Art Market Monitor

Bloomberg’s Architecture Critic Against the Gardner and Barnes Plans

The essay defies summary or simple quotation but on Bloomberg, James S. Russell makes a case that neither the Barnes or the Gardner museums are being well-served by their architects or their donor’s fanciful restrictions.

We need museums that don’t toe the art-world party line, but idiosyncrasy can go too far. I fear neither the Gardner’s addition nor the Barnes’s new home will free them of the unenviable dilemma of trying to save the collections while remaining true to their founders’ vision.

What’s so curious is that we honor donor intent but not artist intent. Long after the brief holder of these items is gone, the works are imprisoned to their arbitrary vision.

Off Beat Gardner, Barnes Museums Face Decay, Change (Bloomberg)

Also of Interest:

• Donor Intent Recast
  The LA Times’s Culture Monster pointed us to this item from the Cleveland Plain Dealer about the Cleveland Museum of...
  
• Donor Cycle
  The Wall Street Journal looks at the donor intent aspect of museum management by focusing on the novel interpretation provided...
  
• Barnes v. The Public
  [Audio clip: view full post to listen] All Things Considered uses the Art of the Steal documentary to explore the...
  
• What Did Barnes Stand For?
  The central issue of the new documentary about the Barnes Foundation move is the question of Barnes’s intent, and, drawing...
  
• The Gardner Expansion Faces Opposition
  The Boston Globe looks at the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum’s own plans for a Renzo Piano extension and finds that...