Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 11 Oct 1996 11:22:16 EST |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I would recommend anyone who is interested to read a front-page
article in the New York Observer about a new exhibition on Arnold
Scaasi at the New York Historical Society. The article is entitled:
"*Schmatte Macher* Arnold Scaasi Maneuvers His Own Glitzy Tribute" I
will quote the opening line:
"The women who wear my dresses don't have to wear underwear."
The Society, which Betsy Gotbaum was hired to rescue from near
oblivion, was encouraged to do this exhibition by individual and
very wealthy sponsors who are Scaasi's customers. Ms. Gotbaum is a
very connected woman who used to fundraise for democratic candidates,
helped to move the Parks Department toward privatization, and is now
working to bring glamour and money to the Historical Society.
The article has her discussing the pro's and con's of the Society's
presenting an exhibit about a commercial designer who is quite alive,
sponsored by the money of women socialites who wear his very flashy
dresses. She said that she "anticipated some resistance from people
who are not accustomed to glitz at the society." but the show
"appealed to [me] because of the role that Arnold has played in social
history." She goes on to say: "Look I have to be realistic. We don't
have enough money some months to pay for lightbulbs. When Gayfryd
[Steinberg, a NYC socially active woman] asked me to do this, I
thought 'Why not?'"
The funders include Hearst Corporate, Arnold Scaasi Inc, and several
of the top names in the NYC corporate/social nexus.
The article is pretty balanced, despite the critical tone of the
title. There is certainly a widespread recognition of the necessity
of keeping {or making} the Historical Society solvent.
I certainly do not want to editorialize in this forum, since we all
can empathize with how difficult it must be to do what Ms. Gotbaum is
doing. However, this article casts some of the issues of sponsorship
that have been discussed here into high relief. Like all museum
people and all New Yorkers who care about these things, I hope that
the Historical Society survives and thrives. Ms. Gotbaum is very
committed to her strategy of livening the place up (what with
transvestite portraits and Madonna-artifacts), and I'm sure her
successors will thank her. But she definitely is making a definitive
statement, and a controversial one at that.
I don't know whether the text of this article is available
electronically...maybe some kind soul can find out...
Eric Siegel
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|