| | I don’t know if any of you are aware of the controversy that was stirred up when the Minneapolis Institute of Arts decided to sell William Bouguereau's popular painting _Bohémienne_ in order to finance the purchase of Albert Joseph Moore’s _Battledore_, but I’d be interested in hearing Objectivist perspectives on the issue.
Before the painting was sold at auction (Christie's reported that a private American collector bought it for $650,000), the Art Renewal Center actively opposed the sale, and offered some impassioned arguments:
http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/2004/Minneapolis/shameful1.asp
MIA is 45 minutes from my home, and, like Fred Ross, ARC’s founder, I was saddened when I heard of the museum’s plans to sell _Bohémienne_. I’ll miss her. But shouldn’t the deaccession of publicly owned art to private parties be ~supported~ regardless of the financial, ideological or aesthetic motives driving such decisions?
Ross was quoted in the Minneapolis Star Tribune as saying, "It could end up anywhere -- Outer Mongolia or Japan -- this is a great, great painting, and America deserves it." I don‘t think that Mr. Ross meant to imply that Outer Mongolians and Japanese are unworthy of owning great works of art, but he does seem to be implying that private ownership can constitute a denial of collective access rights that the public “deserves.”
Comments?
Jonathan
|
|
