'Rescuing' the Detroit Institute of Arts (with Commentary by Michael Hall)

The latest maneuver in the ongoing City of Detroit bankruptcy is the plan put forth by Court-appointed mediator Judge Gerald Rosen under which donors would put up $500 million to "rescue" the Detroit Institute of Arts.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

The latest maneuver in the ongoing City of Detroit bankruptcy is the plan put forth by Court-appointed mediator Judge Gerald Rosen under which donors would put up $500 million to "rescue" the Detroit Institute of Arts, whose encyclopedic collection has been threatened by liquidation to satisfy creditors in what is the largest municipal Chapter 9 proceeding in US history. Under the plan, major foundations with a vested interest in culture and the city of Detroit, such as the Ford, Kresge, and John S. and James L. Knight Foundations, would pool funds to essentially ransom the museum from the mandate of Emergency Manager Kevin Orr to monetize the collection by any means necessary, including selling masterworks by Rembrandt, Caravaggio, Picasso, and Van Gogh at auction. The plan also calls for the DIA, currently a department of the City of Detroit government, to be "spun off" and reorganized as an independent nonprofit institution.

The plan is said to satisfy the quandary of "art vs. pensions," which has pitted local patrons of culture against current and future municipal retirees while conveniently leaving the interests of Wall Street bondholders off the table. It also resolves a governance issue I identified some 20 years ago in a New Art Examiner article titled "DIA in Decline" (Feb./Mar. 1992:29-31), written at the time of another fiscal crisis for the museum when state funding was drastically cut after the election of ultra-conservative Republican John Engler as governor of Michigan. In the article, I charted two trajectories for the evolution of the museum's structure, regionalization or privatization. The former would have established regional taxation and oversight, recognizing the museum's place in the public culture of Southeast Michigan and beyond. The latter was said to facilitate, among other things, private fundraising efforts among the patron class who were and are based primarily in the affluent suburbs. I opined that regionalization was the more democratic option but thought that privatization would be the more likely outcome. Should the current plan succeed, the DIA will in effect enjoy the best of both worlds, a regional funding base for operations from the tax revenues of a recently adopted millage while securing control of the museum away from the municipal bureaucracy to which wealthy trustees had ceded jurisdiction after the First World War.

In response to the news of the plan initially floated by Judge Rosen, noted artist, critic, and curator Michael Hall, a longtime Detroit-area resident, issued the following statement:

* * * * *
SNYDERAND ORR SUCKERPUNCH THE ARTS IN MICHIGAN
In a nifty move right out of the Reagan Revolutionplaybook, the governor of Michigan and his hand picked bankruptcy fixer finallyrevealed their plan for monetizing the art collection at the Detroit Instituteof Arts. The plan is brilliant inits simplicity and in its political nuance.
After months of hinting that the art in themuseum was "on the table" for a liquidation that would generate cash to offsetDetroit's many debt obligations, the lords of the bankruptcy relented and"saved" the museum. Their idea basicallyruns like this: Art is worth money(they got an appraisal to prove it). People who like art have money. Thus, why not present the museum with a bill that would equate to theappraised value of its precious art and let the museum tap its rich friendsacross America for contributions that would pay the tab and keep the paintingson the Institute's walls.
Howperfect! How painless! How noble! This is the ideal "public/privatepartnership" we are always hearing about! In short, since elites like art and since the common working folk of thecity are seeing their pensions cut, why not let the elites pony up for the cityand the State in the interest of the "good of the many." State to the museum: "You 'Culture Vultures' go have a bakesale - or whatever you need to do - and bring us back the ransom payment asspecified. Thank you."
The Snyder/Orr plan is the perfect product ofthe anti-culture, anti-education, anti-intellectual tone of contemporary Americanpolitical discourse. As an artist and an educator, I recognize (and fear) themessaging in the "museum rescue" scheme that has been put forward in Michigan. My view of the plan contends that it istotally predicated on the belief that the public has no stake whatsoever in theart at the museum - or in the museum, itself, as a "public institution." This seems curious in light of the factthat the three counties surrounding the museum recently voted in favor ofvoluntarily taxing themselves to provide substantial, ongoing financial supportfor the Institute - support that had been systematically withdrawn by severaldecades of art-hostile governors and legislatures in the state capital.
The political embrace of the arts that firedthe creation of the National Endowment for the Arts in the early 1960s, has dramaticallyeroded and is presently at a new low. Reagan era antagonism toward public educationand the arts now has a permanent face in our contemporary political conversation."Culture" and the humanities have become the targets of a class envy that hasbeen skillfully manipulated to fuel the anger component of the new Americanpopulism. A business drivenconsumer culture does not need art and there is a concerted effort afoot to rileup Detroit's public against it. Thedrumbeat has been incessant: "Art or pensions - but you can't have both!"
So the idea of "spinning off" the museum to a rich elite that canpamper itself with luxuries and bobbles in gold frames is a perfect fix for theMotor City. Curiously, I don'tremember anybody suggesting that because Jay Leno is rich and likes cars, that he(instead of the government) should have bailed out G.M. Oh, yes, I forgot, that was about"jobs."
The question, "who needs Picasso?" remains unanswered in the newlyrevealed Detroit bankruptcy plan. But one thing is sure, the governor and his team of practical problemsolvers have sent a message that translates directly into: "Let them eat Dancing With The Stars!"
Michael D. Hall
Hamtramck, MI
Dec. 5, 2013
* * * * *

Hall and I agree that the real tragedy here is how the city's commonwealth -- of which the museum is one part and public pensions are another, along with Belle Isle, public transit, the Water and Sewerage Department, etc. -- is being handed over to private interests in service of the avarice of unbridled capitalism and the class war that it has entailed under what David Harvey terms "accumulation by dispossession." This process has been going on in Detroit for years -- the tens of thousands of single-family houses that have been abandoned in the city since the 1970s with the homeowners losing whatever equity they had, being the most visible indicator. Detroit is and has been a microcosm of the machinations of neoliberalism, the economic regime that accumulation by dispossession serves. And as goes Detroit, I fear, so will go the nation.

This post originally appeared on Motown Review of Art.

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot