For my article on the “Arts in Review” page of tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal, (online later today, if all goes according to plan), I had the challenging task of reviewing an entire museum in 900 words. [UPDATE: The article is here and an illustrated companion to my WSJ piece is here.] The Milwaukee Art Museum had recently concluded an ambitious, praiseworthy, top-to-bottom renovation and reinstallation, as well as a 17,500-square-foot expansion:
Milwaukee-based Jim Shields of HGA Architects + Planners, architect of record
Photo by Lee Rosenbaum
The driver for the makeover was a threat by the American Association of Museums (AAM, now the American Alliance of Museums) to withdraw MAM’s accreditation, unless prompt action was taken to redress the museum’s physical deterioriation. Its widespread mold penetration, water leaks and buckling floors were the result of chronic neglect by the county, which owned and was responsible for the maintenance of two of MAM’s three components—its 1957 modernist building designed by Eero Saarinen and its 1975 Brutalist building by David Kahler.
MAM’s 2001 winged wing by Santiago Calatrava has made it a tourist mecca for architecture buffs, notwithstanding the older buildings’ blighted infrastructures. At noon on the first day of my frigid visit last month, I observed the wings closing…
…and opening:
The grand entrance hall within, with breathtaking views of Lake Michigan, is almost devoid of art, save for a Calder mobile suspended from the ceiling, near the entrance, and the obligatory Chihuly blown glass chandelier (mounted on the floor), off to one side:
Photo by Lee Rosenbaum
The monumental Calatrava atrium was also almost devoid of people when I arrived early on a Sunday in January (but was later the site of an afternoon concert):
Photo by Lee Rosenbaum
Playing hardball by threatening to close the museum if it lost AAM’s imprimatur, Daniel Keegan, who assumed the directorship in 2008, prevailed upon the county to chip in $10 million towards the $34-million capital project. He plans to leave the museum this May after a job well done.
It looks like someone is sad to see him go:
In my next post, we’ll meander around the museum, using my article’s text as a roadmap for my CultureGrrl photo essay about how the collection was rethought and reinstalled to make its presentation more coherent and comprehensive.
“The whole place was going to be gutted,” as Keegan told me, “so we sure as heck weren’t going to put it all back together the same way.”
My genial, informative guide on this journey was Brady Roberts, MAM’s chief curator, who had to address the AAM’s accreditation challenge shortly after assuming his post:
Photo by Lee Rosenbaum
According to Roberts’ own account of his trial by fire, an AAM representative had warned him: “You’ve got to get in control of your museum environment. And the arrangement of your collections makes no sense. You’re an educational institution and you’re not making sense of your collection and the way that visitors experience it.”
How well did Roberts and MAM fulfill this mandate? You’ll soon find out, in my WSJ piece (I’ll tweet the link to it, later today) and in its upcoming illustrated companion on CultureGrrl.