Real Clear Arts

Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture

Jim Cuno Takes On The Art History World

I’d never heard of an online publication called The Daily Dot until it was called to my attention yesterday because, of all things, the president of the Getty Trust — Jim Cuno — had written an op-ed piece for the site.  And in what seems strange to me, his piece has more Facebook likes (262 at this writing) than any other op-ed on the new opinion page – weird considering the esoteric subject.

But maybe, perhaps, not quite so weird because Cuno chastises art historians for being behind when it comes to digital technology, and the site is for web communities. His piece is headlined How Art History is Failing at the Internet. He writes:

…Of course we have technology in our galleries and classrooms and information on the Web; of course we are exploiting social media to reach and grow our audiences, by tweeting about our books, our articles, including links to our career accomplishments on Facebook and chatting with our students online.

But we aren’t conducting art historical research differently. We aren’t working collaboratively and experimentally. As art historians we are still, for the most part, solo practitioners working alone in our studies and publishing in print and online as single authors and only when the work is fully baked. We are still proprietary when it comes to our knowledge. We want sole credit for what we write.

Cuno then goes on to compare the ethos of conservation scientists versus that of art historians — citing the Getty’s Closer to Van Eyck project on the Ghent altarpiece.

In short, humanists largely work alone and on timelines with long horizons. Scientists work together, experimentally, and publish quickly.

Rather, he writes:

…we should be experimenting with ways of compiling archives of formal and iconographic incidents across hundreds and thousands of images and then organizing and reorganizing them in ways that ask new questions and suggest new answers from cross-disciplinary and international perspectives.

To a certain extent, what Cuno writes is self-serving. To a certain extent, he’s also right, I think. Even if he’s mostly wrong, he’s taken up a worthy subject, though I think he could have found a better forum for it than he did. It’s a speech made for the College Art Association.

Photo Credit: Mel Melcon, courtesy of the Los Angeles Times

 

Landesman Departing As NEA Chief

This statement just in, not unexpectedly:

Today, Rocco Landesman confirmed his plans to step down as Chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts at the end of the calendar year:

“My intention has always been to serve one term, and we have been able to accomplish more than I had ever thought possible: sparking a national movement around creative placemaking, forging significant relationships with other federal agencies, creating an unprecedented healing arts partnership with the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, and increasing both the scope and impact of our research office.

“We have continued to support and strengthen the entire spectrum of arts in this country, and we have been able to expand the national conversation through convenings, traditional media, and new technology.  I am proud and honored to have served alongside such an amazing group of dedicated public servants.

“The time has come for me to become a cliché: I turned 65, am going to retire, and cannot wait to spend more time in Miami Beach.”

NEA Senior Deputy Chairman Joan Shigekawa will serve as the acting head of the agency until a permanent successor is confirmed.

 

Why This Museum May Offer An Acceptable “Town Square”

This is a test, so don’t look below just yet, please.

I’ve written in the past about the goal of so many museums to become “town squares,” leaving behind their past as “cultural cathedrals.” I prefer the cultural cathedral metaphor — art museums as a place for really looking at art, for seeking inspiration and enlightenment, sometimes for reaching for an almost spiritual experience. The concept of becoming a town square may or may not exclude those goals — depending on the noise and activity levels that are fostered — but the concept certainly makes them harder.

And yet, the two are not mutually exclusive. It’s perfectly all right — even a laudable goal — for museums to want people to come to common areas, like restaurants and coffee bars, to seek social interaction. I think that’s great, as long as it doesn’t make the other goals impossible for those would-be cathedral-goers.

So here I have posted several pictures I took recently at a museum with my cell phone (pardon the quality). I snapped two venues on a Wednesday afternoon. In the one with red walls, people were communing with art, via computers, as well as with each other. In the other place, it was all about eating and being social — it was completely accessible from the outside. One did not have to go into the museum to use this cafe, and many there clearly had not. The museum presumably was, though, earning a profit on the food it sold — which looked quite a bit more appetizing than some museum fare. (I sampled a slice of quiche, and it was just ok, however — but it was mid-afternoon, long past lunch and therefore probably long past its prime. Bad choice on my part. The sweets looked delicious.)

