A highly anticipated evaluation of thousands of city-owned treasures at the Detroit Institute of Arts is not expected to be finished until at least the second week of December.
The report from Christie’s auction house in New York, which Detroit officials previously said would be completed in October or November, is expected to have a major impact on the fate of the museum’s world-class collection.Via the Detroit Free Press.
The American public dislikes secrecy, no matter how you slice it. When foundations play into that, all their high statements about engagement and openness fly out the window.On the role of philanthropies in society, the NPQ has this to say,
But if their sense of civic pride or civic duty lures them into bailing out the city from the demands of its creditors, pensions or others, Detroit’s foundations will be not only depriving Detroit’s nonprofit sector of badly needed resources, but setting a very troubling precedent. How many other cities will lean on their civic-minded local foundations for bailouts like Detroit’s?The entire NPQ article is available here.
No one should believe the claims that sale of the art will help save workers’ pensions. After they take the art, the banks will be even more eager to steal municipal workers’ pensions and to slash city services! The right to culture must be defended along with all the rights of the working class.
The Socialist Equality Party and International Youth and Students for Social Equality are calling for a mass demonstration at the DIA to defend the DIA. We aim not to pressure the Democrats and Republicans, the bought-and-paid-for politicians of the banks, but to organize an independent movement of working people.
To organize this struggle the SEP is calling for the formation of a Committee to Defend the DIA!
In recent days, I’ve talked to three people at the top of the decision-making in the bankruptcy process. All said, without question, that at least part of the collection will have to be — their word — “monetized” before the bankruptcy is resolved.But he wonders how much of the DIA collection will be up for grabs.
Christie’s, the New York auction house, is assessing the collection. If the value is pegged at $2 billion to $3 billion, the DIA likely will escape relatively unscathed. If, as expected, it comes in at $10 billion to $15 billion, the half-billion Orr wants is reasonable. But if the number is more astronomical — $25 billion or above — somebody call Roger Penske and order a moving van.I guess this is one time when an art collector wants the value of her collection to be assessed as low as possible. But then, what are the consequences of that gesture?
Sacrificing Detroit’s art would be an urban planning mistake of the first order that would unjustly enrich creditors. It doesn’t have to happen. Michigan can, and should, take the legal steps necessary to prevent this from happening.Donn Zaretsky also pointed out Levitin's three main reasons,
Christie’s will only appraise works bought directly by the city that are unencumbered by donated funds or other covenants that cloud clear legal title, said Bill Nowling, spokesman for Detroit emergency manager Kevyn Orr. The appraisal will unfold in phases. Officials will start with the art on view before evaluating art in storage with an estimated market value of $50,000 or more and, finally, art in storage presumed to be worth less than $50,000.Final results are due in October or November. The city is paying Christie’s a $200,000 fee. However, it appears that if there is a sale, it won't necessarily be made through Christie's.
Arts education does not depend on expensive paintings; it depends on (relatively cheap) books, supplies and teachers. I think Detroit should sell its collection and pay off its debt. But the city should also set money aside to cultivate the city’s children — its future Caravaggios — whose deep reserves of talent might otherwise disappear, unheard and unseen.Philosophy professor, Felicia Ackerman, adds some sobering thoughts,
Those who consider art essential to civilization should realize that it is even more essential for a civilized society not to abandon its most vulnerable members, let alone break its promise of pensions to those who have invested their working lives in public service.Frank Robinson, who penned the original letter to the editor, responds to Ackerman,
Nevertheless, as Ms. Ackerman eloquently points out, the practical, political and moral question remains for Detroit and, to a lesser degree, for other museums: the pensions of civil servants, as well as basic municipal services, will be cut without some infusion of cash, and the institute’s paintings are significant assets.Robinson's response contains the key word for me in this dilemma: practical. I know it's politically incorrect to believe that there are practical solutions to many dire situations, primarily financial, because somehow, and from somewhere, money will magically appear and absolve any person or entity from financial ruin.
So let me get this straight: Detroit is bankrupt and has no money, yet it can conveniently come up with $200,000 for a "procedural" [art] appraisal? This has got to be one of the biggest lessons in delusional thinking of behalf of a municipality.Siebold doesn't just want the artwork sold (he thinks it's a "good start"), he thinks everything must go.
From there it's just a matter of going down the line, from the city held airport to the Detroit-Windsor tunnel, real estate and parking garages. It doesn't matter how old or nostalgic the artwork or any other asset is. It all has to go!
The situation in Detroit and Chicago is quite ugly indeed, but the solution starts with eliminating wasteful spending with money that's not available, liquidating assets, dissolving the unions, and getting out of an entitlement way of thinking that a bailout is the solution.Luckily, and hopefully no rain-out, I get to watch the Detroit Tigers take on the Yankees tonight before Siebold sells them to the Russians.
