Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Everybody Gets it Except the Phila. Inquirer
Coverage of the selection of architects was predictable in the Philadelphia Inquirer but the news of greater consequence in this affair continues to be better covered in the L. A. Times and even in Perth, Australia! Below is today's story in "The Australian". It has a few errors, most notably the concluding comment that the court's permission to move was "recently upheld":
The Barnes collection of 20th-century art is to leave its carefully planned home, reports Ted Snell
The Barnes Foundation outside Philadelphia houses one of the most spectacular collections of early modernist art anywhere in the world. Albert C. Barnes made a fortune from prescription medicine and began to buy contemporary art in the early years of the 20th century. His first purchase was a van Gogh, a brave move at the time.
In 1922, he established a foundation to promote education through experience. Its first director of education was American philosopher and educational reformer John Dewey, and together they formulated an approach to promote the advancement of education and the appreciation of the fine arts for the working man and woman.
Each wall in the gallery has been carefully arranged around one key work in the collection. Those that surround it extrapolate some principle: the use of the diagonal, for example; the use of the arabesque to harmonise a composition; the interplay of complementary colours; the potency of certain colours; some theme about human relationships; or just a quirky relationship based on recurring motifs, such as flowers or children.
A relevant piece of furniture is placed in the middle of the wall directly below the masterpiece that holds it all together, with a collection of ceramic objects or sculptures placed on top. Intermingled with the paintings is a collection of metalwork objects such as hinges, keys and spoons that further elaborate on the story each wall is designed to tell.
Some walls are very strange, while others work extremely well and you pick up the controlling intelligence behind the arrangement immediately. Two figures talking to each other from either side of the room in paintings flanking a central image of a solitary figure enhance the sense of isolation of a Cezanne portrait, for example.
Two pewter candlesticks with red candles beside a pewter box located under a silvery-grey painting by Daumier flanked by two 15th-century French paintings, in which the same red of the candles is a key visual element, is good interior decoration, but is it something more?
The symmetrical structure of the hang reinforces this sense of control and balance, so you are left wondering whether the theories Barnes developed are anything more than just a highly refined sensibility and sensitivity to the principles of design. Maybe that's enough. Certainly playing with masterpieces helps. And the quality of the works is exceptional.
There are more than 80 paintings by Cezanne, large numbers by Matisse and Picasso, an incredible 181 Renoirs and much more. It's almost like seeing three or four important retrospectives at once.
Some artists particularly benefit from this: Cezanne and Matisse, for example. But Renoir suffers. Seeing so many of his paintings, all so similar, so sweet and soft, reinforces any doubts harboured about his work. One turns quickly for an antidote in the other works in the room.
This level of intensity is a little daunting, too, and the sense of bombardment by images and ideas is difficult to manage. You move from Matisse's great mural to a tiny but exquisite African sculpture, to a painting of Mont Sainte-Victoire and on to a piece of folk furniture. Nevertheless, many of the works are first rate, which makes the gallery a fascinating experience.
The collection is valued at more than $US6billion ($7.3 billion) and a proposal to move it to a new purpose-built gallery in Philadelphia is causing uproar. Legal action has been taken and along the nearby leafy lanes of Merion, outside Philadelphia, are signs saying bluntly: "The Barnes belongs in Merion." I can't help but agree.
The home and its environs were as much a part of Barnes's philosophy as the works and to take them from that environment would seem to be insensitive. Seeing these works in their designated places, on the walls Barnes placed them, is a unique experience. Barnes vested the management of collection in Lincoln University, an African-American focused institution outside Philadelphia, but it has sought and gained court approval for the move. That decision, regrettably, was recently upheld.
Ted Snell is The Australian's Perth art critic.
The Barnes collection of 20th-century art is to leave its carefully planned home, reports Ted Snell
The Barnes Foundation outside Philadelphia houses one of the most spectacular collections of early modernist art anywhere in the world. Albert C. Barnes made a fortune from prescription medicine and began to buy contemporary art in the early years of the 20th century. His first purchase was a van Gogh, a brave move at the time.
