Donate Now
Join Now      Sign In
 

CAA News Today

NEA and Smithsonian Benefit from Economic-Recovery Bill

posted by Christopher Howard — Feb 19, 2009

On Tuesday, President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed by Congress late last week. The $787 billion stimulus bill includes considerable appropriations for the National Endowment for the Arts ($50 million for a federal agency with a $245 million budget for the current fiscal year) and Smithsonian Institution ($25 million, but cut from the House’s original request of $150 million). Language that, in the Senate version of the act, would have excluded museums, theaters, and arts centers from receiving federal funds was removed from the final legislation.

Casey Selix and Cynthia Dizikes of MinnPost.com report:

According to the bill, the NEA money is “to be distributed in direct grants to fund arts projects and activities which preserve jobs in the non-profit arts sector threatened by declines in philanthropic and other support during the current economic downturn.” Forty percent of the money is to be distributed to state arts agencies and regional arts councils . . . and 60 percent for “competitively selected projects.”

Helen Stoilas from the Art Newspaper and Robin Pogrebin at the New York Times have also reported on the arts portion of the stimulus bill.

In a press release from last week, Americans for the Arts argued that 100,000 nonprofit arts organizations and their audiences generate $166.2 billion annually in US economic activity, supporting 5.7 million jobs and providing nearly $30 billion in government revenue. While politicians debated the merits of including the arts in the economic-recovery package, some stood firm. On the House floor last Friday, Congressman David Obey (D-WI) stated: “There are five million people who work in the arts industry. And right now they have 12.5 percent unemployment—or are you suggesting that somehow if you work in that field, it isn’t real when you lose your job, your mortgage, or your health insurance? We’re trying to treat people who work in the arts the same way as anybody else.”

The New York Times has published a full breakdown of the $787 billion, although arts and education funding don’t appear in standalone categories. However, Doug Lederman at Inside Higher Ed once again lists higher-education allotments in the House and Senate bills, as well as amounts in the final compromise that was approved by President Obama.

While groups like Americans for the Arts and CAA applaud the provisions for art and education in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, others point out larger issues. In the Wall Street Journal, Greg Sandow writes that “Fifty million dollars . . . is just a bubble on a wave” and feels that arguments about the economic value of the arts need closer examination. Tyler Green of Modern Art Notes also casts a skeptical eye on the NEA funding, suggesting that people in the arts should “join Washington’s think-tank culture . . . to develop new ideas about how government should be involved in the arts (and not just in one little agency, but across the federal apparatus).”

NEA AND SMITHSONIAN BENEFIT FROM ECONOMIC-RECOVERY BILL

posted by Christopher Howard — Feb 19, 2009

On Tuesday, President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, passed by Congress late last week. The $787 billion stimulus bill includes considerable appropriations for the National Endowment for the Arts ($50 million for a federal agency with a $245 million budget for the current fiscal year) and Smithsonian Institution ($25 million, but cut from the House’s original request of $150 million). Language that, in the Senate version of the act, would have excluded museums, theaters, and arts centers from receiving federal funds was removed from the final legislation.

Casey Selix and Cynthia Dizikes of MinnPost.com report:

According to the bill, the NEA money is “to be distributed in direct grants to fund arts projects and activities which preserve jobs in the non-profit arts sector threatened by declines in philanthropic and other support during the current economic downturn.” Forty percent of the money is to be distributed to state arts agencies and regional arts councils . . . and 60 percent for “competitively selected projects.”

Helen Stoilas from the Art Newspaper and Robin Pogrebin at the New York Times have also reported on the arts portion of the stimulus bill.

In a press release from last week, Americans for the Arts argued that 100,000 nonprofit arts organizations and their audiences generate $166.2 billion annually in US economic activity, supporting 5.7 million jobs and providing nearly $30 billion in government revenue. While politicians debated the merits of including the arts in the economic-recovery package, some stood firm. On the House floor last Friday, Congressman David Obey (D-WI) stated: “There are five million people who work in the arts industry. And right now they have 12.5 percent unemployment—or are you suggesting that somehow if you work in that field, it isn’t real when you lose your job, your mortgage, or your health insurance? We’re trying to treat people who work in the arts the same way as anybody else.”

The New York Times has published a full breakdown of the $787 billion, although arts and education funding don’t appear in standalone categories. However, Doug Lederman at Inside Higher Ed once again lists higher-education allotments in the House and Senate bills, as well as amounts in the final compromise that was approved by President Obama.

