Did the Art Institute of Chicago, the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art — to name a few recent examples — overpay for and underdeliver with their new wings?
Aaron Betsky, left, thinks so. Betsky, director of the Cincinnati Art Museum, is also an architecture critic (a graduate of the Yale School of Architecture) and professor.
The February issue of Art in America contains Betsky’s view of museum architecture today, and he makes what I think are very solid points, starting with the provocative question, “What is the difference between the average Wal-Mart and the average new American art museum wing?”
Betsky proceeds to make cost comparisons — $50 million for a 100,000 sq. ft. Wal-mart versus $345 million for the MFA’s 121,000 sq. ft. wing by Norman Foster and the $294 million, 264,000 sq. ft. modern wing at the Art Institute by Renzo Piano. He calls them “big boxes for art.”
Moreover, Betsky says, the new museum wings have “less accessibility and logic” than Wal-Marts.
“I would argue,” he writes, “…that American art museums currently do things in too fancy a manner.” He cites the 200,000-sq. ft. Museum Aan de Stroom museum, which will open this spring in Antwerp, as a contrast: It cost $50 million.
Art in America is not posting this article online, so I urge you to get a copy of the magazine. In it, Betsky provide many details, examples of how he believes museums have gone wrong. Then, he says:
I would argue that the very way in which they are funded and planned causes, or at least contributes to, both the high cost and the problems with character and layout. Donors want to see something distinctive but not too adventurous or shocking. The venues need to earn income by being rented out for events and donor parties. …
Again, he gives details.
What does Betsky like? He cites the Steven Holl addition to the Nelson-Atkins (I’m with him on that — pictured above), the Allied Works Architecture’s Seattle Art Museum and Frank Gehry’s Art Gallery of Ontario (haven’t seen the latter two in person yet).
I don’t agree with everything Betsky writes. He hints, but never says outright, that the gigantic costs of these buildings would be worth it if they were knockouts (seems to me that the starchitects are most overpaid and guilty of underdelivering. Need I mention Denver?), and he suggests investing in satellite museum spaces instead of new wings (which I think leads to higher costs and two-tier exhibitions). I disagree with both points.
But this is an important article, and it should stir discussion at every museum considering an expansion. Which is just about every one, isn’t it? (Just kidding. I hope.)
Photo Credit: Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal (bottom)