The Detroit Institute of Arts (DIA) has learned that Christie’s, at the request of the Emergency Manager, plans to proceed with a valuation of the DIA collection, and we will be cooperating completely in that process. However, we continue to believe there is no reason to value the collection as the Attorney General has made clear that the art is held in charitable trust and cannot be sold as part of a bankruptcy proceeding. We applaud the EM's focus on rebuilding the City, but would point out that he undercuts that core goal by jeopardizing Detroit's most important cultural institution.For some reason I would not read much into this. This may be a well-planned move to try to get the Obama administration involved (read: federal bailout).
In addition, recent moves in Oakland and Macomb counties to invalidate the tri-county millage if art is sold virtually ensure that any forced sale of art would precipitate the rapid demise of the DIA. Removing $23 million in annual operating funds – nearly 75% of the museum’s operating budget – and violating the trust of donors and supporters would cripple the museum, putting an additional financial burden on our already struggling city. The DIA has long been doing business without City of Detroit operating support; any move that compromises its financial stability will endanger the museum and further challenge the City’s future.
Anybody who doesn't want Detroit to sell its art must be prepared to go up against arguments like these. What's more, the counterarguments will have to persuade locals who know how it feels to call the cops and get a busy signal. In my experience, art lovers aren't accustomed to making that kind of argument, any more than they're accustomed to living in a city without streetlights.To the point, and very true. No offense, but I wonder how long Cobble Hillers or West Villagers (where the baby strollers roam) would argue for keeping artwork when there are no cops to keep Bed-Stuyers away or when streets have potholes the size of moon craters.
Politically, there may be no winning formula, with strong feelings on both sides of the argument.The Chicago Tribune has an update.
After two months of hectic coverage, I call upon journalists to resist the temptation to jump to disaster scenarios or to make the D.I.A.’s singular and highly complicated situation part of a broader story about the structural challenges faced by museums in general.Graham W. J. Beal, Director, Detroit Institue of Art, in his letter to the NY Times.
The museum paid more than $1.8 million for its first O’Keeffe. It will go on exhibit in time for Labor Day Weekend, in a small, second-floor gallery.
At any rate, they are hardly altered by inhabiting one building rather than another. The relationship of art to the institutions that house and display it is a marriage of convenience, with self-interest on both sides, and not an ineluctable romance.In other words the DIA collection isn't site-specific art. We're not talking about the Spiral Jetty or Thomas Hirschhorn's Gramsci Monument. In fact, Hirschhorn's Gramsci Monument is a perfect example of why the DIA should sell its collection: there's a difference between having access to art making and culture and having an art collection that attracts tourists (if that) yet ignores the local citizenry.
Constructed by residents of Forest Houses, the artwork takes the form of an outdoor structure comprised of numerous pavilions. Gramsci Monument will offer a daily program of lectures by philosopher Marcus Steinweg, a children's workshop run by artist Lex Brown, a radio station, happy hour, and a daily newspaper. Weekly programs include a play titled Gramsci Theater, Gramsci Seminars led by international scholars, Poetry Lectures and Workshops led by poets and writers, Art Workshops led by Hirschhorn, open microphone events coordinated by the community, and field trips organized by the project’s “ambassador[.]”Similar to Hirschhorn's project, I believe that what the city of Detroit needs is hands-on culture-making; not hand wringing. No, not every person should have the chance to see art or to live down the street from it. Rather, they should have the chance to create their own version of art and culture and not one dictated by those who read the New Yorker or those who blog about art simply to create cultural capital.
Don’t worry, as usual there will be people making money in Detroit. It just won’t be the people who actually live there…So, there you have it. The Detroit Institute of Art's art collection may not end up paying for lights, police cars or pensions. It may, as sick as this may sound, end up lining the pockets of some firms that represent some of the corporations that helped to cause Detroit's mess. Who said Biglaw was dead?
"Obviously with $15-17 billion in long term debt and no way to pay it off, Detroiters are delusional if they don’t think they are going to face painful sacrifices. This is the day of reckoning for a region that has failed in its basic duties."Ouch. Urban analyst, Aaron Renn, has more here.
A state Senate committee moved quickly today to approve a bill that would protect the art collections at the Detroit Institute of Arts specifically, and Michigan museums in general, from liquidation in the event of a municipal bankruptcy proceeding. The bill was introduced Thursday by Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, and approved on a 5-0 vote today by the General Operations Committee.
 |
| La Robe de la Mariée (The Wedding Dress) |
Posts
All Comments
