This is a shaggy dog story that I should save for the Fourth of July weekend, but…

It’s about a larger-than-life bust of George Washington that may or may not have graced the West Front of the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., but which is indubitably on display now at the Huntington Library, Art Collections and Garden in Pasadena. Oh yes, and it survived a fire and was a gift from France, rather like the Statue of Liberty.

Here’s the story in brief, which new research/writing by Catherine Hess, chief curator of European art, and John Griswold, an independent conservator, support:

The sculpture, by French artist Pierre-Jean David, called David d’Angers (1788-1856), and dated 1832, was commissioned by the French government as a gift to the United States. It was, documents show, on display in the Library of Congress and then on the Capitol building when a fire broke out there in 1851.

“Blackened and pitted,” the bust was thought to be ruined beyond repair and discarded. It then reportedly made its way to someone’s backyard and in 1914 was sold as “scrap marble.” (Who knew?)

Later, the work piece purchased by a New York art dealer, and in 1918, an article in Art and Archeology magazine argued that it was the piece that once adorned the Capitol. Henry E. Huntington must have believed that story, because he bought the bust in 1924 — but kept it in storage, perhaps because The New York Times and other publications criticized the sale of a rediscovered national treasure to a private collector. The U.S. attorney general also made headlines for raising “a question as to the authenticity” of the work, according to the Huntington.

Are you still with me?

Griswold determined that the piece was soiled and stained “possibly with soot,” that chips that might have “popped” off; and that a fine crack across the top of the head may have been the result of high heat exposure from a fire.

Bingo! There was scientific evidence to support early reports that had never been conclusively proved.

So now, the Huntington has pulled the piece out of storage, and on Thursday it went on view.

David d’Angers, btw, believed his bust was, indeed, in the fire. “I read yesterday in an American newspaper of the burning of the Library in Washington; the colossal bust that I sent to America is burnt up,” he wrote. Plus, in 1904, French officials presented the United States with a bronze copy of the bust as a replacement. The bronze is presently displayed in an entryway to the House Chamber at the Capitol.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Huntington

 

In contrast to Las Vegas, Detroit offers plenty of reasons for art-lovers to visit. The Detroit Institute of Arts itself is worth the trip. I recently had a whirlwind two-hour-plus tour, and barely got a chance to look at its wonders. I spent only a few minutes, sometimes a few seconds, with paintings like Bruegel’s Wedding Dance, Fra Angelico’s Annunciatory Angel, Bronzino’s Eleonora of Toledo with Her Son and van Gogh’s Portrait of Postman Roulin before having to move on to more goodies of extremely high quality. Even then, I was unable to see the whole museum in the allotted time.

I didn’t make it at all to Detroit’s other museums, or galleries, and now there is a new one to put on the list. Tomorrow, the Kunsthalle Detroit opens on Grand River Avenue in a building that once was occupied by Comerica Bank. Its focus is different: it claims to be the first U.S. museum to showcase exclusively multi-media and light-based arts from around the world. It also plans to provide support for U.S. artists of light-based mediums, according to a press release.

KD’s first exhibition, Time and Place, includes work by 12 artists that ” reveal grand narratives of life and death, and time and place and suggest that art is essential for keeping memories alive and for encouraging the future.” Among them are Bill Viola. William Kentridge and Diana Thater. A look at Tim White-Sobieski’s Deconstructed Reality is above.

Founding director Tate Osten believes in the power of the arts and what they can do for Detroit. Says she:

With the population of the city at its lowest point in 20 years, the city can only be saved by welcoming artists into the city and establishment of arts communities and culture. This Museum brings the best in contemporary multimedia art as catered to the local population. It is ultimately a revolutionary action, bringing international art forces to Detroit. In the near future we envision multimedia and light projects splashing from within the museum onto the streets of Detroit, making life and art inseparable.

Now that would be fun.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Kunsthalle Detroit

What is it about Las Vegas? The gambling? The neon? The fast-living?

Once again, the 28th largest U.S. city has proven that it has no, or very little, interest in art museums. A recent article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, reviewing the status of the Southern Nevada Museum of Fine Arts, says the museum generally receives just 15 to 20 visitors a day, mostly tourists. It charges just $3 in admission.

The museum, withe 22,000 sq ft of gallery space, has since 2008 been located on the second floor of the Neonopolis (left). Originally, it was in Henderson, NV — about 15 miles away.

It’s currently showing International Contemporary Masters, an exhibit of 176 works by 70 artists. I can’t vouch for the quality, which — judging from the website — may be a problem. But the museum director, Joseph Palermo, chalks up the lack of interest to lack of recognition by the community.

“Most people who come through here say they didn’t know we were here, and they never heard of us,” he said in the LVRJ. “It takes a long time to establish something. How often do you go to a museum? Once a year? Once every six months?”

The SNMFA was started in 2003, and aims to focus on “local, regional and international artists.” It is accredited by the American Association of Museums.

Las Vegas residents have shown a startling lack of interest in art, what with allowing the Las Vegas Art Museum to close, scrapping plans for a contemporary art museum, leaving land designated for a sculpture garden to go empty — and now this. More details are here, here and here.

