It's the kinda of thing you make a campaign commercial out of, no?

__________________
If you can't take the Politics forum...Don't spam the other forums with your political threads.

I don't believe that the Barnes move is dead, since is has a very good chance of coming to Philly, and that Nutter is going to be mayor.

One project that I really want is to see the Calder Museum come to Philly. I believe that bringing the Calder Museum would be a very good benefit to this city. The only thing is the the Calder family has to have a unanimous agreement to make sure that the Calder's artwork is showcased. Nobody's going to steal the work, as there's going to be exibitions.

...the Calder would have been a really great fit for that spot on the parkway...and a point of civic pride seeing as we basically pulled a brand new museum out of the a$s. Oh well, something good will go on the plot soon enough.

IIRC, there was an effort to build a Calder Museum on a site not too far from where the p-t-b want to put the Barnes back in Rendell's first term, and that the Gov was intimately involved in the negotiations. I also STR that the effort ultimately foundered because the Calders couldn't agree on what the institution should look like. Or maybe it was that they wanted something that cost more than the state and city were willing to chip in. Or something like that.

FTR, I have become a skeptic of the Barnes-on-the-Parkway idea, mainly because I believe that once it moves, it will cease to be the Barnes and instead become just another collection of paintings and decorative metal objects. Barnes' unorthodox theories of what gives art meaning and how it is to be understood seem to be getting lost completely in the Establishment's rush to turn the foundation into a tourist attraction. Not to mention that Barnes saw the building, its grounds and the works on display in it as parts of a unified whole. Ordinarily, I wouldn't stand so firmly on tradition -- it's usually something I criticize about this city -- but IMO the Barnes is better understood as akin to the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston or the Menil Collection in Houston, both structures designed to house idiosyncratic collections at the behest of the collectors and which reflect those collectors' highly personal visions. We are ready to toss this away in pursuit of the almighty tourist dollar, and as a result, the tourists will no longer be able to experience a singular institution, even if more of them will be able to see the art.

__________________
Sandy Smith, Exile on Market Street, Philadelphia
"Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier." --Gen. Colin Powell

We've had eight years of "decisive," "experienced" "leadership." Why not try intelligence this time around?

...Albert Barnes was supposedly a total prat back in his day. He was nasty, egotistical, and was supposedly an alcoholic. He was shunned by the arts community back then and as a giant f-u to the racist upper-crust community, left the Foundation to be administered to Lincoln University, a historically black institution.

Bad karma i suppose---the neighbors of the Foundation treated it poorly for decades (only recently realizing the incredible treasure that was literally in their backyards) && the very folks who shunned Barnes back in his day (Lenfest, Pew, etc) are the ones wooing his work back into Philly. What goes around comes around i guess.

This is the kind of wine-and-cheese tourism that the city is aspiring towards. It is a shame that some integrity has to be sacrificed, but if it will benefit the city, than so be it. Who knows? maybe NIMBYs in Haverford will force the college to relocate to University City in the near future.

You are correct in your understanding of Dr. Barnes and his final gesture. Regrettably, once control of the foundation passed to Lincoln on the death of Violette de Mazia, the Barnes' Merion neighbors dug in their heels against moves the Lincoln-appointed trustees made to increase attendance on site and thus help shore up the foundation's finances. To make matters worse, the head of the Barnes board proved as stubborn as the neighbors, and was litigious to boot, draining the foundation's endowment while fighting the neighbors in court, claiming they were racist. That left the Barnes broke, which in turn opened up the opportunity for the Establishment to get the final 'FU' in by wresting control of the Barnes board from Lincoln and committing it to a Parkway move in exchange for much needed cash.

Hey, that gives me an idea! Let's move the Youth Study Center to the present site of the Barnes on Latches Lane. It would only serve the neighbors right now that they're lamenting the result of their own opposition to what would have been much less disruptive moves.

(Edited to add: Oops! I just said what you said, only in more words.)

__________________
Sandy Smith, Exile on Market Street, Philadelphia
"Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier." --Gen. Colin Powell

We've had eight years of "decisive," "experienced" "leadership." Why not try intelligence this time around?

If someone were actually trying to run against her. She was unopposed in the primary and I'm not convinced the Republican officially on the ballot in Nov. actually wants to be elected, much less has a snowballs chance in hell.
http://www.phillyblog.com/philly/showthread.php?t=40194

__________________
Barack Obama on security, Iraq and Afghanistan. We need a Commander in Chief who knows the differences between Shii'a and Sunni.

Um, not sure what a "prat" is, but the man was a fricking genius, OK? I'm not normally one for lionizing dead white male art collectors, but Barnes was a man ahead of his time. While the upper crust of Philly were collecting pretty pictures of flowers, he was collecting Picasso, Matisse, Cezanne, Gaugin, and so on. Further, as you say, he couldn't stand the racist upper class of Philly, and demanded that his art collection be kept out of their filthy paws after his death. Sadly, the Orphans Court declared that his will could be ignored. A travesty.

Not sure if you're being serious or not. By what right should a unique art institution be sacrificed for a few tourist dollars? As Sandy said above, "once it moves, it will cease to be the Barnes and instead become just another collection of paintings and decorative metal objects."

They should include a virtual tour of the original house and layout.

__________________

Conversely, what good is a collection no one can see? While I agree it's better in its current setting, it's also pretty worthless. Though I live less than 10 minutes away, I've never been there. Anytime I have the free time, they've exceeded their niggardly attendance limitations with school trips or tours, and I'm SOL. The whole "the Barnes belongs...." crowd pisses me off to no end. If they wanted it there, the should have acted like it. And the few token concessions they made (and then,only after the court okayed the move) are far too little, far too late.

__________________
“Stupidity has a certain charm - ignorance does not”