• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
    • Real Clear Arts
    • Judith H. Dobrzynski
    • Contact
  • ArtsJournal
  • AJBlogs

Real Clear Arts

Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture

Uncategorized

Did Worcester Museum’s “Rethinking” Work? A FollowUp

More than a year has passed since I visited the Worcester Art Museum and wrote Museum, Remodeled and Rethought for the Wall Street Journal, so I thought I would check in with the director, Matthias Waschek, to see what had happened since then. WAM in many ways might be a model for other art museums, especially those in cities that do not attract many tourists.

matthias-waschek-directorBrief recap: Waschek had rehung the Old Masters galleries there, medallion-style, to get people to visit the museum (a pitiful 31,435 people had visited the galleries in FY 2011, though total attendance was 78,012) and to look more carefully; had drawn new donors (including support for free admission in August); was attempting to increase his curatorial staff to six from two; and was integrating the Higgins Armory Museum into WAM. More details at that link above.

Waschek is aiming to get attendance to 200,000 by 2020, with help from the Higgins merger: In the last few years (except its final year, when people knew it was closing), the Higgins received about 32,000 to 33,000 visitors a year.

What has happened? In FY 2012 and FY 2013, WAM’s total attendance was 91,000-92,000.

Here’s what it looked like month by month in the galleries, 2014 over 2013–not including people who attend programs that take place outside the galleries, like studio classes.

2013 2014
March 5,498 6,201
April 2,826 6,025
May 2,858 4,688
June 3,345 3,960
July 5,558 3,879
August 6,530 11,198
September 3,094 2,922
October 2,326 2,943
November 3,812 4,649

 

April 2014 is big because that’s when Knights! (an installation of mostly armor that it acquired in the Higgins deal) opened; August is big because that is when the museum is free.  July 2013 was also free, but not July 2014.

So on the whole, I’d say that attendance is moving in the right direction, but that the 2020 goal remains a stretch.

Waschek has a plan, though. The museum has done a zip code analysis of visitors since Knights! opened and, he said, “the data show us the way forward.” It turns out that about 45% of visitors came from central Massachusetts, including Middlesex and Norfolk counties between Worcester and Boston, and now that area is his target audience–not just the city of Worcester. That means the museum will do more outreach to schools in those counties, find trustees from those counties, etc.

Overall membership is also up and Waschek says “We will be in a great place (and break out the champagne) when we reach 5,000 members.”

FY12   3,148 Active Members

FY13   3,235 Active Members

FY14   3,564 Active Members

Waschek adds: “We aim not only to grow the total membership, but also their geographic distribution – pulling from the broader region in addition to Worcester and the surrounding towns.”

On the curatorial front, WAM now has four curators: Jon Seydl is chief curator and in charge of European art, there’s an armor curator and a works on paper curator, and Waschek just hired Elizabeth Athens, who will arrive on March 16, as Assistant Curator of American Art. A PhD candidate at Yale, she has held positions at the Yale Center for British Art, the Williams College Museum of Art and the Metropolitan Museum. He is searching for an Asian art curator and the contemporary art curatorial position will soon be open.

On the excitement front, Waschek and his staff will be reinstalling other parts of the permanent collection, are keeping [reMastered] fresh with borrowed works and Knights! fresh with rotations and contemporary auxiliary shows (e.g. a show on child soldiers), are designing a museum guide for families, and are offering free nude drawing classes in the galleries, among other things.

Like so many other directors, Waschek is trying a lot of new things, and so far, it seems from here, he has mostly avoided the gimmicks that are aimed at getting people in the door but have little to do with art. I like his emphasis on attendance in the galleries, not just in the museum.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of WAM 

 

Who Will Run the National Gallery? The Odds-On Favorite…UPDATED

The National Gallery in London was expected to announce a replacement for Nicholas Penny, the director, before Christmas, and I understand that the person has been chosen; the name must now simply go through political channels, with approval by Prime Minister David Cameron, before it can be announced.

GFinaldiOne thing is for sure, though: it’s not going to be Luke Syson, the curator of European sculpture and decorative arts at the Metropolitan Museum, who openly sought the job and, some sources tell me, thought he had it in the bag, thanks to his friendship with a trustee or two. Some weeks ago, according to several sources, Syson took himself out of the running. His interview apparently did not go well, for one thing, and I’ve heard that when he realized that he had no chance to get the job, he decided to withdraw and stay in New York, rather than return to the NG, where he had been Curator of Italian Paintings before 1500 and Head of Research. (Syson has been at the Met for two full years, and something of a disappointment to the many who expected him to produce a exhibit with some of the excitement of his last at the NG, Leonardo da Vinci: Painter at the Court of Milan.)

So who will it be? There are two finalists*, Gabriele Finaldi, deputy director of the Prado in Madrid (despite the title, the job is essentially the director), and Taco Dibbits, director of collections at the Rijksmuseum. If Ladbrokes offered odds on this contest, Finaldi would pay less than Dibbits. That’s what I am hearing, again from numerous sources.

Aside from having spent 10 years at the NG as a curator, Finaldi has an edge because of his fabulous track record at the Prado. He was educated in the U.K. (Ph.D. from the Courtauld), knows the collection well, was seriously considered last time (when Penny got the job), and has many excellent exhibitions to his credit.

Dibbits also has a U.K. doctorate, from Cambridge, but he worked at Christie’s before joining the Rijksmuseum in 2002. There, he helped develop plans and layouts for the new Rijksmuseum, and he guided the purchase last month of the Adrien de Vries Bacchic Figure Supporting the Globe for $27.9 million at Christie’s.

