Reflecting on the recent argument by the Detroit Institute of Arts that the city of Detroit cannot legally sell, let alone be forced to sell, the artwork in the museum to satisfy creditor, some overlapping terminology creates the possibility of an important confusion. Particularly in the realm of deaccessioning, this distinctions are quite important. Meanwhile, the state of Michigan today approved its part of the “Grand Bargain” to subsidize the bankruptcy to avoid sale or encumbrance of the artwork.
Topics: Donn Zaretsky, Roberta Smith, Rose Art Museum, Lee Rosenbaum, Columbia University, Deaccessioning, Detroit Institute of Arts, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Association of Art Museum Directors, Michigan, Albright-Knox Gallery, New York Times, Detroit Bankruptcy, AAMD, Edward Hopper, Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, grand bargain, Brandeis University, Barnes Foundation
A last reminder that on Monday, there will be a panel discusion at Columbia Law School entited "Selling the Museum's Collection: Is Deaccessioning Ever Appropriate?" From the event description:
Topics: Johnson Museum of Art, Donn Zaretsky, Roberta Smith, Deaccession, Pollock-Krasner Foundation, Cornell University, Graham W. J. Beal, Richard Levin, Frank Robinson, Pippa Loengard, the Art Law Report, Events, Selling the Museum's Collection: Is Deaccessioning, Williams College Museum of Art, Nicholas O'Donnell, Rhode Island School of Design, New York Times, Detroit Bankruptcy, Samuel Sachs II, Detroit Institute of Art
A reminder that two weeks from Monday, I will join a panel discusion at Columbia Law School entited "Selling the Museum's Collection: Is Deaccessioning Ever Appropriate?" From the event description:
I will be on a panel at the Center for Law and the Arts at Columbia Law School on Monday, October 28, 2013 discussing deaccessioning issues. Details are yet to come, but co-panelists will include Donn Zaretsky of John Silberman Associates (and writer of the Art Law Blog), and Roberta Smith of the New York Times. The event is scheduled for lunch. The panelists have quite different views of the issue, and it promises to be a lively and well-informed discussion.