My main thought was that Andy Warhol would be pleased as punch (or perhaps
soup?)

I'm thinking that throwing a McDonalds in the Smithsonian is far worse than
letting Armani sponsor an exhibit.

Robyne

--
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not
to think at all." - Hypatia
--
Robyne Miles
Director of Operations & Volunteers
The Science Factory
www.sciencefactory.org
phone: 541-682-7882  fax: 541-484-9027
reply to: [log in to unmask]



> From: John Suau <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:39:38 -0500
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Guggenheim Editorial - Village Voice
>
> This article from the VILLAGE VOICE, Feb 19, 2002. I think his theories are
> flawed.  Thought provoking, but the Guggenheim is not alone in any of the
> problems articulated here.  I'm interested in others' thoughts, on or off
> line.  Thanks.
>
>
> The Guggenheim Museum Touches Bottom
> Downward Spiral
> by Jerry Saltz
>
> It is time for Guggenheim director Thomas Krens to go. The trustees and
> board members who helped him twist this institution into a kind of GuggEnron
> should go as well. When they have all gone, and after we breathe a sigh of
> relief and survey the damage they've done, someone will have to put the
> Guggenheim back together again. Krens & Co. have turned this already fragile
> museum into a rogue institution, broken faith with art, and stripped it of
> the reputation won for it by generations of artists and curators.
>
> Krens set out to reach more people, and make more money. Unlike many
> European institutions, our museums aren't primarily government funded, which
> leaves the back door to business permanently and invitingly ajar. In a
> shrewd piece of entrepreneurial prestidigitation, Krens converted the
> Guggenheim's back door into its main entrance. The most literal
> manifestation of this flip-flop-or flimflam-was how viewers had to pass
> through the museum store in order to enter the Soho Guggenheim. Shadier
> examples include BMW underwriting "Motorcycle," Giorgio Armani reportedly
> donating $15 million to the Guggenheim around the time of his exhibition
> there, and the Norman Rockwell Estate Licensing Company providing funds for
> that illustrator's current show.
>
> Krens's big-top approach to culture also embodies a recessive American
> tendency toward empire, or what we cutely call McDonaldization. In an
> attempt to juice up, globalize, and glamorize the museum, to market it, turn
> it into a worldwide entertainment network, boost audience share, stage
> spectaculars, and pad the pockets of this institution, Krens hoped to
> transform the Guggenheim into a brand. He talked of "synergy," and opened-or
> tried to open-branches around the globe, including venues in Venice, Las
> Vegas, Bilbao, Salzburg, and Berlin. Although the Soho branch has gone
> belly-up, he's still trying to build a Frank Gehry colossus in Lower
> Manhattan, and is brokering an outlet in Rio.
>
> Some have gone so far as to say that Krens "articulated a vision of the art
> museum in the 21st century." But this isn't "a vision," it's a ruse
> masquerading as a wow. The only thing Krens did was cross Museum Mile with
> Broadway: He created glitzy palaces and high-concept productions dependent
> on onetime, out-of-town visitors. Now that the museum has fired 90 people
> and postponed or canceled the Kasimir Malevich, Douglas Gordon, and Matthew
> Barney surveys (Barney's would have opened next week), the Guggenheim looks
> a lot less "visionary" and a lot more dubious, with each branch set up to
> support another branch. The business world calls this leveraging. The street
> calls it a shell game. I think we can call it reprehensible.
>
> Krens franchised the museum, but he never gave it a curatorial identity. He
> accessorized the shell but neglected art. Like Tina Brown at The New Yorker,
> he was adept at administering an established, if adrift, institution; like
> Brown at Talk, however, he was incapable of creating anything genuinely
> interesting. Solid exhibitions were mounted on Krens's 14-year watch. Some
> were extravaganzas. For the record, I liked "Motorcycle"; it convincingly
> tracked the development of a form. But "Motorcycle" isn't the problem.
> Selling out art is. Joey Ramone said, "It's easier to sell a lot of records
> than it is to make rock-and-roll history." Krens & Co. believe hype and
> history are the same. This is Spice Girls logic.
>
> Unfortunately, this logic has run the place into the ground and demoralized
> the staff. The current "Brazil: Body and Soul" show is one of the ugliest,
> most muddled exhibitions ever mounted by a New York museum. By painting the
> entire rotunda black so that nothing is visible, the Guggenheim is telling
> you it's not interested in the work, only in its packaging. The place looks
> like a giant bazaar. We all want to see art from other cultures, but why
> Brazil, why now, and why in this incomprehensible manner? Unless, of course,
> it's to sweeten the Rio deal. Pairing this with the desultory Rockwell
> exhibition, the Guggenheim has touched bottom.
>
> We will never know how many millions of dollars were wasted on online
> gimmicks and real or would-be outposts. As for the vaunted behemoth Krens
> and Gehry built in Bilbao (which Krens claims as "one of the greatest
> buildings of the 20th century"): It's beguiling from the outside and
> ridiculously overscaled on the inside. At the end of the day, like many of
> Krens's projects, it has little to do with art. Krens should be made the CEO
> of a big company. Then he could put up all the buildings he wants in places
> like Hartford or Houston. Anywhere but here.
>
> When Krens & Co. are gone, they will not be missed. They came in with Reagan
> and should go out with Enron. On the bright side, museums as institutions
> are relatively young and resilient; art is old and can take care of itself.
> In a generation, maybe less, the Guggenheim will be great again. As it is,
> it's lost.
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/
> . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a
> one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the
> message should read "help" (without the quotes).
>
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
> [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
> Museum-L" (without the quotes).

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).