Critic: Barnes Foundation move fueled by ignorance

The uniqueness of the Barnes Foundation in Merion, Pa., is a primary reason for the difficulty in explaining why the planned move of its amazing collection of paintings by Matisse, Cézanne, Van Gogh, Seurat and scores more to a tourist site in downtown Philadelphia is such a gut-wrenching tragedy. A simple sentence, encapsulating shorthand or a brief paragraph just cannot explain it.

The problem is compounded when most readers are accustomed to museum galleries that have almost nothing in common with the Barnes. Sui generis, constituting a class of its own, the Barnes Foundation is literally incomparable.

That's what makes the cover story in the May 31 issue of the Weekly Standard so important. Art critic Lance Esplund has devoted more than 8,500 words to a cogent, argumentative, sometimes disconcerting and often enlightening essay on the place. The move now being engineered by assorted Pennsylvania blockheads is characterized by the cover's loud banner-headline, "An Act of Vandalism." Meanwhile, the inevitably deleterious effect is conveyed in the story's quietly devastating title: "No Museum Left Behind."

Esplund also shows why claims of the supposed benefit of bringing Barnes' art to more people at a tourist venue are sheer nonsense. "Barnes wanted to empower people to experience art — and, by extension, life — at its most profound levels," he writes, discussing numerous examples in depth. Profundity of experience is tough to pull off in a tourist trap jostling with crowds.

On art, Esplund is a critic with whom I don't agree about much. And I think the Weekly Standard is, typically, a magazine best picked up with long-handled tongs while wearing rubber gloves, protective goggles and a fully functioning horse-puckey detector.

But not this time. Historic preservation is always a tough sell, but Esplund has rendered an important service. Read the whole piece here.

--Christopher Knight

Twitter @KnightLAT

Photo: Barnes Foundation. Credit: Tim Shaffer / Reuters

Related:

Spinning the Barnes Foundation's controversial plan to move

Barnes Foundation fundraising appears stalled

Comments

[william wray]

Money talks, the wishes of the founder be dammed. Getting a touch of the old intention of how the work is/was housed cannot be priced. Sadly, New construction is what's important and the graft it brings.
The Millard sheets mural in San Jose is being destroyed and replaced with a photo. The city says the public will not know the difference. Classic projection by politicians who will get what they want no matter what.

[Brady Westwater]

It took me three years to finally be get into the museum when I was making monthly trips back to New York back in the 1980's. And even then, two of the paintings I most wanted to experience were hung so far off the ground, they were utterly unviewable. It was frustrating to have waited so long to get into the 'museum' and then find that much of the art was impossible to even see, much less experience.

[Marino]

"A single sentence cannot explain it".

Last night I watched the "Art of Steal" a 90 min documentary against the Barnes foundation move and no I still don't get it what's so bad about it.

Yes Dr Barnes had a vision and an ax to grind against his fellow Philadelphia billionaires. Well... He got it his way for 20 years during his lifetime and for another 50+ past his death. How long do we need to carry a dead man's wishes ? Especially if his wish is to exclude as many people as possible from seeing "his" art. It's not *his* art. It's Cezanne's , Picasso's, Matisse's etc.

And I don't buy the argument that you can't experience the art if there are too many "tourists" around. We are all "tourists" when we veer out of our neighborhoods. Want to experience art away from the crowds? Go find some underground galleries and young upcoming artists. Buy their work. Be the next Barnes.

The people responsible for the move are the neighbors. They wanted the prestige of having such a collection next door but they didn't want the fuss of sharing it with the tens of thousands of people interested in seeing it.

Reminds me of the Southwest Museum/Gene Autry scuffle here in LA where some Mt Washington residents took it upon themselves to reenact the drama. Defenders of the founder's vision vs large fancy museum supported by the oligarchs.

[Dave Minnich]

Yes, the Barnes Foundation is unique - uniquely bad for viewing the art. Much of it is jumbled according to Al Barnes' ignorant attempt to teach art, a skill of which he was entirely lacking.
The lighting is usually bad. The place is dirty and crowded on the few days it is open. In short, it's an cranky old dude's man cave, albeit filled with great art.
Of course, the elites love it.

[Katina Olmstead]

I find it absolutely frustrating and really uncomfortable that a collector with the foresight to draw a trust and will regarding his personal collection is ignored. Barnes constructed an educational facility for the instruction of future generations and the analysis and enjoyment of the artists' masterpieces. Barnes' main concern was the education of future generations and not to succumb to the facade of the tea and crumpets persona - he could care less about the prestige and knew he had something special, a collection to be preserved. His collection has already made many several of millions for the wrong reasons. Fix it.

[Daniel Pope]

I visited the Barnes Foundation last year; it was indeed an inspirational experience. I've also seen "The Art of the Steal," which makes a compelling case that political chicanery and self-aggrandizing "philanthropy" engineered the move to Philadelphia. Nevertheless, there are real problems with keeping the old venue operating and real advantages in terms of access to the new museum building. To label it a "tourist trap" is snobbish and to suggest that the move will destroy everything that Barnes accomplished is unduly apocalyptic. Barnes's own theories strike me as idiosyncratic and rigid; while the design of the old building poses problems as well as advantages for viewing the collection. is It's a tough case with no perfect outcome.