While groups like Americans for the Arts and CAA applaud the provisions for art and education in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, others point out larger issues. In the Wall Street Journal, Greg Sandow writes that “Fifty million dollars . . . is just a bubble on a wave” and feels that arguments about the economic value of the arts need closer examination. Tyler Green of Modern Art Notes also casts a skeptical eye on the NEA funding, suggesting that people in the arts should “join Washington’s think-tank culture . . . to develop new ideas about how government should be involved in the arts (and not just in one little agency, but across the federal apparatus).”

Filed under: Advocacy — Tags:

Brandeis Department of Fine Arts Responds to Museum Closing

posted by Christopher Howard — Feb 03, 2009

The Department of Fine Arts at Brandeis University, chaired by Charles B. McClendon, the Sidney and Ellen Wien Professor in the History of Art, has published a statement on the closing of the Rose Art Museum. It was sent to all university faculty, students, alumni, and friends of this department. Here is the letter in full:

Late Monday afternoon (January 26) the Department of Fine Arts was notified that the University Board of Trustees resolved to disband the Rose Art Museum and sell the collection at auction to raise funds for the university. In addition to despairing at the Trustees’ action, we wish to make clear that at no point in the decision making process was the Department of Fine Arts faculty consulted. Neither was there any communication regarding the decision with the Rose Board of Overseers on which a member of the faculty sits. Nor was any reference made to the museum at the university-wide faculty meeting last Thursday (January 22) when strategies to confront the current fiscal crisis were discussed.

The department faculty wishes to express our profound sadness at the consequences of this abrupt action for the liberal arts mission, cultural life, and intellectual legacy of the university. Since its founding in 1961, the Rose Art Museum has been building a collection of post-war and contemporary art, gradually, steadily, and with the generous support of donors who believe in Brandeis. Often cited as the best in New England, the collection includes superb examples of work by nearly every major artist from the post-war decades, such as Jasper Johns and Willem de Kooning, and deep holdings of art of the present and of classic modern art from both sides of the Atlantic. No other university in the region can claim a more renowned resource for the study of modern and contemporary art. In the past year thousands of visitors came to the Rose to admire the collection.

The Rose has been a leading expression of the value Brandeis places on the arts. The museum has demonstrated the commitment of Brandeis to intellectual rigor in the humanities as well as social sciences and hard sciences. In the last few years it has served as a place where faculty and students from many disciplines come together for symposia, exhibitions, lectures, and concerts. Through the Rose, Brandeis has publicly placed a premium on creative thinking in whatever form it may take. Binding art to the mission of Jewish sponsored scholarship and education was critical to the history of post-war American art. The continued connection between art and education at Brandeis has been a defining aspect of the Brandeis contribution to American higher education. This mission and the values it has imbued in generations of students have been fundamental to the growth and successes of the educational program of the Department of Fine Arts. The Rose is essential to the character of this department as it exists today.

The collection is an intellectual history of post-war society that corresponds to the history of Brandeis itself. Curators and art historians have been drawing on our collection to tell histories of American art and culture to audiences here in Waltham and around the globe. Hundreds of students from studio art and art history classes study the collection each semester. For some, the collection has been the seedbed for important careers in the arts, Academe, and great museums.

As to the proposed future of the museum building, at no time before or after notification of the decision, have members of the Fine Arts Department expressed a desire to change the function of the Rose or reuse the building. There is no academic advantage to be salvaged from closing the museum and selling our art. It is a sad response to the current fiscal crisis that treasures left in trust for current and future students are now being sacrificed. The department remains committed to continuing the legacy of the intellectual and artistic practice here. We are losing an irreplaceable tool to fulfill that goal.

The Department of Fine Arts offers undergraduate degrees in studio art and art history and hosts a postbaccalaureate program in studio art. Both the department and the Rose Art Museum are CAA institutional members.

Rose Art Museum Updates

posted by Christopher Howard — Jan 29, 2009

Ford W. Bell, president of the American Association of Museums, has issued a Statement on the Closure of the Rose Museum at Brandeis University. Read it at the Boston Globe’s Exhibitionist blog.

Artinfo.com has published the response from the Association of Art Museum Directors.

The Association of College and University Museums and Galleries, a CAA affiliated society, has published its statement, ACUMG Responds to the Closure of the Rose Art Museum, Brandeis University.

