From museum exhibition catalogue to auction catalogue?
Installation shot from National Gallery of Art’s “George Bellows” show
Center: “Men of the Docks” 1912, Randolph College
Left: “New York,” 1911, National Gallery of Art
Right: “Snow Dumpers,” 1911, Columbus Museum of Art
Photo: Rob Shelley, © 2012 National Gallery of Art, Washington
Among some 130 works in the just-opened George Bellows retrospective at the National Gallery, Washington (to Oct. 8) is “Men of the Docks,” the masterpiece deaccessioned (but not yet sold) by Randolph College, Lynchburg, Va. This is its first public showing since it was withdrawn, due to a legal challenge, from a Nov. 29, 2007 sale at Christie’s.
After opponents lost a lawsuit to stop the planned disposals of the Bellows and three other works, a Tamayo was sold at Christie’s for $7.21 million. But a drop in the market for American art caused the college to delay the sale of three American paintings, including the Bellows.
Bellows’ depiction of New York City longshoremen on the East River was a star of the collection of Randolph’s Maier Museum until Oct. 1, 2007, when it was spirited away by the auction house, at the behest of the college’s president, John Klein. It was removed without any prior notice to the museum’s director, Karol Lawson, who resigned in protest. The 1912 painting had been the museum’s first purchase, acquired directly from the artist in 1920 for $2,500.
Here’s a close-up of its appearance in what the National Gallery has billed as the “first comprehensive exhibition of Bellows’ career in more than three decades”:
The planned sale of this and the other Maier Museum deaccessions, with
proceeds to be applied to the general endowment, was condemned in October 2007 by the Association of Art Museum Directors (which last year reaffirmed its position). Under AAMD’s professional guidelines (p. 21), museums are supposed to apply deaccession proceeds only to the acquisition of other works. (The Maier is not a member of AAMD.)
In response to my query, a spokesperson for the National Gallery told me that Randolph College has agreed not to sell “Men of the Docks” off the Washington museum’s walls or while it is on view at the two other venues to which the show travels—the Metropolitan Museum, New York, and the Royal Academy of Arts, London. “There is nothing else agreed to regarding the possible sale of the painting,” according to the spokesperson.
Any subsequent marketing of this work will undoubtedly use the museums’ imprimatur as a sales tool. To avoid this type of commercial exploitation, some museums try to avoid showing works that are on the market.
Any sales pitch would likely include this quote from the essay by Carol Troyen, curator emerita of American paintings at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, published in the National Gallery’s catalogue for the show:
That Bellows considered “Men of the Docks” a major painting is apparent not only in the size he chose for the canvas, but also by his determination to make it known. It was his only submission to the 1912 National Academy annual. Bellows then sent it on a tour of the Midwest and to the Pennsylvania Aademy, where it won the Sesnan Medal for best landscape….He was hailed as “the Millet of the stevedores.”
Is now a good time to sell a Bellows? Sotheby’s last month sold “Tennis at Newport” for $7.03 million, which was the second-highest auction price achieved by Bellows:
George Bellows, “Tennis at Newport,” 1920, sold for $7.03 million at Sotheby’s, May 17, 2012
But “Men of the Docks” had been estimated back in 2007 by Christie’s to bring much more—some $25-35 million. The auction record for Bellows was set back in December 1999—$27.5 million, paid by Bill Gates (scroll down to first paragraph) at Sotheby’s for “Polo Crowd,” 1910. Sold by the Museum of Modern Art (ex-John Hay Whitney Collection), it remains the record not only for the artist but also for any American artwork ever auctioned:
Sotheby’s 1999 catalogue cover, showing a detail of Bellow’s “Polo Crowd,” 1910
Here’s what Ellen Agnew, who resigned her position as associate director of the Maier Museum because of contemplated deaccessions, thinks about the latest chapter in the saga of “Men of the Docks”:
Unbelievable, but unfortunately not surprising. Deny students and community members the benefits of the painting for four years, while it languished in Christie’s storage, and then prostitute it publicly as a way to promote it and increase its value for subsequent sale.
Shame on Randolph College and the National Gallery of Art.
My queries to Randolph College’s press spokesman, Brenda Edson, have (as usual) not been answered.
Adding insult to injury, Randolph’s President Klein (who last month announced his retirement, effective in June 2013), wrote this to alumni last October, reminding them of how much they had lost when Bellows left the building:
Randolph College is honored to lend to an exhibition with such a far-reaching educational benefit. It is also our hope that the exhibition will provide the opportunity for members of our community to view “Men of the Docks” in the context of Bellows’ career….
I know that you have fond memories of “Men of the Docks” from when you were a student at the College. Despite the necessary decision in 2007 to sell four paintings from our collection, the College’s commitment to both art education and the use of its collection as an integral part of that education endures. We wanted you to be among the first to know about this opportunity to lend this painting to such an important exhibition.
As an inadequate consolation prize, a group of Randolph alums will have an opportunity to travel to Washington next weekend with President Klein and his wife, where they will enjoy “a private curator-led tour” of the Bellows exhibition, according to an invitation extended on Apr. 12 by Heather Ayers Garnett, Randolph College’s alumni director. She added that those who were unable to attend would be given another “opportunity for a private tour of the show on June 22.”
Off to Washington: President John Klein and his wife, Susan
With Randolph College’s financial condition on the upswing, shouldn’t it consider re-accessioning this painting, which still elicits such “fond memories,” as Klein acknowledged?
According to Liz Barry‘s article last month in the Lynchburg News & Advance:
Under Klein’s leadership, Randolph shored up its finances, added academic programs and launched seven new sports teams.
If the finances have indeed been “shored up” and if the college has recently raised enough money for “seven new sports teams,” as well as for “a wave of construction projects, including a $6-million student center renovation funded entirely by alumnae donations,” perhaps the urgent financial need that prompted the decision to monetize an important cultural resource no longer exists, while the educational need for this painting manifestly still does. Randolph should embrace a Brandeis Solution: Let the new president reassess Klein’s unfortunate decision to exploit the art collection as a cash cow.
After their current voyage, Bellows’ longshoremen should be hauled back home for the long haul.