Two other candidates, Emilie Gordenker, director of the Mauritshuis, and Axel Ruger, director of the van Gogh Museum, are no longer in the running, I’m told. Ruger, however, is a contender at a different museum, more about which in the future.

A caveat to all of this: I don’t have a direct line to Cameron or the NG trustees, but when one hears the same things from several sources who are not in the same circles you can usually assume that what you are hearing is close to the truth, if not the truth itself.

*UPDATE, 1/5: When I wrote this yesterday, I left out John Leighton, director of the Scottish National Galleries, who was definitely considered for the job, but–according to more than one source–decided that he would rather stay in Edinburgh. Now, I hear that he remains in contention.

This could be true for one good reason: I had heard that NG trustees felt that both Finaldi and Dibbits had flaws; it is conceivable that they chose Leighton as a compromise.

On The Art Movie Docket: Matisse and…

“Matisse From Tate Modern and MoMA” is the latest of Exhibition on Screen’s movies about art exhibitions to open here in the U.S. It’s a one-night only event on Jan. 13 at theaters nationwide. Fathom Events is the distributor, and you can find out where it is nearest you right here.

The movie is 90 minutes long, and it’s about the cutouts show now at MoMA. You can see the preview on YouTube, which tells the five essential things you matisseshould know about Matisse’s cutouts. Here’s the billing from the email I received for a preview (which I can’t attend, unfortunately):

This “exhibition on screen” provides viewers with a virtual tour of the exhibition with the addition of illuminating archival materials and commentary from Nicholas Serota, Glenn Lowry, curators, conservators, and some who knew the artist in his final years. For those unable to see the show and for those who have and want to know more, the film takes the audience behind the scenes with unprecedented access and into the galleries.

If it it’l like the one of Manet, which I did see, that is a fair description.

This all made me wonder how Exhibitions On Screen was faring–I wrote about Phil Grabsky and his venture in spring 2013 here and for The Wall Street Journal. Well, I guess the answer is good enough, because after Matisse four more such movies will be shown here in 2015. They are “Rembrandt: The Late Works,” “Vincent van Gogh: A New Way of Seeing,” “The Impressionists,” and “Girl with a Pearl Earring.” More details here.

To me, they are supplementary to seeing an exhibit, not a substitute–except when you can’t get to the real thing.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of Getty Images 

Court Orders Tate To Provide Funding Details, Pronto

The Tate museum has been ordered to reveal the details of its sponsorship deals with BP, the oil company–and that, I think, is a good thing.

Tate-Britain-012This all happened just before Christmas, and according to The Guardian’s article on the ruling by a court:

Tate has been ordered to give details of its BP sponsorship between 1990-2006, in a case brought by environmental campaigners.

An information tribunal has ruled against the art institution, which was refusing to give details, claiming the information could intensify protests and harm its ability to raise money from other companies.

The case had been brought by the environmental campaigner Brendan Montague, supported by the arts and activism charity Platform, which argues that only when the sponsorship sums are in the public domain can informed debate take place.

I don’t see anything on the surface with museums’ accepting sponsorship from oil companies. But I wince at the way BP has arranged to have its name before the art, as in “BP British Art Displays.” So it would make sense to see how this happened, and what precisely the Tate does not want to disclose. Other museums, including the National Gallery, have disclosed all requested sponsorship information.

The Tate opposed the order, obviously, arguing that BP would be offended by the disclosure and that would affect the company’s willingness to give in the future. But why? Isn’t it a good thing to support the arts? The tribunal didn’t buy that argument either.

Some of those siding with the Tate are saying that the arts need money wherever they can get it–I agree, for the most part. But I’d still like to know what the deal is between the two sides. The Tate has 35 days from the ruling to provide the details.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of The Guardian

 

 

Merry Christmas…

I’ll be away celebrating Christmas for a few days. Here’s my Christmas greeting to you this year: Francesco di Giorgio Martini’s The Nativity, With God the Father Surounded by Angels and Cherubim, which is jointly owned by the National Gallery of Art and the Metropolitan Museum.

Francesco_di_Giorgio_Martini_Italian_painter_1439_1502_Nativity

And there’s a story behind this joint ownership, provided to me by my friend Paul Jeromack, who also suggested the painting when I went looking for a nativity to share. It seems the painting was sawed into two pieces in the 19th century–the NGA owned the top half, of God the Father, while the Met owned the bottom half.

Per the Met: “…The upper part of this engaging composition is very inventive and was inspired by the sculptural reliefs of Donatello, while the lower part reflects Francesco’s admiration for the work of the north Italian miniaturist Girolamo da Cremona, who worked on choirbooks in Siena from 1470 to 1474. So different in character are the upper and lower parts that they were separated in the nineteenth century; they were rejoined in 1988.”

Yes, the two pieces were put back together and the two museums share ownership. The painting is on view at the Met. The NGA’s “half” looked like this:

10874222_10152533028742286_2082292666_o

Better together, aren’t they?

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

About Judith H. Dobrzynski

Now an independent journalist, I've worked as a reporter in the culture and business sections of The New York Times, and been the editor of the Sunday business section and deputy business editor there as well as a senior editor of Business Week and the managing editor of CNBC, the cable TV

About Real Clear Arts

This blog is about culture in America as seen through my lens, which is informed and colored by years of reporting not only on the arts and humanities, but also on business, philanthropy, science, government and other subjects. I may break news, but more likely I will comment, provide

Archives