Also as reported in the Boston Globe, the president of Brandeis University, Jehuda Reinharz, said that while he would not reconsider closing the museum, he is entertaining the possibility that his school might not sell the Rose Art Museum’s art collection and reaffirmed that the museum building would become a “fine arts teaching center with studio space and an exhibition gallery.” CAA notes that the Rose Art Museum as it stands now is already this.

Other updates and articles can be found at Bloomberg.com, the New York Times, and Modern Art Notes, including a Q&A with Michael Rush, director of the Rose Art Museum. Time also interviewed Rush on Tuesday, and Lee Rosenbaum at CultureGrrl has additional information.

Donn Zaretsky at Art Law Blog is also writing about the Rose situation, with deaccessioning in mind.

CAA Protests Rose Art Museum Closing and Art Collection Sale

posted by Christopher Howard — Jan 29, 2009

The College Art Association (CAA) was shocked and dismayed to learn of the decision by Brandeis University to close the Rose Art Museum and sell its entire art collection for operating revenue.

CAA supports the Codes of Ethics of the American Association of Museums and the Association of Art Museum Directors, which clearly state that works of art in museum collections are held as a public trust and that any proceeds of sales must only support the acquisition of new works. However, perceiving an entire art collection as a disposable financial asset and then dismantling that collection wholesale to cover other university expenses is deeply troubling for all college and university collections.

The closing of the museum at Brandeis will be devastating to the academic community, not only affecting our colleagues at the museum and students and faculty in the Department of Fine Arts, which offers programs in both studio art and art history, but also depriving the entire arts-loving public in New England and around the world. The teaching of art and art history in higher education is untenable without the direct study of physical works of art, and it appears the Brandeis Board of Trustees has disregarded the kind of scholarship and creativity that have been the hallmark of CAA members for nearly one hundred years.

According to news reports, neither Brandeis University nor the Rose Art Museum is on the brink of economic collapse, nor are they unable to maintain the collections. Given that no clear explanation has been offered on the school’s financial exigencies, the closure of the Rose Art Museum and the sale of its collection appear to be in violation of professional museum standards and of academic transparency and due process; the decision also demonstrates a lack of academic responsibility and fiduciary foresight. We appeal to the Trustees of Brandeis to revisit and reverse their decision.

Paul B. Jaskot
President, College Art Association
Professor of Art History
Department of the History of Art and Architecture
DePaul University

Linda Downs
Executive Director, College Art Association

Download a PDF of this letter from the CAA website.

Rose Art Museum Updates

posted by Christopher Howard — Jan 29, 2009

Ford W. Bell, president of the American Association of Museums, has issued a Statement on the Closure of the Rose Museum at Brandeis University. Read it at the Boston Globe’s Exhibitionist blog.

Artinfo.com has published the response from the Association of Art Museum Directors.

The Association of College and University Museums and Galleries, a CAA affiliated society, has published its statement, ACUMG Responds to the Closure of the Rose Art Museum, Brandeis University.

Also as reported in the Boston Globe, the president of Brandeis University, Jehuda Reinharz, said that while he would not reconsider closing the museum, he is entertaining the possibility that his school might not sell the Rose Art Museum’s art collection and reaffirmed that the museum building would become a “fine arts teaching center with studio space and an exhibition gallery.” CAA notes that the Rose Art Museum as it stands now is already this.

Other updates and articles can be found at Bloomberg.com, the New York Times, and Modern Art Notes, including a Q&A with Michael Rush, director of the Rose Art Museum. Time also interviewed Rush on Tuesday, and Lee Rosenbaum at CultureGrrl has additional information.

Donn Zaretsky at Art Law Blog is also writing about the Rose situation, with deaccessioning in mind.

Filed under: Advocacy — Tags: ,

CAA Protests Rose Art Museum Closing and Art Collection Sale

posted by Christopher Howard — Jan 29, 2009

The College Art Association (CAA) was shocked and dismayed to learn of the decision by Brandeis University to close the Rose Art Museum and sell its entire art collection for operating revenue.

CAA supports the Codes of Ethics of the American Association of Museums and the Association of Art Museum Directors, which clearly state that works of art in museum collections are held as a public trust and that any proceeds of sales must only support the acquisition of new works. However, perceiving an entire art collection as a disposable financial asset and then dismantling that collection wholesale to cover other university expenses is deeply troubling for all college and university collections.

