The J. Paul Getty (Mis)Trust?

MoCA Mobilization Bug Has Apparently Caught On at the Getty



There's no doubt that times have been tough at art institutions throughout the country. Everyone is scrambling to hold on to every penny in order to continue with their exhibitions and programing schedules in order to avoid sinking into a financial abyss.

It's been almost a year since I left the Getty Trust under bitter sweet circumstances. Sweet, due to the talented and mission-driven colleagues who had a deep sense of commitment and obligation toward making the Getty a top-notch arts institution. Bitter, due to the abrasive, selfish and short-sided leadership of a selected few at the top of the food chain who share similar character traits with those "financial wizards" who brought Wall Street to its knees last November.

I was planning on writing an open letter to the Getty's CEO and President, James N. Wood, addressing some concerns that I had about the Getty's future, but apparently someone beat me to the punch. And did a WAY better job at it! Under the nom de plume, Silence Dogetty, some person(s) have taken brave and bold steps in attempting to right that which is obviously wrong at the Getty. Read the post here. Join the Facebook page here.

Without re-hashing what was posted on Silence Dogetty's blog, the biggest issue I had with Mr. Wood was the compensation aspect. In this turbulent economic climate, for the CEO of a nonprofit to propose a budget cut of 20-25% and not even think of adjusting his own $728,000 yearly salary is, in my opinion, absolutely preposterous and disgraceful to say the least. Moreover, the fact that The Trust subsidises his living accommodation expenses to the tune of a $20,000 per month housing allowance, indicates that there is a sever governance flaw that was clearly overlooked post-Munitz . Thank goodness for the Internet and the empowerment it gives regular individuals to organize!

Nasher Sculpture Center Appoints New Director

Obama Ain't Got Nothin' on the Nasher Sculpture Center

As a rule, I try my best not to report arts-related conjecture, unless it is substantiated by relevant and related facts, which would point me to come to a solid and well-informed conclusion. However, I feel that I should, at the very least, comment on the MoCA situation, especially given the fact that the short-term financial side has been resolved and I can finally make sense of the facts, rather than just speculating on an outcome.

Recent History 101

Many Americans, including myself, believe that Timothy F. Geithner was a poor selection, as President Obama's pick for Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. The mere idea of appointing a tax evader to run and oversea the Internal Revenue Service is like calling 911 because your house is on fire, only to have the arsonist sent to the site instead of an actual firefighter. Sure, Geitner made "an honest mistake" by not forking over almost $34,000 in owed taxes to the Federal government, but at least he was forced to pay the government back every penny. Given the present state of the economy, that's just the kind of leadership we need to run the IRS, right? I'll let you be the judge of that.

Well, in an all too similar move, the Nasher Sculpture Center in Dallas, Texas announced today that they have hired former MoCA director Jeremy Strick as the Center's new director -- yes, no joke! Given what we now know about MoCA and his stewardship of that institution over the past nine years or so, one would surmise that Mr. Strick's executive headhunter would have had a difficult time placing him anywhere? I guess I was wrong.

So, as a resident (and avid museum goer) of Los Angeles, how should I feel after hearing such news? Disgusted? Angry? Hurt? Or, perhaps, all of the above? Yes, I'd probably select all of the above. It seems so unfair that unchecked power and outright failure should be rewarded with a six-figure salary and directorship at another museum. The job losses, which were announce almost in lockstep with Strick's appointment to the Nasher Sculpture Center, compounded with the measly $6 million MoCA endowment will, indeed, seal Mr. Strick's legacy. I think that many good, competent employees will now have a very difficult time finding employment in this malnourished economy, as a direct result of his financial incompetence and lack of concern for the institution he led. For me, it seems like 2009 will, undeniably, be quite a year in politics and the art world. It's turning out to be a year where greed and poor leadership continues to flourish and be rewarded. And loyalty, hard work and dedication, continues get the shaft. I don't know how the vetting process for the director of the Nasher was conducted, but I can tell you that after reading about Mr. Strick in the L.A. and N.Y. Times, he would have not been at the top of my list.

