Real Clear Arts

Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture

People

Peter Gelb Reverses Course

I’ve been pondering all day what I should add, if anything, to the egregious decision by Peter Gelb to pressure Opera News so much that it voluntarily decided to stop reviewing the Met’s productions (a call made in “collaboration with” Gelb, he said). But what else could editor F. Paul Driscoll do? Promise all positive reviews?

Now I can add something:

Gelb has reversed course. Here’s the statement I just received:

In view of the outpouring of reaction from opera fans about the recent decision to discontinue Met performance reviews in Opera News, the Met has decided to reverse this new editorial policy. From their postings on the internet, it is abundantly clear that opera fans would miss reading reviews about the Met in Opera News. Ultimately, the Met is here to serve the opera-loving public and has changed its decision because of the passionate response of the fans.

The Met and the Met Opera Guild, the publisher of Opera News, have been in discussions about the role of the Guild and how its programs and activities can best fulfill its mission of supporting the Metropolitan Opera. These discussions have included the role of reviews in Opera News, and whether they served that mission.  While the Met believed it did not make sense for a house organ that is published by the Guild and financed by the Met to continue to review Met productions, it has become clear that the reviews generate tremendous excitement and interest and will continue to have a place in Opera News.

More thoughts soon.

UPDATE: I won’t belabor this, but Dan Wakin’s Page One story in today’s New York Times mentioned two other instances of Gelb’s interference with the media and, worse, that the outlets in question — WQXR and a blogger — complied with his wishes and removed the posts that Gelb had protested. What were they thinking? A loss of ad dollars (ok, support dollars) for WQXR? That’s a real blemish on its record as well as that of its owner, WNYC. The blogger gets more sympathy — it’s hard for an individual to face down a powerful organization like the Met.

But what was Gelb thinking? A while back, Alex Ross wrote a very critical piece (mostly about the Ring)  in The New Yorker, too. It concluded: “The current direction of the Met remains dispiriting.”

Did Gelb dare call David Remnick?

I hope the Met board, specifically Chairman Ann Ziff and President and Chief Executive Officer Kevin W. Kennedy, are having a serious conversation with him about intimidation.

What’s The Connection Between The Barnes And Hitler?

I’ve always opposed the move of the Barnes Foundation into Philadelphia, and mostly — but not unwaveringly — agreed with the Friends of the Barnes Foundation. But the Friends have goofed, I think, in a very distasteful way. It’s time to call them on it.

Last week, they sent me a link to a “New Barnes video” on YouTube. It’s not a snippet — it’s nearly four minutes long and someone, or some bodies, spent time on this. It uses an old film of a raging Hitler — apparently from a German film called “The Downfall” and which I gather has been used many times “in jest” — trying to pull off a great art heist. When he loses his own officers, Hitler decides to call the Pew Trust, which helped orchestrate the Barnes move.

Given all the good reviews the new Barnes has been getting (it opened with a trumpet fanfare), it’s clear the Friends are feeling low, but standing pat. On Friday night, during the opening gala, and on Saturday night, they had planned to wear black and stand in protest at the new Barnes to “witnesses to the destruction of the Barnes Foundation.” Presumably they did, though I’ve seen no mention of that in the press –another slight by hometown newspapers, which back the move.

And, the Friends have been fined by the court, probably unfairly, and are still protesting and fighting that.

But the Hitler video isn’t funny and is way out of proportion.

Last week, I suggested to one of the Friends, “Maybe it’s time to call it a day?” Their efforts, it seems to me, have nowhere to go. The Barnes has moved, and it’s not going back to Merion.

“Calling it a day depends mostly on an assessment of whether or not there is any justice to be had and the risks of putting the system to the test,” she wrote back.

That is true. Someone, in some court, may agree that they should not have to pay penalties for using the courts. I just wish they had remained on the high road. What’s the connection between the Barnes and Hitler? None, absolutely none.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Friends of the Barnes Foundation

 

Richard Amstrong Gets A Chair — At His Old Museum

To my mind, the creation of an endowed curatorial position at a museum doesn’t make news. But here’s an exception: on Friday, the Carnegie Museum of Art announced that an endowment had been created for the position of curator of contemporary art. Lynn Zelevansky also announced the appointment of the museum’s Associate Curator of Contemporary Art Dan Byers (below left), who is co-curating the 2013 Carnegie International, to this new position.

Then came the twist: the chair has been named in honor of another museum’s director — Richard Armstrong (below right), director of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and Foundation and previous head of the Carnegie.

It’s a hearty compliment to Armstrong, who left Pittsburgh for his current post in 2008 after 12 years as director of the museum and four as a curator there. When he left, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazettequoted museum board Chairman William E. Hunt saying “Physically and financially, it’s in as good a shape as it has been in a very long time,” praised his expansion of the museum as well as his people skills, and added, “We have a world class group of curators. He’s done a tremendous job with his management group as well as his educators. He has also made strategic and intelligent acquisitions.”