Is there any rational explanation for this amazing situation?

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Neonopolis

 

As political appointees always say, it’s hard to decline a Presidential request and, presumably, almost as hard to turn down a First Lady. Always in the background, too, is the fact that favors bestowed on someone create chits that can later be traded in, most of the time.

I’d bet that some art museum directors are thinking those thoughts right now, because last month Michelle Obama joined with the Institute of Museum and Library Services in an effort called Let’s Move! Museums and Gardens — an anti-obesity initiative that “will provide opportunities for millions of museum and garden visitors to learn about healthy food choices and will promote physical activity through interactive exhibits and programs,” per the IMLS press release.

The goal is worthy. And heaven knows that art museums can use support (not just, or even necessarily, monetary) from the White House. Nonetheless, I hope that art museums will resist this siren call, which has nothing to do with their core missions and is a waste of precious resources.

The “Let’s Move” program was started several months ago by the American Association of Museums, the Association of Children’s Museums and the American Public Gardens Association. Its goal is to help young people learn about nutrition, healthy food choices and physical activity. Great. Those groups have many members for whom programs on those subjects are relevant.

But recently the group widened to include the Association of Art Museum Directors, the Association of African American Museums, the Association of Science-Technology Centers, the American Association for State and Local History, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums and the Center for the Future of Museums.

Again, most of those are natural fits — but not the AAMD. (Thank goodness the Association of Art Museum Curators didn’t join in.)

Look at the IMLS program guidelines, and you’d be hard-pressed to see anything appropriate for art museums. The program wants museums to provide exhibit spaces where children can be active, offer families and children advice on growing and consuming healthy food, and learn about expending energy through activities versus sitting in front of an electronic device.

There’s no connection with art there (unless an Archimboldo show qualifies…).

Yet so far, eyeballing the list of participating institutions, some art museums have indeed signed on: the Montgomery Museum of Fine Arts, the Bruce Museum, the Luther Brady Art Gallery/GWU, the Bass Museum of Art, the James and Meryl Hearst Center for the Arts, the Newark Museum, the North Carolina Museum of Art, the Cincinnati Art Museum, the Mabee-Gerrer Museum of Art, the Austin Museum of Art, the San Angelo Museum of Fine Arts, and the Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum.

OK, a couple of those have natural history components, so they may be able to do something appropriate. But the rest of you, I believe, should rethink, remember your core mission, and pass on participating in “Let’s Move.”

Photo Credit: Courtesy of IMLS 

 

I was going to let pass last week’s announcement by the Metropolitan Museum of Art* that it was raising the price of its suggested admission without comment — but I changed my mind when no one seemed to add much historical context.

$25 — the new price —  sounds awfully steep, even if it is “suggested,” and even if it’s the first increase in five years. Still, as director Thomas P. Campbell said in the press release, “…the average cost to the Museum of each visitor is $40, [so] we believe it is fair and, above all, necessary, to increase recommended admission levels at this time.”

The hike — from $20 — is also steep within the Met’s own context. In 1998, I wrote an article for The New York Times about museum prices, and though most of it was about special exhibition tickets (higher at many museums but almost never at the Met), I noted the Met’s suggested price of general admission at the time: $8. In 2011 dollars, that would be $11.04 — quite a difference from $25.

In that article, I quoted the late J. Carter Brown calling museums “a bargain” and comparing ticket prices to those at the Metropolitan Opera. Fair enough: you can — if you’re lucky — get $20 tickets to the Met.

Malcolm Rogers, then and now director of the Museum of Fine Arts-Boston, used Red Sox tickets as a comparison. Today, I checked Yankee prices and found bleacher seats as low as $5 and grandstand seats as low as $22 — though they go as high as $325.

Notice that range: it brings me to a related announcement and allows me to mount a hobby horse: variable pricing. The Met also just announced that it would open its very popular Alexander McQueen exhibition to the public on Mondays, when the rest of the museum is closed, for the price of $50 per person. It has done that before, a sign that the public has matured on the issue since 2006, when the Neue Museum backtracked from its plan to charge the public $50 on Wednesdays, when it’s normally open only to members.

This is a good thing. Airlines, theater, and many other places have succeeded in using variable pricing, with few or no complaints from the public, which has proven again and again that it understands the market (to this extent). In 2009, I wrote an opinion piece for Forbes magazine advocating variable pricing in the arts, specifically museums. Here was my guidance:

Besides charging extra on weekends, they could get a premium for the first hour every day. Many people delay seeing special exhibitions until the last minute; maybe prices should rise as the end nears. Or maybe tickets purchased online to avoid lines should carry a service fee, as they do for movies. To make variable pricing a success, the differential has to be meaningful. The benefits have to be obvious–early entry, fewer people, for example. And the public has to understand the rationale, knowing that those who can’t afford the premium are still welcome during most museum hours.

It’s time — or else we will see more, and bigger, general admission price increases.

* I consult to a foundation that supports the Met.