On December 9th I posted to the AW Blog concerns over the National Academy deaccessioning two paintings, and the public censure by the Association of Art Museum Directors (click HERE to read). The director Carmine Branagan, director of the National Academy recently sent a letter to museum director of the AAMD, explaining the rationale for the deaccessioning of the two painting, stating there could be two more sales from the collection and asking for the public censure to be removed.
In order for AW readers to fully follow the situation and the explanation, I have posted the full letter from National Academy director Carmine Branagan. To me, the rationale makes a lot of sense, and in this difficult times for museums and the art world, sometimes extraordinary measures are necessary along with a little bit of common sense and understanding of the financial issues. But my perspective is that of an appraiser and antique dealer and not as a museum professional.
The letter:
December 11, 2008
Dear Museum Director,
I am writing to directly address the reasons for the National Academy of Design's decision to deaccession, and to strongly express our concern about the AAMD's practice of publicly censuring organizations in crisis.
Some time ago it became clear that the National Academy was in dire financial straits and would not survive unless bold steps were taken. The decision to deaccession was reached only after all other options, including efforts to launch a fund raising campaign and to sell the Academy's home on upper Fifth Avenue, were exhausted. There is no question that without deaccessioning, one of the oldest arts institutions in New York City, one that has played a vital role in America's cultural landscape for 183 years, would have had to close its doors forever. It is unthinkable this is what the AAMD intended!
To sell four pieces was a protracted and carefully considered decision that the Academy's membership voted overwhelmingly (181 in favor, one against, one abstention) to support. This decision was reached in conjunction with a long-range financial and programmatic plan that places the Academy's historic collection of American art at its center. A large portion of the Academy's permanent collection has not been available to the public, and now the Academy will have the funds to put this culturally and historically significant collection on regular exhibition, to implement public programs and to continue investing in infrastructure that supports these efforts.
The Academy's governing body and staff undertook an analysis of internal operations and governance from top to bottom. We are all inspired by the new possibilities and are committed make the significant changes required to create an effective governing structure that will sustain the Academy into the future.
Without reservation, we are assuring the museum community that the National Academy will uphold the highest professional standards in all aspects of the exhibition, preservation and interpretation of its collection. The Academy also adheres to the strictest guidelines in the care of any work of art loaned to the institution for exhibition. The Academy's reputation in this regard is flawless. We will continue to strive only to the highest standards.
We sold paintings that had not regularly been in the public domain in order to achieve exactly what the AAMD states is the role of a museum: "to enhance the conservation, exhibition and study of the collection which we recognize is the essence of a museum's service to its community and to the public." Two paintings have been sold (Frederic Edwin Church, "Scene on the Magdalene" and Sanford Robinson Gifford, "Mt. Mansfield, Vermont") and possibly two more will be sold (John White Alexander, "Portrait of Mrs. Hastings" and Robert Blum, "Japanese Beggars") in order to save over 7,300 and to ensure the future of the Academy itself.
It is also important to note that the two paintings that have sold went to a private foundation that regularly places works on public view. The Academy clearly and proactively articulated to the AAM and to the AAMD, in advance of the sale, the reality of its financial situation. We also made clear that the Academy is not an acquiring institution and presented detailed plans to use the proceeds of the sale to make the collection available in a manner that has never before been possible. Based on their criteria for deaccessioning we concluded we had no choice but to withdraw from their accreditation programs.
No comments:
Post a Comment