Photo by Lee Rosenbaum
Critic Peter Schjeldahl, in his current New Yorker piece—“European Tour: New galleries demonstrate Philippe de Montebello‘s method”—perpetuates a common misconception about the Metropolitan Museum director’s modus operandi.
Favorably (but somewhat belatedly) describing the museum’s recently expanded and reconfigured installation of 19th- and early 20th-century European paintings, Schjeldahl writes:
The result [of the curators’ reinstallation] displays the director’s touch to a degree that is common among feats of his regime–which is not at all.
Not at all.
It is certainly true, as I observed when Philippe announced his decision to retire from the Met, that de Montebello has been a curators’ director, supporting and facilitating their initiatives. But suggesting that he’s hands-off couldn’t be farther from the truth.
Several times I’ve heard curators comment with affectionate exasperation on Philippe’s propensity for tinkering with their displays—his prerogative as director, which he never hesitates to exercise. The most recent time I heard about Philippe’s customary finishing touches was from Carlos Picón, curator in charge of Greek and Roman art, at the press preview last spring for the new Greek and Roman galleries.
Since the director was also in attendance for this event, I asked him whether he had done a little rearranging. Here’s what he told me:
I always do: I’m the director….What I did, overall, is basically remove objects. Curators have a tendency to put in too much, so I created a little space here and there—mostly in the vitrines. I redirected some of the pieces, made certain areas a little more dynamic. But I didn’t make that many changes. I’m always fussing. It’s always collaborative.
I can’t do just budgets, right?
Right.