In 1922, he established a foundation to promote education through experience. Its first director of education was American philosopher and educational reformer John Dewey, and together they formulated an approach to promote the advancement of education and the appreciation of the fine arts for the working man and woman.
Each wall in the gallery has been carefully arranged around one key work in the collection. Those that surround it extrapolate some principle: the use of the diagonal, for example; the use of the arabesque to harmonise a composition; the interplay of complementary colours; the potency of certain colours; some theme about human relationships; or just a quirky relationship based on recurring motifs, such as flowers or children.
A relevant piece of furniture is placed in the middle of the wall directly below the masterpiece that holds it all together, with a collection of ceramic objects or sculptures placed on top. Intermingled with the paintings is a collection of metalwork objects such as hinges, keys and spoons that further elaborate on the story each wall is designed to tell.
Some walls are very strange, while others work extremely well and you pick up the controlling intelligence behind the arrangement immediately. Two figures talking to each other from either side of the room in paintings flanking a central image of a solitary figure enhance the sense of isolation of a Cezanne portrait, for example.
Two pewter candlesticks with red candles beside a pewter box located under a silvery-grey painting by Daumier flanked by two 15th-century French paintings, in which the same red of the candles is a key visual element, is good interior decoration, but is it something more?
The symmetrical structure of the hang reinforces this sense of control and balance, so you are left wondering whether the theories Barnes developed are anything more than just a highly refined sensibility and sensitivity to the principles of design. Maybe that's enough. Certainly playing with masterpieces helps. And the quality of the works is exceptional.
There are more than 80 paintings by Cezanne, large numbers by Matisse and Picasso, an incredible 181 Renoirs and much more. It's almost like seeing three or four important retrospectives at once.
Some artists particularly benefit from this: Cezanne and Matisse, for example. But Renoir suffers. Seeing so many of his paintings, all so similar, so sweet and soft, reinforces any doubts harboured about his work. One turns quickly for an antidote in the other works in the room.
This level of intensity is a little daunting, too, and the sense of bombardment by images and ideas is difficult to manage. You move from Matisse's great mural to a tiny but exquisite African sculpture, to a painting of Mont Sainte-Victoire and on to a piece of folk furniture. Nevertheless, many of the works are first rate, which makes the gallery a fascinating experience.
The collection is valued at more than $US6billion ($7.3 billion) and a proposal to move it to a new purpose-built gallery in Philadelphia is causing uproar. Legal action has been taken and along the nearby leafy lanes of Merion, outside Philadelphia, are signs saying bluntly: "The Barnes belongs in Merion." I can't help but agree.
The home and its environs were as much a part of Barnes's philosophy as the works and to take them from that environment would seem to be insensitive. Seeing these works in their designated places, on the walls Barnes placed them, is a unique experience. Barnes vested the management of collection in Lincoln University, an African-American focused institution outside Philadelphia, but it has sought and gained court approval for the move. That decision, regrettably, was recently upheld.
Ted Snell is The Australian's Perth art critic.
Architects
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
FBF to BF: "Too late!"
The Barnes Foundation held a news conference at Philadelphia's City Hall today. Mayor Street came. The Mayor said this was a historic day for the city and the region. The news? The Barnes Foundation is moving to the Parkway! Sorry, Barnes Foundation. Too late.
There was this exchange between Bernard Watson and Evening Bulletin reporter Jim McCaffrey:
Bulletin: Dr. Watson there is a lot of criticism in Montgomery County of your board's refusal to consider Montgomery County's offer. People say you are turning your back on your fiduciary duty.
Dr. Bernard Watson: "I don't have any response. They can say whatever they would like to say. I have not heard from them. We are working on the collection's destination."
Bulletin: Dr. Watson when do you expect to fill the vacancies on your board?
