Art is a profitable commodity and always has been. But this is not an art auction at Sotheby’s or Christie’s. Brandeis is a reputable academic institution, and its art museum, much like Vassar’s Frances Lehman Loeb Art Gallery, is an indispensable resource for students, professors and members of the community. Furthermore, the Rose Art Museum has always supported itself by raising its own funds independently of the University. It prides itself on works of art from private donors, to many of whom the plan to close the museum was seen as a bald-faced insult.

[...] The Trustees are robbing the Brandeis community of a significant resource, and they’re tainting the University’s reputation in the process. Instead of cutting costs in multiple areas of the University, the trustees are striking a blow solely to the visual arts, compromising Brandeis’ reputation and credibility as a higher learning institution. Even if the Trustees were to re-open the museum in the future, under better economic conditions, who would donate to it, now that its reputation has been sacrificed?

The imperativeness of appreciating the resources available to us as students of the liberal arts is reinforced by Brandeis’ abrupt decision to close its art museum. Being able to study in an environment that values cultural exploration and resources is a luxury, not an entitlement. In a declining economy, nothing is certain and nothing can be taken for granted—least of all art.

Read Gabrielle’s full article at the Miscellany News website.
For more information on this topic, see the most recent article in the NY Times, which reports that the building will “remain open as a teaching and studio facility;” Tyler Green’s Q&A with Michael Rush, Rose Art Museum director; as well as CultureGrrl’s wrap-up of the responses to the incident.

About a year ago, I took a Vermeer seminar in which we discussed all of the works in Vermeer’s ouevre — even those most unlikely candidates… one of which was the piece at left.  This small painting surfaced most recently in 2004 in an auction at Sotheby’s, was sold to a private bidder, who sold it again, and has been under the radar ever since.

Until now, that is: this controversial little painting is on view at the Metropolitan Museum of Art until around June.  Walter Liedtke, the curator of Dutch paintings at the Met, as well as the former paintings conservationist of the Rijksmuseum, endorse this painting as a late, authentic Vermeer.

I haven’t seen it myself yet, but I can definitely tell you I’ll be at the Met sooner rather than later to catch a glimpse of it.  Until then, share your thoughts — is it real, or as some art historians contend in this post-van Meergeren era of Vermeer studies, probably a fake?

A Young Woman Seated at the Virginals, at the Met until June | Via CultureGrrl
(If you’re interested in the provenance of this work, see this article from the Sotheby’s sales catalogue.)

News from Artforum.com

I found this interesting yet slightly ridiculous article today on Yahoo! News. It discusses how a 70 year-old man recently found out that an old mug given to him by his grandfather in 1945 is actually an ancient Persian golden cup from around the third or fourth century bce. This relic from the Achaemenid Empire (present-day Iran) is valued by an English auction house to be worth around a million dollars, and will go up for auction on June 5th. This beautiful cup was made from a single sheet of gold and was hammered out to depict the faces of two women facing in opposite directions, complete with detailed garlands on their heads in the forms of knotted snakes. While the current owner has no idea where his grandfather purchased the relic, he admits to using it as a target for his air gun as a child.

Moral of the story: think before you start shooting works of art.

Full story: “Childhood ‘Toy’ Revealed as Ancient Persian Relic” at Yahoo! News

I just found this interesting article about the links between phsyical ailments and/or psychological disorders and artists and their output. I think that a lot of this information has been floating around the edges of art historical research for a while, but it’s interesting that this doctor takes the study to a distinctly scientific level, discussing Cassat’s cataracts, Degas’ arthritis, and van Gogh’s many issues, as they relate to the artists’ work. Cool study!

‘One Person’s Trash is Another Person’s Lost Masterpiece’ One very lucky woman finds a $1 million Mexican masterpiece… in the trash outside her apartment building. This is a great story—even greater because it’s true.

‘Seurat, Drawing His Way to the Grande Jatte’ Yet another reason to visit MoMA this fall.

‘Where Gods Yearn for Long-Lost Treasures’ Because everyone and their mother (or even grandmother, in my case!) is talking about the new Acropolis museum—and the NY Times’ reviewer absolutely loves it. Goodness, to see the Acropolis… maybe I’ll have to add Greece to the list of places I need to visit when abroad in Europe next semester.

That’s it. I NEED to go to the Neue Galerie. Actually, I’m glad I waited, because they’ve just opened a new exhibit devoted entirely to one of my favorite artists, Gustav Klimt. Anyway, the NY Times has an interesting article on the controversial decision of Ronald Lauder, one of the museum’s founders, to withhold much of the provenance information about his private collection. Though many American collectors prefer not to release any information about the artwork in their collection, it’s considered good museum manners to do so– and with Mr. Lauder in such a prominent museum-related role, many are surprised as to why he won’t just release it, especially because many of the works were jostled around in Nazi-era Europe, which makes his refusal seem the slightest bit suspicious. Personally, I think his argument is a little weak (“It’s my private collection… Would it be O.K. for people to see what dresses you have in your closet?”), but nonetheless it’s high time I get down to the Neue and see some Klimt. Review to come!

NYTimes: ‘Lauder’s Openness is Sought on Artwork.’ 10.18.07.
‘Gustav Klimt: The Ronald S. Lauder and Serge Sabarsky Collections’ from 10.18.07-06.30.08 @ the Neue Galerie, Fifth Ave. & 86th St.

You’ve probably heard of Damien Hirst — a young, very controversial British artist who’s most well known for his 1991 sculpture The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living… a.k.a. that sculpture of a shark floating in a tank of formaldehyde. Now’s your chance to see this huge sculpture (complete with a freshly-preserved tiger shark for the occasion) at, of all places, the usually conservative Metropolitan Museum of Art beginning in late August. It’s not permanent, so get to the Met within three years. I’ll certainly be checking it out this fall, albeit on an empty stomach…

Press Release from The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Wikipedia for more information on Damien Hirst

I only wish they’d started sooner — I visited the Bargello when I was lucky enough to be in Florence in March, and wish I could have seen it being done! If you do happen to be in Florence anytime soon, definitely check out David and the Bargello. The Bargello is an absolutely fantastic little museum that, for some reason, is rarely busy, despite the incredible array of masterpieces that it holds. Inspired by this article, I’ll post some more about Donatello, his David, and the Bargello soon. Stay tuned!