Notice the lack of school children beefing up the attendance numbers. Notice the mix of ages, the presence of men.

Now guess which museum this is.

First, a hint: From the outside, this museum is an example of what people frequently label as “intimidating,” ridiculously. It dates to the mid-1800s. But it doesn’t look as if it’s scaring ordinary people away, does it?

Second, this museum is full of old art. Its collection extends from the 13th century only to the 19th. No Warhol here. Its director recently blasted the cookie-cutter approach to contemporary collecting, and questioned the legitimacy of certain categories.

Yet it draws. Admittedly, this museum has a big tourist base.

Ok, you know now — It’s the National Gallery in London. I admit this may be a bit unfair — but I can’t think of another museum I’ve been in that has added this social aspect so successfully without ruining the experience for awe-seekers. Maybe the Met, but it has so much more room, more kinds of art, to work with.

 

Damage/Aid To Chelsea Galleries, Plus Five Questions About Relief

The weather has been beautiful in New York, and galleries in Chelsea continue to reopen after cleaning up the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. It’ll take a long time for complete recovery, though. The other day, Bloomberg reported that

Axa SA, the French insurer that underwrites more than $1 billion of art in Manhattan’s Chelsea district, said it has received $40 million in claims from Hurricane Sandy and has already sent checks to policyholders.

The company insures 66 galleries in Chelsea — you can at least quadruple that number to get a fuller idea of the damage among all Chelsea dealers.

A few more details from Bloomberg are here, and a trade website called PropertyCasualty360 has a more complete report here.

On Friday, the Art Dealers Association of America issues a press release noting that its Relief Fund had doubled in value to more than $500,000, with pledges coming “from galleries, private collectors, publications, and other non-profits and industry supporters.” They include $50,000 pledges from Art Basel, the Pace Gallery, Mitchell-Innes & Nash, and David Zwirner.  Here is the full release — ADAA_Relief_Fundraising_Release_11_16_12.

And the Andy Warhol Foundation, the Robert Rauschenberg Foundation and the Lambent Foundation on Thursday announced a relief effort to assist artists and non-profit arts organizations who suffered serious damage from the storm — with the Warhol Foundation alone committing $2 million, half for organizations and half for artists. Details here.

Earlier in the week, I’d asked ADAA’s Executive Director Linda Blumberg to answer Five Questions. Here are her reponses:

1) Does ADAA have an estimate of damage to Chelsea galleries overall, and an idea of how many galleries might be eligible to apply to the relief fund? It’s too early to know the full extent of the damage.  We just know the cost of re-building will be enormous.   

2) How many galleries have applied so far?   We have 20 applications to date.  It is a rolling application process.

3) Three have won awards — how did they move the top of the line (I.E., using what criteria?) and what are the size of the grants? Actually, we distributed four grants last Friday and they were the first ones to apply.  The size of the grants will depend on the amount of damage sustained and the need, but usually $10,000.

4) The fund started at $250,000 — how much is it now, and what plans does ADAA have to raise money for it?  With donations from gallerists and others in the arts community, the ADAA Relief Fund has over doubled in size.

5) Do you know of galleries that were hit so hard that they simply will not reopen?  I do not know of any and we hope that our program will help stop that from happening.

As you can see, help from ADAA — while worthwhile — won’t solve the problems of Chelsea’s galleries. Let’s hope they all had good insurance. Chubb and Castle Rock are among the other fine art insurance companies, but I couldn’t find their damage estimates online, at least.

Photo Credit: Getty Images via ArtInfo

New Prints Program At IPC

Two weeks ago, I wrote about prints, and promised to return with links to the New Prints Exhibition at the International Print Center in Chelsea — I was part of the jury and I wrote the essay on our deliberations and choices. Here’s the promised link to the exhibition, whose run has been extended through Dec. 15 because of Hurricane Sandy. And here’s a link to the illustrated checklist and one also to my essay.

 At left is an example of one of our choices, Roma II, by Ann Aspinwall.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the International Print Center