Dr. Bernard Watson: "I expect to do that by the end of the year. I will tell you the only people that will be considered are people [who are willing to work]. We are a hard working board and we only want people who have something to add to the board. Our board includes a former President of Harvard University. This is a quality bunch."
When asked about the lawsuit filed by the Friends of the Barnes Watson at least twice replied, "Our lawyers will deal with that. We will continue do what all the courts up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have said we can do" move the Barnes to the Benjamin Franklin Parkway. Dr. Watson is repeating a falsehood that BF counsel Phyllis Beck also claimed a few weeks back: the PA Supreme Court never reviewed the Orphans'Court decision. The lawyers for the Barnes made sure of that when they succeeded in getting (Barnes student) Jay Raymond's appeal dismissed before the decision could be reviewed.
There was this exchange between Bernard Watson and Evening Bulletin reporter Jim McCaffrey:
Bulletin: Dr. Watson there is a lot of criticism in Montgomery County of your board's refusal to consider Montgomery County's offer. People say you are turning your back on your fiduciary duty.
Dr. Bernard Watson: "I don't have any response. They can say whatever they would like to say. I have not heard from them. We are working on the collection's destination."
Bulletin: Dr. Watson when do you expect to fill the vacancies on your board?
Dr. Bernard Watson: "I expect to do that by the end of the year. I will tell you the only people that will be considered are people [who are willing to work]. We are a hard working board and we only want people who have something to add to the board. Our board includes a former President of Harvard University. This is a quality bunch."
When asked about the lawsuit filed by the Friends of the Barnes Watson at least twice replied, "Our lawyers will deal with that. We will continue do what all the courts up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have said we can do" move the Barnes to the Benjamin Franklin Parkway. Dr. Watson is repeating a falsehood that BF counsel Phyllis Beck also claimed a few weeks back: the PA Supreme Court never reviewed the Orphans'Court decision. The lawyers for the Barnes made sure of that when they succeeded in getting (Barnes student) Jay Raymond's appeal dismissed before the decision could be reviewed.
Zaller Strikes at the Heart
FBF member Robert Zaller's current piece in the online arts journal, Broad Street Review, is a must read. The moral corruption of those in charge of the move and those who are enabling it is put on full display.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Setting Callen Bair Straight
The other day, Callen Bair, in "Figure Painting" blogged on FBF's filing of the petition. Her post went along just fine until the fourth paragraph, when she began to repeat oft-repeated misreadings of Albert Barnes' intent. I posted a comment and said this:
"Your post on Barnes goes astray in the fourth paragraph which begins, 'We don't pretend to know anything...'. I would gather that you have never been to see the Barnes. Without seeing it one cannot imagine the loss of profound artistic expression that removing the art from its context would engender. This would not be simply a change of location, it would be an act of vandalism against a world art treasure.
Further, you go on to repeat an oft-repeated misreading of Albert Barnes' intent, inferring that he would approve of the move since more people could see the art. Dr. Barnes' intent was that his school would be a place for serious study by anyone, regardless of background, of the language of art. Indeed, his collection is designed to demonstrate that all humans, no matter when or where they come from, express their experience of life in the same language. His art was assembled to be a source of study for that language.
Turning the Barnes Foundation into a sideshow on Philadelphia's Parkway will undermine the art's greatest potential value and rob us all of a priceless and irreplaceable inheritance."
"Your post on Barnes goes astray in the fourth paragraph which begins, 'We don't pretend to know anything...'. I would gather that you have never been to see the Barnes. Without seeing it one cannot imagine the loss of profound artistic expression that removing the art from its context would engender. This would not be simply a change of location, it would be an act of vandalism against a world art treasure.
Further, you go on to repeat an oft-repeated misreading of Albert Barnes' intent, inferring that he would approve of the move since more people could see the art. Dr. Barnes' intent was that his school would be a place for serious study by anyone, regardless of background, of the language of art. Indeed, his collection is designed to demonstrate that all humans, no matter when or where they come from, express their experience of life in the same language. His art was assembled to be a source of study for that language.