The Carnegie didn’t say how much money has been raised for the chair or from whom. But there’s one clue on the website: Announcing the fourth annual Art in Bloom — “a four-day celebration of timeless art and fresh flowers, presented by the Women’s Committee of the Carnegie Museum of Art” — it said that proceeds from it will “benefit the Women’s Committee dedicated gift for the Richard Armstrong Curator of Modern and Contemporary Art Endowed Chair.” That gift has been disclosed as $500,000, though it’s unclear if all has been raised or not. Or where else money for this endowment is coming from.

In any case, I can’t think of a similar gesture toward a living former director. (Let me know if there are others.)

Armstrong’s tenure at the Guggenheim has had its ups and downs, it compliments and criticisms, which is to be expected. Here’s hoping that it ends, whenever that is, with as good a feeling in New York as Pittsburgh has for his tenure there.  

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Post-Gazette (top)

 

The Market Pays Tribute To Ernst Beyeler — Again

Master dealer Ernst Beyeler died more than two years ago, but he’s still receiving tributes — not least in the auction results achieved at Christie’s last Thursday. 

Beyeler is known as “Europe’s pre-eminent dealer in modern art,” as his obituary in The New York Times put it in February, 2010, but he was more than that; he was a true connoisseur, with a “discerning eye [and] refined taste” in many categories. 

That was amply demonstrated again at Christie’s sale of the Arts of Africa, Oceana and the Americas (sometimes known as tribal art), which was announced in mid-April. That announcement, in part, read:

The genesis of Beyeler’s tribal art odyssey occurred in the late 1950’s. He held his first exhibition of African art in 1958, during a time when ‘tribal’ works of art were reaching an international stage in the post-War art world.  He maintained his interest in tribal art over the years as someone who clearly understood it as key to the language of Modern art.  The African, Oceanic and Pre-Columbian works of art from Beyeler’s collection demonstrates [sic] the continued relevance of tribal art within the contemporary art world today.  Many of the sculptures offered in the sale, such as the Pre-Columbian works of art, lined Beyeler’s wall since the early 1960’s.

What caught my eye was the results. In a sale that totaled $1.6 million, 98% of the lots sold, and 100% of the lots Beyeler owned sold — at prices far above their estimates. Of the Top Ten lots, nine were owned by, sold by or exhibited by Beyeler. Let’s look more closely at them (in order of sale, not value brought), with their presale estimate first, followed by the sale price including the buyer’s premium in bold:

  • Lot 1*: $3,000 to $5,000; $116,500 (pictured above right)
  • Lot 6: $80,000 to $120,000; $314,500
  • Lot 8: $20,000 to $30,000; $60,000 (pictured below right)
  • Lot 15*: $8,000 to $12,000; $266,500 (pictured above left)
  • Lot 20: $10,000 to $13,000; $47,500
  • Lot 22: $5,000 to $8,000; $47,500
  • Lot 23: $30,000 to $50,000; $62,500
  • Lot 24: $30,000 to $40,000; $60,000
  • Lot 36: $6,000 to $9,000: $47,500

In the Top Ten, only Lot 31, estimated at $20,000 to $40,000 and fetching $80,500, didn’t have Beyeler’s fingerprints on it – 90% of the Top Ten. In a sale of 51 lots, I counted 36 with a Beyeler connection (using Christie’s search function) — that’s just over 70%. But look at those prices, too — multiples of the estimates.  Two of the pieces, a Bidjogo mask (lot 15) and Aboriginal shield (lot 1), marked above with an asterisk, set new world records. All of the results are here.

When you consider that the best of Beyeler’s collection still resides at his Fondation Beyeler in Basel, these results speak volumes about Beyerler’s discernment.

Sam Keller, now the Beyeler director, has got to find the challenge of maintaining such quality daunting.

 Photo Credits: Courtesy of Christie’s

 

Art Basel Journeys to Hong Kong — UPDATED

We knew this was coming, but now it’s official: Art Basel will have a fair in Hong Kong, starting next May (the 23rd to 26th, 2013). “Just what we need,” you may be thinking, “another art fair.” The truly addicted collector can be on the road, traveling from one to the next fair, pretty much all year now. Why does Art Basel want to start something in Hong Kong?

Proximity to Chinese money is the obvious answer — and Art Basel is doing things the smart way. Instead of starting a brand-new fair, AB co-directors Annette Schönholzer and Marc Spiegler (right) have hired Magnus Renfrew, who previously headed ART HK,  which will have its fifth interation this May 17 through May 20, as Art Basel’s Director Asia. So ART HK will cease to exist. None of this is a surprise because last July, MCH Swiss Exhibition (Basel) Ltd. , which is the parent company of Art Basel, acquired 60 percent of Asian Art Fairs Limited, which presented ART HK. (It has the option of acquiring the remaining 40 percent in 2014.)

The venue, the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, stays the same. And the new show will include more than 250 galleries around the world, chosen by a new selection committee. More than half of them are expected to be based in Asia or somewhere else in the Eastern hemisphere. UPDATE: That comment — that promise — may be in response to what Art in America, in its May issue, said was local “grumbling” about the favor shown to high-profile Western galleries in the fair’s layout, and worry that Art Basel Hong Kong won’t have enough Asian content.

Meantime, Art Basel in Basel gets underway on June 14 (till June 17). It will offer exhibits by more than 300 galleries from 36 countries.