Blog
We Must Stop “Investing” In Art: The Rose Art Museum Sale
The president of Brandeis University recently announced the University’s controversial decision to sell their prized Rose Art Museum art collection and to close the museum altogether. The collection, valued at $350 million, consists of work by noted artists such as Robert Rauschenberg, Andy Warhol, Willem DeKoonig, Jasper Johns, and Roy Lichtenstein. Adding to the surprise announcement of the sale was the fact that nobody at the Rose Art Museum knew of the sale until it was announced to the public -including the museum director, Michael Rush, and the chairman of the board of overseers, Jonathan Lee, who in this NYT article referred to the extraordinary collection as “one of the artistic and cultural legacies of American Jewry”.
Economically, the sale of art on a level like this is dangerous to the art world. If the auction does not draw the estimated value (which in this time of economic duress is quite possible) it could have a ripple effect on the value of other artworks by the artists. If Jasper Johns painting goes for less than the estimate, what happens to the value of all the other Jasper Johns out there?
The simple act of the sale is also setting a precedent for other institutions undergoing financial strain, in effect communicating “Well, hey- If Brandeis sold their art, then we can too.” If it becomes “acceptable” to hock one’s art collection for cold cash, institutions everywhere could unleash a potential flood of prized art onto the scene, thus exacerbating and compounding the problem.
The Rose Art Museum sale also threatens to affect the considerations of benefactors in general. Witnessing artwork being so easily and flippantly sold off to generate revenue, philanthropists could begin think twice before donating a work. To those who already have gifted such cherished pieces and passed on believing the works were indeed given in perpetuity, this is the ultimate insult. In fact, Brandeis is prepared to undergo lawsuits for this exact reason, as the legality of selling works in conflict with the intention of the donor is in question.
In my estimation it is outright hypocrisy to discard an entire museum and its contents, especially from an educational institution that, according to Brandeis’ very own mission statement, “is dedicated to the advancement of the humanities, arts and social, natural and physical sciences.”
If ever any kind of reminder comes from an announcement such as the Brandeis sale, we must remember to always first look at art for what it is- a gift from the hand of the artist. These original works, the kinds of work that Walter Benjamin touted as having aura, are the one-of-a-kinds that must continue to be looked upon with eyes to the ART, not the fickle capitalist value-assignment that the sales such as this Brandeis have engendered. We must stop fiscally ‘investing’ in art, and invest ourselves in the preservation of its real irrevocable value- the ability to inspire the people.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
- Spread the word and join Facebook’s Save Rose Art Museum page
- Make a pledge to the Rose Art Museum
- Sign the petition
Written by sonia on 01/29/2009 in Activism | Blog | News | Painting | Theory/Criticism
|
Share this post: |
|
-
http://depression.forumn1.com/depression-test depression test