Turning the Barnes Foundation into a sideshow on Philadelphia's Parkway will undermine the art's greatest potential value and rob us all of a priceless and irreplaceable inheritance."
Main Line Times: A Real News Paper
Cherly Allison of the Main Line Times has given far more complete coverage of FBF's petiton before Orphans' Court than has the Philadelphia Inquirer. Here is Allison's report on August 30, 2007:
Group Files Petition to Reopen Barnes Case
Friends of Barnes asks Montco Orphans’ court judge to oust current board of trustees
by Cheryl Allison
In a scathing, 79-page petition filed Monday, opponents of relocating the Barnes Foundation’s priceless art collection from Merion to Philadelphia asked a judge to reopen the epic case.
Going further, the Friends of the Barnes Foundation, together with students and neighbors, call on Montgomery County Orphans’ Court Judge Stanley Ott to rescind his 2004 decision permitting the move. They also ask Ott to remove the current board of trustees and place the foundation in the hands of a court-appointed caretaker.
Speaking at noon press conference at the home of Dr. Walter and Nancy Herman, across Latch’s Lane from the gallery, attorney Mark Schwartz said new evidence not available to Ott in 2004 and changed circumstances since the decision merit new consideration.
The petition also asserts that the Barnes board has violated its fiduciary responsibilities and, in its single-minded “mission” to move the art to Philadelphia, has dismissed less costly remedies to preserve the institution where its founder, Dr. Albert C. Barnes, wanted it to remain: in Merion.
“The problem has never been the trust indenture,’ Albert Barnes’ instructions, Schwartz said. “The problem is and always has been the board. So what we’re suggesting is, given the board’s continued failure to exercise its fiduciary obligations, that now is a good time for the judge to get rid of the board and place [the foundation] in receivership.”
A spokesman for the Barnes Foundation, Andrew Stewart, said it had not seen the petition and would have no comment on the suit.
The filing came less than a week after an acrimonious public parting of the ways between Bryn Mawr resident Schwartz, who had also been working to prepare a petition on behalf of Montgomery County, and board of commissioners President Tom Ellis. Schwartz resigned Aug. 21, forestalling his firing by the county.
The issues, according to the various parties, had to do with Schwartz’s continued representation of the Friends, the timing of court action, and the tone of his draft petition.
Ellis has said Montgomery County remains committed to the fight to keep the Barnes in Merion, and will file its own petition, working with in-house counsel, possibly as soon as next month.
In an interview, Schwartz said the Friends have “been ready to file for a month.” Symbolically, they felt it was imperative to act sooner, before the Barnes board names an architect for the new museum. The board has said it wants to announce its selection before the end of the summer.
The tone of the petition is strong.
Drawing a picture of a web of connections between Barnes board members and other entities interested in a move to Philadelphia of which the court may not have been fully informed, the petition says the board has ”come to the court with unclean hands,” and conflicts of interest should be investigated. Among those entities are the three major benefactors of the move, the Pew Charitable Trusts and the Annenberg and Lenfest foundations.
The petition is also harshly critical of the state attorney general’s office, which oversees non-profit organizations, and the passive, if not outright supportive, role it has played. The roles of politicians from Gov. Ed Rendell to Philadelphia state Sen. Vincent Fumo are also called into question. Among allegations: that the governor and then Attorney General Mike Fisher influenced Lincoln University, which then controlled the Barnes board, to drop out of the legal fight by proffering $50 million in state aid to the school.
A major focus in the petition is an appropriation in a 2002 state capital budget of $107 million for a new Barnes facility in the city. The bill, which carries Fumo’s name as a sponsor, predated the Barnes’ request to Ott for relief form the indenture. Uncovered last year by a Merion resident, that earmark and its origins have never been explained. Schwartz calls it “The Immaculate Appropriation.”
