The Brooklyn Museum
[NOTE: Part II is here.]
Robin Pogrebin‘s initial NY Times article, imputing “diminished stature” to the Brooklyn Museum, provoked considerable backlash from the museum profession. But Robin didn’t back down; she doubled down. In Sunday’s astonishing front-page Arts & Leisure piece, she took it upon herself to convene an ad hoc panel of 17 commentators “to start a conversation” about a solution in search of a problem. (Kate Taylor, in yesterday’s Times, examined a museum that truly is in urgent need of some good advice.)
This exercise in “helpfulness” was an implied insult to the museum’s longtime director Arnold Lehman, whose institution, in less dire straits than many, has been uniquely showered with this torrent of unsolicited advice, proffered by everyone from Brooklyn artist/satirist William Powhida (who gets the first word) to former Metropolitan Museum director Philippe de Montebello (who gets the most words, in his more outspoken critical appraisal of a colleague to date) to Brooklyn artist Rico Gatson (who gets the last word).
What’s most surprising about all this is that Arnold’s own voice is notably missing. His own comments about his administrative priorities, the state of the museum, and its plans for the future (which in many ways parallel the concerned “advice”) were apparently not deemed necessary for Sunday’s piece.
Arnold had to resort, instead, to a letter to the editor, in which he took the high road, thanking the Times “for choosing the Brooklyn Museum as the focal point to create a high-level dialogue about some of the challenges confronting cultural institutions” and detailing the ways in which Brooklyn is already addressing those challenges.
So let’s give Arnold the space he deserves: CultureGrrl readers may remember my June 18 post, “Populist” Arnold Lehman Strikes Back, published in response to Pogrebin’s initial June 15 broadside. My post included a CultureGrrl Video that gave Arnold five minutes to air his side of the story.
What I didn’t tell you then is that our impromptu but completely on-the-record conversation in the director’s office continued for another 45 minutes—an exchange that was, in many ways, more interesting and revealing than what I had caught on camera.
Here are some excerpts from my June chat with the man who, responding to critics, sardonically called himself “Mr. Populism,” while seriously addressing the issues raised and highlighting some of his under-the-radar accomplishments:
Q: [In the posted video, I had mentioned that for as long as I could remember, the Brooklyn Museum has struggled with the challenge of attracting visitors to the outer borough. We continued our discussion about Brooklyn’s fluctuating attendance, after I powered down my camcorder.]
A: We cannot count on a constant flow of tourists. That makes up a huge proportion of [the attendance at] our colleague institutions in Manhattan. They [tourists] actually even find their way out to us. Those visitors who are comfortable using the subway come here. Those who are not used to the subway and don’t want to spend 20 bucks on a cab don’t come. The MTA’s weekend work schedule makes getting here and a lot of other destinations in Brooklyn and Queens a nightmare. Believe me, If you have to stand in the subway for two hours and change to this train and that train, that doesn’t make it easy.
Because we have such a tiny advertising budget, we don’t advertise in a general way. It’s always specific to exhibitions. Generic advertising tends to smooth out peaks and valleys [in attendance]. We have a lot of money to be able to advertise Warhol, for example, or Murakami, for which we tend to get a bigger, broader mix of visitors.
But the bottom line is not the number of people we serve, but who we’re serving. It’s been said that we always have so many people coming for First Saturdays. That’s the point. The point is to get people to enjoy a museum experience in whatever way they want to enjoy it. Believe me, anyone who writes about it needs to come here and see that the galleries are crowded with people–adults, families who have kids and senior citizens, people in wheelchairs—and they’re not all here to dance. They can look.
Q: How else does the Brooklyn location impact you?
A: To me, this is one of the greatest opportunities in the United States. The diversity of this community, the youth of this community, and the incredible art community that’s here all are so important to how we approach what we do. Coming up, the person who’s been sort of the dean of the Brooklyn art community, Fred Tomaselli, is doing a big show. We focus in on Brooklyn and the great Brooklyn artists, such as Kiki Smith (now on view). And there are a couple of other shows of major Brooklyn artists who haven’t even been announced yet.
Q: Are you thinking of doing more with the borough’s community of emerging artists?
A: Yes, absolutely. We’re thinking of doing another major show, exclusively focused on Brooklyn. In terms of the younger art community, you don’t really have to go any place else. If you could envision a big, incredibly collection-rich institution, some place where you’d have unbelievable opportunities to touch peoples’ lives in different ways, Brooklyn is it—the center of creative opportunity and creative capital.
COMING SOON: Planned reinstallations to revitalize the permanent collection, and why Lehman says his tombstone should read, “He Loved Ductwork.”