The facts:

The economy sucks. The Jewish economy has been hit even harder than the rest due to the Bernie Madoff scandal. Brandeis is a Jewish nonsectarian University, thus a majority of the donors are Jewish. This means that most of the high profile donors have lost money and many have lost a lot more money than other wealthy investors. For example, take the Shapiro family. Their foundation has lost about $150,000,000, never mind the money they have had depleted from their personal fortune. They are currently funding at least three new building projects on campus all of which are now under duress.

I will be the first to agree that Brandeis is hurting financially, but I cannot believe what the administration is going to do in order to try to fix the problem.

In today’s Boston Globe:

Rocked by a budget crisis, Brandeis University will close its Rose Art Museum and sell off a 6,000-object collection that includes work by such contemporary masters as Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol, and Nam June Paik.

What the hell?

I think the reaction of a lot of people is best summed up by the following quote from the Globe article.

"It is the largest asset that the university owns, and it is a world-class asset," said Jonathan Lee, who chairs the Rose's board of overseers. "So they're saying, 'Oops, we've had some bad reversals in our endowment investments, and we're going to make it up by selling our art.' What a second-class institution we've decided to be."

How dire is the situation for Brandeis?

The letters that President Jehuda Reinharz has been sending out have all stated that the issue is not huge and Brandeis will persevere though these tough times. All of a sudden this outlook has changed and the University has to purge its wonderful art collection to make ends meet?

While museums regularly deaccession individual pieces, the wholesale sell-off of a collection of the Rose's stature is unprecedented. Codes of practice common among museums stress that art should not be sold to cover operating expenses."Clearly, what's happening with Brandeis now is that they decided the easiest way is to look around the campus and find things that can be capitalized," said David Robertson, a Northwestern University professor who is president of the Association of College and University Museums and Galleries. "It's always art that goes first."

I am curious as to how the University’s endowment is calculated. Does the endowment, which the Globe states was around 700 million dollars at the high mark, take into consideration the worth of its art? If so does it make sense to turn such an investment, which will not have a fluctuating value like the volatile stock market, into fluid funds which will be spent? If there is left over cash is it going to reinvested in a less stable way? A way that got Brandeis into this mess in the first place?

Is there a market?

If the University is hell bent on selling the collection, my next question is who is going to buy it? This is not a sellers market for any good and in order sell most of the art, the University is going to have to drop the price.

"I'm in shock," said Mark Bessire, the recently named director of the Portland Museum Of Art. "This is definitely not the time to be selling paintings, anyway. The market is dropping. I'm just kind of sitting here sweating because I can't imagine Brandeis would take that step."A recent survey of auction houses showed that prices are down dramatically. Auctions in late 2008 at Sotheby’s and Christie's raised a combined $238 million, down from equivalent sales the year before of a combined $640 million.

It makes me think of needing money so badly that a family decides to hold a yard sale and take best offers for their prized possessions. Yes, I will sell this $2000 plasma TV for $500. Great now I have $500, but I ask what about the loss of $1500?

Is this moral?

Maybe moral isn’t a good choice of words, but I expect that a majority of the art in the collection was given to the University as gifts. In fact, I strongly doubt the fact that the donators were expecting the art to be sold when they gave the gifts. I wonder how they feel about it?

The move also angered David Genser, a Boston-area collector who last year gave the Rose a James Rosenquist drawing."This art was never given to the museum for those purposes," he said. "It should be a last resort. I can't understand how Brandeis is in such dire straits."

I know that yes, the University owns the art, but I think the administration should think twice about pissing off the people who were kind enough to make a donation. These are probably the same people who are the biggest monetary donors to the University as well. Does Brandeis really want to make them angry/disillusioned with the school when it is in such an economic crisis?

Be transparent.

If this process is going to occur I think the time has come for the University to start being very transparent about what is happening. Fine the art is sold, but where is this money going? Is it going to be spent on re-sodding and planting flowers on the entire campus every time there is a major event that requires parents to be on campus or is it going to be used to pay the salaries of new faculty members who would be fired if the art wasn’t sold?

I think the decision to sell the art from the Rose is a huge step for the University and a hasty, poorly-communicated one at that. It is time for Brandeis to start a more open dialog about the situation, what is being done, and what the end goal of each step is going to be. Under these conditions the liquidation of a wonderful collection of art might seem more like a solid economic decision rather than a kindergarden bake sale.

The original Boston Globe article can be found here.

This apparently is bothering more people than just me:

Website started to save the Rose
Petition started to save the Rose
Article in the Justice a Brandeis newspaper
Comments from Brandeis Students
Op-Ed One
Op-Ed Two

Tags: Art