Ott has said he was not made aware of that appropriation during months of court deliberations. “If any of the parties knew of or sought this appropriation, not bringing it to the attention of this court was nothing less than a fraud perpetrated upon this court, “ the suit asserts.
But the petition goes further still. It mentions that promises made to the court have not been met. A site on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway is still in question. Fund raising for the move is murky. And, even though the Barnes argued that an expanded board of 15 members was necessary to promote fund raising, no more than 12 members have been appointed, three years after Ott’s ruling.
Although area residents, the art community and the court have been led to believe the Barnes experience will be replicated in a new, more accessible gallery, “petitioners believe and affirm that the endgame may come when the compromised and co-opted Barnes Foundation decides that the collection needs to be housed in a place of last resort, that just so happens to have some space, e.g., the Philadelphia Museum of Art.”
Besides those issues for review, the petition points out changes since 2004 that could support the Barnes in Merion. Montgomery County has offered a $50 million bond-funded purchase and lease-back arrangement, which would provide the foundation with needed funds.
Lower Merion Township recently amended its zoning code to more than double admissions from 62,000 to 144,000 per year, also bringing in new revenues.
And, at the Friends’ request, the Department of the Interior’s National Park Service has determined that the complete Barnes complex in Merion, including the gallery building, arboretum and the art collection, is eligible for National Historic Landmark status.
Achieving such a designation could make the Barnes eligible for additional grant funding. But, like with the county and township proposals, the Barnes board has shown no interest.
The petition has been filed on behalf of several Barnes students, neighbors and the Friends organization, which it argues have more than a common interest in the case and should have legal standing. But even if Ott finds that they do not, it point out, the court itself can take action to review the points made.
Speaking at the press conference, one of those students, Jay Raymond, whose appeal of Ott’s decision previously went all the way to the state Supreme Court, said “there is no alternative to a Barnes in Merion.”
“It is already understood,” he said, “that no matter how beautiful and prestigious a new container for the paintings would be, a Barnes on the parkway will never be the work of art that Albert Barnes created, but will be the work of vandalism that others created.
“We are here today,” Raymond said, “to announce that a deal that has never been close to done, is coming undone.”
Group Files Petition to Reopen Barnes Case
Friends of Barnes asks Montco Orphans’ court judge to oust current board of trustees
by Cheryl Allison
In a scathing, 79-page petition filed Monday, opponents of relocating the Barnes Foundation’s priceless art collection from Merion to Philadelphia asked a judge to reopen the epic case.
Going further, the Friends of the Barnes Foundation, together with students and neighbors, call on Montgomery County Orphans’ Court Judge Stanley Ott to rescind his 2004 decision permitting the move. They also ask Ott to remove the current board of trustees and place the foundation in the hands of a court-appointed caretaker.
Speaking at noon press conference at the home of Dr. Walter and Nancy Herman, across Latch’s Lane from the gallery, attorney Mark Schwartz said new evidence not available to Ott in 2004 and changed circumstances since the decision merit new consideration.
The petition also asserts that the Barnes board has violated its fiduciary responsibilities and, in its single-minded “mission” to move the art to Philadelphia, has dismissed less costly remedies to preserve the institution where its founder, Dr. Albert C. Barnes, wanted it to remain: in Merion.
“The problem has never been the trust indenture,’ Albert Barnes’ instructions, Schwartz said. “The problem is and always has been the board. So what we’re suggesting is, given the board’s continued failure to exercise its fiduciary obligations, that now is a good time for the judge to get rid of the board and place [the foundation] in receivership.”
A spokesman for the Barnes Foundation, Andrew Stewart, said it had not seen the petition and would have no comment on the suit.
The filing came less than a week after an acrimonious public parting of the ways between Bryn Mawr resident Schwartz, who had also been working to prepare a petition on behalf of Montgomery County, and board of commissioners President Tom Ellis. Schwartz resigned Aug. 21, forestalling his firing by the county.