The closing of the museum at Brandeis will be devastating to the academic community, not only affecting our colleagues at the museum and students and faculty in the Department of Fine Arts, which offers programs in both studio art and art history, but also depriving the entire arts-loving public in New England and around the world. The teaching of art and art history in higher education is untenable without the direct study of physical works of art, and it appears the Brandeis Board of Trustees has disregarded the kind of scholarship and creativity that have been the hallmark of CAA members for nearly one hundred years.

According to news reports, neither Brandeis University nor the Rose Art Museum is on the brink of economic collapse, nor are they unable to maintain the collections. Given that no clear explanation has been offered on the school’s financial exigencies, the closure of the Rose Art Museum and the sale of its collection appear to be in violation of professional museum standards and of academic transparency and due process; the decision also demonstrates a lack of academic responsibility and fiduciary foresight. We appeal to the Trustees of Brandeis to revisit and reverse their decision.

Paul B. Jaskot
President, College Art Association
Professor of Art History
Department of the History of Art and Architecture
DePaul University

Linda Downs
Executive Director, College Art Association

Download a PDF of this letter from the CAA website.

Filed under: Advocacy — Tags: ,

Brandeis University to Close Rose Art Museum and Sell Collection

posted by Christopher Howard — Jan 27, 2009

Geoff Edgers and Peter Schworm of the Boston Globe reported yesterday that Brandeis University, a private research university in Waltham, Massachussets, plans to close the Rose Art Museum and sell its collection of modern and contemporary masterworks. The measure to shutter the museum, which was founded in 1961, in late summer 2009 is one of several drastic decisions the school is making as it faces a budget deficit of several million over the next couple years.

The school’s website boasts that the museum “houses what is widely recognized as the finest collection of modern and contemporary art in New England. With more than 6,000 objects—paintings, sculptures, works on paper and new media—the Rose collection has particular strengths in American Modernism, American Social Realism, post-War American, Abstract Expressionism, Minimalism, Surrealism and Photorealism.”

“The decision to shut the museum,” writes Scott Jaschik of Inside Higher Ed, “runs directly counter to the ethics codes of art and museum associations, which permit the sale of art donated for a museum only for the purchase of additional art, not to be shifted to other purposes.” The Association of College and University Museums and Galleries, a CAA affilated society, has already spoken out opposing the closure.

Relatedly, Inside Higher Ed also reports on shrinking college and university endowments.

Winter Obituaries in the Arts

posted by Christopher Howard — Jan 26, 2009

CAA recognizes the lives and achievements of the following artists, scholars, designers, architects, philanthropists, and collectors.

  • Joan Abelló, a Spanish painter who lived in Barcelona, died on December 25, 2008, one day before he would have turned 86
  • Leonard E. B. Andrews, a collector of Andrew Wyeth’s “Helga Pictures” and an arts philanthropist, died on January 2, 2009, in Malvern, Pennsylvania. He was 83
  • Manjit Bawa, an Indian figurative painter of mythological and Sufi spiritual themes, died on December 29, 2008, in New Delhi. He was 67
  • Aldo Crommelynck, an artist and master printer who worked with artists ranging from Matisse, Picasso, and Miró to Jim Dine, Chuck Close, and Terry Winters, died on December 22, 2008, in Paris, France. He was 77
  • Hannah Frank, a Scottish artist and sculptor, died on December 18, 2008. She was 100
  • Betty Freeman, an art collector and supporter of twentieth-century music, died on January 3, 2009, at the age of 97
  • Shigeo Fukuda, a graphic designer and poster artist, died on January 11, 2009, in Tokyo, Japan. He was 76
  • Betty Goodwin, a highly acclaimed Canadian artist, died on December 1, 2008, at the age of 85
  • Robert Graham, a Los Angeles–based artist who focused on monumental public bronze sculpture, including those depicting Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Joe Louis, and Charlie Parker, died on December 27, 2008. He was 70
  • Robert Gumbiner, a physician, healthcare innovator, and founder of the Museum of Latin American Art in Long Beach, California, died on January 20, 2009. He was 85
  • Jan Kaplický, a Czech architect whose radical, organic building forms can be seen across Europe and the UK, died on January 14, 2009, at the age of 71
  • Michael Levy, an art historian and director of the National Gallery in London from 1973 to 1987, died on December 28, 2008, at the age of 81
  • Pierre Mendell, a graphic designer and poster artist who worked on the visual identity of the International Design Museum in Munich, Germany, died on December 19, 2008. He was 79
  • Govinder Nazran, an illustrator and designer turned fine artist, died on December 30, 2008, at the age of 44
  • Ann Sperry, a New York–based sculptor and feminist whose work was collected by art institutions nationwide, died on November 27, 2008
  • Coosje van Bruggen, an art historian, critic, and artist who collaborated with her husband Claes Oldenburg, died on January 10, 2009, in Los Angeles. She was 66
  • Andrew Wyeth, a respected and reviled American realist painter, died on January 16, 2009, at his home in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania. He was 91
  • Ray Yoshida, a painter and collage artist who taught at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago for many years, died on January 10, 2009, in Kauai, Hawai‘i. He was 78