January is L.A. Arts Month

Los Angeles, "...the Venice of the 21st century."
-- Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa

At a press conference held this morning at the Japanese American National Museum in Little Tokyo, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, along with a cadre of civic and arts-minded leaders, designated the month of January as "L.A. Arts Month." When I learned about this announcement, I did a double-take. I thought to myself, 'Hmm, where have I seen and experienced such an event before?' And then, like the 'pop' of a champagne cork on New Year's Eve, it hit me! Back in February of 2007, the mayor hosted a similar conference at the Getty Center where he designated March as "Creative L.A." month. The initiative, which exalted the various creative enclaves of this city -- from art to entertainment to science -- delivered a lot of excitement and fan fair on the day it was announced, but now it is all but extinct. I don't even think that there's a website devoted to it anymore (or was there ever?) But there is still an old press release on the Town Hall Los Angeles website -- read it here.

So, where exactly did "Creative L.A." month go? Did anyone celebrate it last year and will it be celebrated this coming March? My hunch is that it was nothing more than one of those politically motivated and meticulously calculated photo-ops, rather than a serious manifesto lauding the importance of L.A.'s creative industries. I think that designating one month of awareness, whether it be for the arts or any other program, over a long period of time, greatly diminishes the spirit of the cause which you are trying to promote. That's not to say that assigning a specific day or month to draw attention to an important cause is bad, but rather an inefficient way of promoting, interpreting and infusing the visual and non-visual arts as a natural phenomenon and integral part of our daily lives. Arts awareness should be designated a year-round initiative, as should Black history, AIDS and cancer awareness, or any other noteworthy cause which, under the present guidelines, gets 31 days or less to make its case.

If Mayor Villaraigosa is truly genuine about his commitment toward promoting the arts in this city, and I most certainly would like to give him the benefit of the doubt, then why is he declaring "L.A. Arts Month" in the last year of his first term? One can't help but question the prioritization of this administration and whether or not it has a truly genuine commitment to the arts? It seems more like a well-calculated public relations move to bolster votes for the upcoming general election in May, rather than a passionate plea to populate L.A's cultural destinations. Sure ticket giveaways and free radio airtime is great. However, art appreciation should be more than just a gimmick to increase attendance and stimulate revenue. It should be treated as a valuable lesson in understanding the diversity of thoughts and ideas through visual and non-visual means -- a process that takes way more than a month, if you want it to really be effective.

TMITF on break until after the New Year

Dear TMITF Readers:

This year has been full of excitement and volatility. Despite the current economic recession, artists are nonetheless committed to their daily practices of making art. They continue to create fresh, new and inventive work in order to sustain our ever-growing appetites for the visual arts. Along the same lines, museums and galleries are tightening up their belts a bit in an effort to continue to give the public the best programming that they have to offer, given the grave financial circumstances surrounding the financial markets. These are tough times to say the least, but sometimes economic meltdowns help us reevaluate ourselves and how we choose to support the arts.

Since the launch of TMITF back in June 2008, I have received several kind notes and accolades (and some sporadic diatribes) about the blog and the things I chose to feature. I am grateful for ALL of the feedback, both positive and negative, and continue to absorb as much as possible in order to present you with a solid snapshot of current happenings within the greater creative community of L.A.

Through it all, I would like to convey a special thanks to all the loyal readers of this blog and hope that you will continue to read my posts in 2009. It's much more difficult to manage a blog than I had originally envisioned. Spending late (sometimes sleepless) nights writing/editing posts, consuming copious amounts of coffee; not to mention the occasional swig from the bottle. All, demands of the job, I guess? But it is something that I truly enjoy doing and am thankful that I have the time and energy to make TMITF a reality.

