college and focus the museum on digital art, photography and contemporary art. Most controversially, he proposes creating an endowment of “a few hundred million dollars” in large part by deaccessioning — selling — a fraction of the collection that is rarely displayed.

…Reynolds says that a respected scholar, familiar with the collection, has pledged to consult on deaccessioning and has given assurances that such a sum could be raised without sacrificing great paintings.

Not likely.  Apparently Reynolds named the scholar — or Montgomery discovered it in another way — but the person in question declined to be identified. I’ll bet. I’d sure like to know his/her fee arrangement, too.

Also, if the Corcoran under Reynolds focuses on the three areas he mentioned, what’s to become of the 102 pre-1945 American paintings featured in the 2011 Corcoran catalogue? (Have a look here.)

One part of Reynolds’s view — “It’s shameful what’s happened there” — is correct. If he goads the current board into action, that would be a good thing. If he somehow wins, the East Coast will have its own version of the mess at LA-MOCA.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Washington Post

Thursday Is The Day: Annual NYT Museum Section

In my opinion, museums do not get enough coverage in newspapers and magazines, so if a lot of it comes at once, in the annual New York Times section on museums, well, fine by me. That section should arrive in your paper tomorrow. I have three stories in it this year, and I will have more to say about each of the subjects in the coming days. Meantime, though, I will simply list them here:

Sargent watercolor1) In Denver, Exhibits Interweave Genres — that’s the headline, but it doesn’t really say what the story is about. As you may know, the Denver Art Museum has two buildings, with the older Ponti building containing more of the permanent collection and the newer Libeskind building presenting more of the special exhibitions. Visitors usually don’t go to both. So director Christophe Heinrich devised a solution — a campus-wide theme for this summer in which all, or most, curatorial departments are presenting an exhibition. This summer, it’s called SPUN.

2) Country Music Temple Stays In Financial Tune — This is about the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum, and its unique financial model. The Hall — which is an accredited museum, typically gets around 80% of its annual budget from earned income. Discuss: What’s the applicability to art museums? We will.

3) Examining Sargent’s Shift From Oils to Watercolors — You know some of these watercolors, but not all, and you probably don’t know the story of how the Brooklyn Museum, first, and then the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, purchased Sargent’s ground-breaking watercolors in bulk and how they came to be united for the first time in a traveling exhibition this year. Sargent is getting the illustration for this post — that’s his In a Medici Villa at left.

You can also see here a summary of the upcoming exhibitions around the country that I’ve chosen as noteworthy for NYT readers.

More soon.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Brooklyn Museum

Membership Does Have Its Privileges — Here’s A New One At The Met

MetBalc2Several days ago, I met a curator of the Metropolitan Museum* for lunch, and she suggested that we meet in the new balcony lounge. I’d never heard of the new balcony lounge, but I eagerly said yes. While the Met has several places to eat, the two most convenient ones — in the Petrie Court and in the American wing — are often crowded, and the noisy ambiance of the basement cafeteria doesn’t usually appeal to me. The Members dining room is very nice, but formal and besides you have to take an elevator to get to it (I am impatient).

The new balcony lounge turns out to be a place restricted to members at the sustaining level and above — that is, donors who contribute more than $550 a year.

So the point is not that the Met has a new restaurant. It’s that the Met has a dozen categories of membership and, like other other museums, it is trying to figure out how to differentiate among them and in process encourage those who can pay more to do so. Sustaining members there are invited to view exhibitions in the evening followed by receptions, and they are entitled to reciprocal membership with 15 other museums.

MetBalc3Now they have a place of their own, with light snacks, beverages and reading material. The breakfast, lunch and evening menus are posted online, btw.

The pictures here show what it looks like (btw, it’s in a space that used to be the store, so no galleries were sacrificed). Given the membership fee, it’s supposed to feel sophisticated, and I guess it does. The food I tried was just fair, but I may have picked the wrong thing. The seats are comfortable, and I can envision stopping in between exhibitions to rest.

After eating, I chatted a little with the two women who were manning the desk, and they said people have been popping in to ask about it, with a few increasing their membership category on the spot.

I don’t know if it’s worth that — the lower category, Friend, costs $275 and membership for those withing a 200-mile radius starts at $70. But I do think it’s a worthy goal to entice members to give more. Food has always been a way to people’s hearts and wallets.

Photo Credits:  © Judith H. Dobrzynski

* I consult to a foundation that supports the Met

 

“Save The Corcoran” Itself Needs Saving

Since I wrote here two days ago about the strange, even silly goings-on at Save the Corcoran, I’ve learned a thing or two that only makes the group’s stance worse.

CorcoranA brief recap: Save the Corcoran endorsed Wayne Reynolds for chairman of the board of the Corcoran, even though he plans to sell off the collection to pay the bills for a plan to expand the Corcoran College of Art and Design, boost the focus on technology and new media, as well as “traditional arts disciplines.” Aand even though he wants to “de-emphasize the gallery” because it can’t compete with “the free, federally funded galleries in town.” Those quotes come from an article in the Washington Post.

In a press release, STC quoted Terrance Shanahan, a Corcoran member and a leader of the group as buying into Reynolds’s vision and saying, “We can no longer sit on the sidelines and let the current board meet in committees and subcommittees while the coffers drain and potential supporters dwindle. The Corcoran’s future starts now. And it starts with Wayne.”

Now I learn from a couple of sources that none of the members on the group’s Advisory Committee were consulted about the endorsement of Reynolds! They weren’t even informed of it in advance!

Linda Crocker Simmons, curator emerita of the Corcoran and an advisory committee member, is the only one going public (at the moment), but she is not alone. Here is what she wrote to me:

Thank you for pointing out what is wrong with Wayne Reynolds’ plan for the Corcoran.I would like to state that although I have been on the advisory board of the STC group I was not consulted or given any prior notice about their endorsement of Wayne Reynolds or his proposed plans for the Corcoran including de-emphasizing the museum and selling much of the art collection. I do not know who the senior advisor is who would work with Reynolds to select the portion of the collection to sell. The continued deaccessioning from the collection horrifies me. The present Corcoran Board has very little art museum experience, a non-professional director, and no full-time curator for European art so there is no one to guard the hen house except the foxes. The Corcoran has begun to eat itself alive, a form of institutional cannibalization. Too tragic. Reynolds offers nothing new to the equation. I too hope for a third choice.

Another source close to STC told me that the Advisory Committee members who objected to Reynolds’s plan were not invited to recent dinner with him and Save the Corcoran leadership.

The Advisory Committee includes many people knowledgeable about art, museums and the art world. What’s the point of having them if they are not called on to advise?

Shame on Save the Corcoran — not only for endorsing Reynolds, but also for the way they did it and they way they shut down dissent.