Read all past obituaries in the arts on the CAA website.

Filed under: Obituaries, People in the News

The Art Bulletin publishes leading scholarship in the English language in all aspects of art history as practiced in the academy, museums, and other institutions. From its founding in 1913, the quarterly journal has published, through rigorous peer review, scholarly articles and critical reviews of the highest quality in all areas and periods of the history of art.

The Art Bulletin Seeks Editor-in-Chief

The Art Bulletin Editorial Board invites nominations and self-nominations for the position of editor-in-chief of The Art Bulletin, for a three-year term, July 1, 2010–June 30, 2013 (preceded by a year as editor designate, from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010).

The Art Bulletin comprises scholarly essays and documentation on the history of visual art of all periods and places. The editor-in-chief is responsible for the content and character of the journal. Each issue has approximately 150 editorial pages (135,000 words), not including book and exhibition reviews, which are the responsibility of the reviews editor. The editor-in-chief reads all submitted manuscripts, refers them to appropriate expert referees for scholarly review, provides guidance to authors concerning the form and content of submissions, and makes final decisions regarding acceptance or rejection of articles for publication.

In addition to working with authors, the editor-in-chief attends the three annual meetings of the Art Bulletin Editorial Board—held in the spring and fall in New York and once at the CAA Annual Conference—and submits an annual report to the CAA Board of Directors and editorial board. CAA reimburses the editor-in-chief for travel and lodging expenses for the spring and fall meetings in accordance with its travel policy, but the editor-in-chief pays these expenses to attend the Annual Conference. The editor-in-chief also works closely with the CAA staff in New York, where production for the publication is organized. This is a half-time position. CAA provides financial compensation to the editor’s institution, usually in the form of course release or the equivalent, for three years. The editor is not usually compensated directly.

Candidates must be current CAA members and should not be serving on the editorial board of a competitive journal or on another CAA editorial board or committee. Members may not publish their own work in the journal during the term of service. Nominators should ascertain their nominee’s willingness to serve before submitting a name. Please send a letter describing your interest in and qualifications for appointment, CV, and contact information to: Chair, Art Bulletin Editorial Board, CAA, 275 Seventh Ave., 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001. Deadline: April 15, 2009.

The Art Bulletin Seeks Editorial-Board Members

CAA invites nominations and self-nominations for two individuals to serve on the Art Bulletin Editorial Board for a four-year term, July 1, 2009–June 30, 2013.

The ideal candidate has published substantially in the field and may be an academic, museum-based, or independent scholar; institutional affiliation is not required. Applicants who have specializations in East or South Asian, Renaissance, or early modern European art are especially invited to apply.

The editorial board advises the editor-in-chief and assists him or her to seek authors, articles, and other content for the journal; guides its editorial program and may propose new initiatives for it; performs peer reviews and recommends peer reviewers; and may support fundraising efforts on the journal’s behalf. Members also assist the editor-in-chief to keep abreast of trends and issues in the field by attending and reporting on sessions at the CAA Annual Conference and other academic conferences, symposia, and events in their fields.

Each year the editorial board meets twice in New York and once at the CAA Annual Conference. CAA reimburses members for travel and lodging expenses for the spring and fall New York meetings in accordance with its travel policy, but members pay these expenses to attend the conference.

Candidates must be current CAA members and should not be serving on the editorial board of a competitive journal or on another CAA editorial board or committee. Members may not publish their own work in the journal during the term of service. Nominators should ascertain their nominee’s willingness to serve before submitting a name. Please send a letter describing your interest in and qualifications for appointment, CV, and contact information to: Chair, Art Bulletin Editorial Board, CAA, 275 Seventh Ave., 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001. Deadline: April 15, 2009.

Filed under: Art Bulletin, Publications