Sincerely,
Taras Matla

An Artist That Went Beyond Painting Pretty Pictures

Mixing Business with Pleasure

My first post on LACMA's blog, Unframed, is online now. I wrote a succinct, yet focused piece on California artist Millard Sheets and his influence on architecture in Southern California. Read it here!

Architecture As An Accessioned Work of Art?

DISCLAIMER: This article references my employer, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA). The views expressed on this blog are solely my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LACMA, LACMA's leadership, LACMA's Board, or LACMA's staff. Furthermore, the views posted on this blog have not been influenced in any way by the aforementioned parties.

The scope of collecting getting larger and larger -- literally!!!

Today, on The Times' blog, Culture Monster, Christopher Hawthorne posted a brief write-up on the potential for museums to start collecting irreplaceable works of architecture as part of their permanent collections. The Indianapolis Museum of Art is on the right track by following through with a deal to acquire Eero Saarinen's Miller House from the surviving members of the Miller family. I think that this action finally breaks the ice for museums that have long wanted to pursue this kind of activity, but have been hesitant to do so -- especially during the current economic downturn. Concurrently, it potentially sets the stage for a tug-of-war between museums, foundations and other non-profit ownership of residential architecture.


Eero Saarinen's Miller House, 1952
The Indianapolis Museum of Art

Setting up a non-profit foundation with an endowment is key for ensuring long-term sustainability for significant structures like these. Strong examples include the Eames Foundation and the Philip Johnson Glass House (under the opposes of the National Trust for Historic Preservation). Any property owner can tell you that owning a building has it's ups and downs, especially if it's a historic one. Neutra's VDL II House in Silver Lake is a good example of how a lack of funding and a starved endowment -- and in my opinion, a real lack of financial commitment by Cal Poly Pomona -- can perpetuate a structure's continued disrepair. Let's not kid ourselves, there's plenty of bureaucratic fat that can be trimmed at the administrative level of any university in order to fund a worthwhile project like this.


Ray and Charles Eames built the Eames House (a.k.a. Case Study House No. 8) in 1949.

I know that LACMA has expressed interest in possibly pursuing such avenues, but they should perhaps remain a bit on the cautious side. While it's nice to have historic modern homes in your collection, they should only do so if (a) the price is really too good to pass up or (b) it's a donation, as was the case in Indianapolis. Anything other than those two approaches should be pursued with the utmost caution and precision. A part of a museum's responsibility to the public is to collect and present objects of exceptional aesthetic quality, and place them into an art historical context. In a traditional museum, you can achieve this with great success when you're dealing with easily movable objects, let's say, sculptures, paintings, antiquities, decorative arts, etc. However, collecting architecture is a bit more tricky because of issues pertaining to geographic location, high maintenance costs and the ability to have consistent attendance without alienating the neighbors around you. In other words, you can't treat residential architecture in L.A. like the Cloisters.

Houses were really designed to be functional places to live in, not for curious museum goers to trounce around in. I know my argument may seem a bit uptight, but the best way for this concept to work is to have these structures remain independent and occupied by passionate people who understand their importance to the community at large. Perhaps, we could see the formation of a consortium of modern houses in L.A. that works together to offer tours of various houses in the L.A. area on an ongoing basis? One thing is definitely clear -- more must be done about this situation because time is running out to save the irreplaceable.

Patriotic Posts on Election Day

Vote, vote, vote...

No matter whom you vote for today, get inspired by checking out some of these great posts regarding the flag in contemporary art on MAN -- cue shameless plug -- including yours truly on Ed Kienholz. And for those who follow the political art of Robbie Conal, here's one of my favorite guerrilla works from the 2000 presidential election.


Robbie Conal, 2000, (Left) Tastes Like Chicken!, (Right) The Other White Meat!

Old Glory, New Perspectives

Pledging Allegiance to Poultry

Building on Tyler Green's "The flag in contemporary art" theme on MAN last week, I figured I'd post something on TMITF that not only fits the criteria, but is also an amazing and provocative piece of art that should come out from hiding at LACMA -- especially in an election year! My choice is Edward Kienholz's The U.S. Bird, or Home from the Summit.

