According to Philly.com, The Pearl S. Buck Foundation plans to sell two paintings that belonged to the author so it can pay for restorations to her historic home.
"It may not be a popular decision in the eyes of some people," said Janet Mintzer, president and CEO of Pearl S. Buck International. "But it was such a carefully considered decision. . . . It's a sacrifice for the better good of the house."
The concept of removing artwork from a museum's collection (deaccessioning) has been the topic of much discussion and debate over the last several years. However, the conversation has mostly focused on the ethics of deaccessioning. Notably, the primary professional associations governing museums position their policies on deaccessioning within their ethical standards. Yet little has been studied on the history and motivation of the development of such policy. Through the tracing of deaccessioning history and public debates, this research examines the practice of deaccessioning from a policy perspective. Through the examination of the actions at national, state, local, and institutional levels, this study considers the history and future of deaccessioning policy.
Remember the big fiasco concerning Brandeis University’s possible fire sale of the Rose Art Museum’s collection? Well, the Chronicle of Higher Education has published the following news.
Brandeis University announced on Thursday that it would not sell any part of its prized collection of modern art at its Rose Art Museum, ending a long-simmering dispute that had cast a negative light on the Massachusetts institution.
However, Donn Zaretsky takes issue with this statement as well as headlines from the Boston Globe, LA Times, and The Art Newspaper.
That isn’t quite right. What the settlement agreement says (you can read it here; see the last sentence of paragraph 1) is that Brandeis “has no aim, plan, design, strategy or intention to sell any artwork.” There’s a big difference between saying that and saying they promise not to sell any artwork.
Glad someone’s doing some content checking.
There is real risk in writing an article for a hard-copy publication on a topic in which things are in flux. Something new, and even dispositive, can happen between when one submits the piece for publication and when the printed journal actually appears. It must be another corollary to Murphy's Law.More from The Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Blog.
Posts
All Comments
