Pages

Showing posts with label Detroit Institute of Arts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Detroit Institute of Arts. Show all posts

Derek Fincham's column "The Empty Frame" on "Detroit and the Difficult Deaccession Question" in the Fall 2013 issue of The Journal of Art Crime

"Detroit and the Difficult Deaccession Question" is the topic of Derek Fincham's column "The Empty Frame" in the Fall 2013 issue of The Journal of Art Crime.
The city of Detroit has declared itself bankrupt. It also has a world class collection of art at theDetroit Institute of Art (DIA). The first to consult about what should happen to Detroit's art must surely be Detroiters themselves. Yet one remarkable arts blogger referred to the potential sale of art as a "rape of its collection." This kind of angry criticism reveals much more about the sorry state of certain arts commentary than it does the difficult decisions confronting Detroit. Because the same critics who pile on the city leaders in Detroit are often the same who angrily criticize efforts by nations of origin like Italy for attempting to repatriate works of art that have left the country. You cannot have it both ways. There must be some organizing logic other than: "I want it here."
Derek Fincham is an Assistant Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law and served as Academic Director of ARCA. His research focuses on the intersection of law with art and antiquities. He holds a Ph.D. in cultural heritage law from the University of Aberdeen, and a J.D. from Wake Forest University and is a trustee of ARCA. He maintains a weblog at http://illicit-cultural-property.blogspot.com/.

Design for this issue and all issues of The Journal of Art Crime is the work of Urška CharneyHere's a link to ARCA's website on The Journal of Art Crime (includes Table of Contents for previous issues).
"Detroit and the Difficult Deaccession Question" is the topic of Derek Fincham's column "The Empty Frame" in the Fall 2013 issue of The Journal of Art Crime.
The city of Detroit has declared itself bankrupt. It also has a world class collection of art at theDetroit Institute of Art (DIA). The first to consult about what should happen to Detroit's art must surely be Detroiters themselves. Yet one remarkable arts blogger referred to the potential sale of art as a "rape of its collection." This kind of angry criticism reveals much more about the sorry state of certain arts commentary than it does the difficult decisions confronting Detroit. Because the same critics who pile on the city leaders in Detroit are often the same who angrily criticize efforts by nations of origin like Italy for attempting to repatriate works of art that have left the country. You cannot have it both ways. There must be some organizing logic other than: "I want it here."
Derek Fincham is an Assistant Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law and served as Academic Director of ARCA. His research focuses on the intersection of law with art and antiquities. He holds a Ph.D. in cultural heritage law from the University of Aberdeen, and a J.D. from Wake Forest University and is a trustee of ARCA. He maintains a weblog at http://illicit-cultural-property.blogspot.com/.

Design for this issue and all issues of The Journal of Art Crime is the work of Urška CharneyHere's a link to ARCA's website on The Journal of Art Crime (includes Table of Contents for previous issues).
reade more... Résuméabuiyad

DIA evaluation of $2 billion includes only 'works bought directly with city funds' -- Detroit Free Press

Last summer Christie's evaluated the artworks of the Detroit Institute of Arts as part of a city bankruptcy filing; now "Orr says DIA masterpieces worth less than thought," writes Mark Stryker for the Detroit Free Press
The 459 most valuable masterpieces at the Detroit Institute of Arts have a fair-market value of less than $2 billion, Detroit emergency manager Kevyn Orr said Tuesday. That figure is significantly below most predictions for the value of the art, which many observers expected to reach at least several billion dollars — perhaps as much as $8 billion. A figure less than $2 billion is likely to inflame the passions of bondholders, unions and other creditors who see DIA masterpieces as a prime source for recovering the billions they are owed by the city. It also increases the chances that a court battle over the fate of the DIA will become even more contentious as Orr prepares his plan of adjustment to restructure city finances. On another front, the lower-than-expected estimate could make it easier for Orr to justify his push to extract roughly $500 million in revenue from the DIA to help restructure the city. A high Christie’s estimate had been widely expected to increase pressure on Orr to demand even more from the DIA. “I do think it gives creditors more ammunition,” said Nicholas O’Donnell, a Boston-based attorney who specializes in art-related law. 
[...]
In May, the Free Press consulted art dealers and auction records to estimate the market value of 38 big-ticket works at the DIA. The tally was $2.5 billion. Included in those works were six paintings bought by the city between 1922 and 1930 that also were evaluated by Christie’s. The newspaper’s estimate for those works was more than $500 million, including price tags between $50 million and $150 million for Matisse’s “The Window,” Bruegel’s “The Wedding Dance” and Van Gogh’s “Self-Portrait.” So how could 459 works add up to less than $2 billion? Part of the answer could be that many of the DIA’s most valuable works — including those by Caravaggio, Ruisdael, Van Gogh, De Kooning, Giacometti, Cezanne and others — were not evaluated because they were either donated to the museum or bought with funds other than city dollars. Though every piece of art at the DIA is owned by the city regardless of how it was acquired, Orr decided to evaluate only works bought directly with city funds to avoid messier legal entanglements of donated works and expedite the evaluation process. The DIA owns roughly 65,000 works.
Last summer Christie's evaluated the artworks of the Detroit Institute of Arts as part of a city bankruptcy filing; now "Orr says DIA masterpieces worth less than thought," writes Mark Stryker for the Detroit Free Press
The 459 most valuable masterpieces at the Detroit Institute of Arts have a fair-market value of less than $2 billion, Detroit emergency manager Kevyn Orr said Tuesday. That figure is significantly below most predictions for the value of the art, which many observers expected to reach at least several billion dollars — perhaps as much as $8 billion. A figure less than $2 billion is likely to inflame the passions of bondholders, unions and other creditors who see DIA masterpieces as a prime source for recovering the billions they are owed by the city. It also increases the chances that a court battle over the fate of the DIA will become even more contentious as Orr prepares his plan of adjustment to restructure city finances. On another front, the lower-than-expected estimate could make it easier for Orr to justify his push to extract roughly $500 million in revenue from the DIA to help restructure the city. A high Christie’s estimate had been widely expected to increase pressure on Orr to demand even more from the DIA. “I do think it gives creditors more ammunition,” said Nicholas O’Donnell, a Boston-based attorney who specializes in art-related law. 
[...]
In May, the Free Press consulted art dealers and auction records to estimate the market value of 38 big-ticket works at the DIA. The tally was $2.5 billion. Included in those works were six paintings bought by the city between 1922 and 1930 that also were evaluated by Christie’s. The newspaper’s estimate for those works was more than $500 million, including price tags between $50 million and $150 million for Matisse’s “The Window,” Bruegel’s “The Wedding Dance” and Van Gogh’s “Self-Portrait.” So how could 459 works add up to less than $2 billion? Part of the answer could be that many of the DIA’s most valuable works — including those by Caravaggio, Ruisdael, Van Gogh, De Kooning, Giacometti, Cezanne and others — were not evaluated because they were either donated to the museum or bought with funds other than city dollars. Though every piece of art at the DIA is owned by the city regardless of how it was acquired, Orr decided to evaluate only works bought directly with city funds to avoid messier legal entanglements of donated works and expedite the evaluation process. The DIA owns roughly 65,000 works.
reade more... Résuméabuiyad