The year was 1960 and Dwight D. Eisenhower was concluding his second, and final, term as president of the U.S. Preparing for what he had hoped would be the final accolade of his presidency, Eisenhower received word that on May 1st, the U.S.S.R. had shot down an American U-2 spy plane that had allegedly violated Soviet airspace. This was not the news he had hoped for weeks prior to the convening of an important meeting of the post-war Big Four -- the United States, Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union. After several days of down playing the incident as an unfortunate crash of a U.S piloted "weather" surveillance plane, Eisenhower was later pressured to concede that the aircraft was, indeed, engaged in activities of a more clandestine nature. As the summit began on May 16th in Paris, a furious Nikita Khrushchev denounced Eisenhower and the U.S. for engaging in such behavior toward the Soviet Union and stormed out of the summit. Consequently, the main issues of the summit, which included the division of Berlin and nuclear arms control, became stalled and were never fully resolved.

Fast forward, 48 years later, and you can definitely see how such a piece could continue to resonate with viewers given the U.S's current reputation on the world stage. This work contains several symbolic narratives which allude to the failed Paris summit. The stuffed duck, possibly picked off by a skilled hunter, gives off the appearance of being tarred in red, white and blue paint, its lifeless body crammed into a coffin-like box. Kienholz is clearly making a bold political statement regarding the lame duck presidency and failed foreign policies of Eisenhower. He insinuates that the president came home from the Paris summit just as a dead U.S. soldier would come home from a conflict region -- in a pine box, draped in an American flag.

Another interesting point as to why Kienholz may have chosen to use a duck, rather than another animal, is because the comparison between a duck and a U-2 spy plane, in this case, is striking. Ducks are capable of flying at extremely high altitudes and, as a result, are very difficult to shoot down once in full flight. That is why, more often that none, hunters who stumble upon a flock of ducks will startle them in hopes of getting a clear shot just before they approach an altitude where a shotgun slug could no longer reach them. While the tone of the work may seem to be more on the serious side, there is also a thin veil of humor embedded within. In my opinion, the composition of a duck in a box also implies the act of gift giving. In this gesture, Kienholz is presenting us with a literal depiction of "flipping off" the viewer. Yes, sometimes giving someone the bird is patriotic!


Edward Kienholz
The U.S. Duck, or Home from the Summit, 1960
Mixed media/assemblage/collage, Construction,
26 7/16 x 21 1/4 x 6 in. (67.15 x 53.98 x 15.24 cm)
Michael and Dorothy Blankfort Bequest
© Edward Kienholz and Nancy Reddin Kienholz.
Photograph © 2002 Museum Associates/LACMA.

The Power 100 from ArtReview.com

She Blinded Me With Science!!!

L.A. Times arts writer, Suzanne Muchnic, posted a brief mention of The Power 100 list from ArtReview.com on The Times' Culture Monster blog. Cutting to the chase, the top slot went to Damien Hirst and his company, Science Ltd. When he's not playing around with livestock and formaldehyde, he's probably dabbling in bling that would make Liberace hyperventilate. Yes, I'm talking about For The Love of God, the life-size platinum skull set with 8,601 high-quality diamonds. While we can discuss whether or not he should have been number one or not, there was someone else on the list that made me cringe -- THOMAS KINKADE?!?! Who includes Thomas Kinkade on a list like this? Sure, he came in dead last at # 100, but I feel that ArtReview really missed the mark on this one. Well, I guess there is something to be said about the strong lobbying power of the AARP!


Damien Hirst
For The Love of God, 2007

TMITF Will Be Back Soon!

Stay Tuned...

Hello loyal readers! I'm back from my trip and, evidently, it was more difficult for me to blog from South Africa than I had previously thought. I was constantly on the move and did not have a chance to do any posting -- SORRY!!! I'll be sorting all of my notes in the upcoming weeks and hope to bring you all up to speed by early October.