The issues, according to the various parties, had to do with Schwartz’s continued representation of the Friends, the timing of court action, and the tone of his draft petition.
Ellis has said Montgomery County remains committed to the fight to keep the Barnes in Merion, and will file its own petition, working with in-house counsel, possibly as soon as next month.
In an interview, Schwartz said the Friends have “been ready to file for a month.” Symbolically, they felt it was imperative to act sooner, before the Barnes board names an architect for the new museum. The board has said it wants to announce its selection before the end of the summer.
The tone of the petition is strong.
Drawing a picture of a web of connections between Barnes board members and other entities interested in a move to Philadelphia of which the court may not have been fully informed, the petition says the board has ”come to the court with unclean hands,” and conflicts of interest should be investigated. Among those entities are the three major benefactors of the move, the Pew Charitable Trusts and the Annenberg and Lenfest foundations.
The petition is also harshly critical of the state attorney general’s office, which oversees non-profit organizations, and the passive, if not outright supportive, role it has played. The roles of politicians from Gov. Ed Rendell to Philadelphia state Sen. Vincent Fumo are also called into question. Among allegations: that the governor and then Attorney General Mike Fisher influenced Lincoln University, which then controlled the Barnes board, to drop out of the legal fight by proffering $50 million in state aid to the school.
A major focus in the petition is an appropriation in a 2002 state capital budget of $107 million for a new Barnes facility in the city. The bill, which carries Fumo’s name as a sponsor, predated the Barnes’ request to Ott for relief form the indenture. Uncovered last year by a Merion resident, that earmark and its origins have never been explained. Schwartz calls it “The Immaculate Appropriation.”
Ott has said he was not made aware of that appropriation during months of court deliberations. “If any of the parties knew of or sought this appropriation, not bringing it to the attention of this court was nothing less than a fraud perpetrated upon this court, “ the suit asserts.
But the petition goes further still. It mentions that promises made to the court have not been met. A site on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway is still in question. Fund raising for the move is murky. And, even though the Barnes argued that an expanded board of 15 members was necessary to promote fund raising, no more than 12 members have been appointed, three years after Ott’s ruling.
Although area residents, the art community and the court have been led to believe the Barnes experience will be replicated in a new, more accessible gallery, “petitioners believe and affirm that the endgame may come when the compromised and co-opted Barnes Foundation decides that the collection needs to be housed in a place of last resort, that just so happens to have some space, e.g., the Philadelphia Museum of Art.”
Besides those issues for review, the petition points out changes since 2004 that could support the Barnes in Merion. Montgomery County has offered a $50 million bond-funded purchase and lease-back arrangement, which would provide the foundation with needed funds.
Lower Merion Township recently amended its zoning code to more than double admissions from 62,000 to 144,000 per year, also bringing in new revenues.
And, at the Friends’ request, the Department of the Interior’s National Park Service has determined that the complete Barnes complex in Merion, including the gallery building, arboretum and the art collection, is eligible for National Historic Landmark status.
Achieving such a designation could make the Barnes eligible for additional grant funding. But, like with the county and township proposals, the Barnes board has shown no interest.
The petition has been filed on behalf of several Barnes students, neighbors and the Friends organization, which it argues have more than a common interest in the case and should have legal standing. But even if Ott finds that they do not, it point out, the court itself can take action to review the points made.
Speaking at the press conference, one of those students, Jay Raymond, whose appeal of Ott’s decision previously went all the way to the state Supreme Court, said “there is no alternative to a Barnes in Merion.”
“It is already understood,” he said, “that no matter how beautiful and prestigious a new container for the paintings would be, a Barnes on the parkway will never be the work of art that Albert Barnes created, but will be the work of vandalism that others created.
“We are here today,” Raymond said, “to announce that a deal that has never been close to done, is coming undone.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
