“The Cup of Joy” was its marketing name.
Toledo bought “The Cup of Joy;” Toledo bought the story.
$4 million hammer price shattered auction records
Toledo Museum of Art bought it and immediately lent it to the Jewish Museum in New York for long term display in their just-renovated museum.
But what happened to the cup after it went on display to make it so yellow?
If it was a natural patina, it would have photographed that way in the marketing photos. Is it a thin tarnish layer, yet so evenly a brassy yellow-gold especially on the inside of the bowl? Is it the interaction of the silver with its environment, a brand new freshly painted display case in the newly renovated fourth floor of the museum? One thing is clear, it’s definitely not the lighting.
For four million dollars, the public has a right to know.
Now in the collection of the Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo is shown only one photo of the ancient kiddush cup — the Sotheby’s photo, misrepresenting the condition it is in today, one year after the purchase. For an ancient, fragile little cup having such a big price tag – $4 million – more than the museum’s usual entire annual art purchase budget – and two times as much as what it got for the Professional Building, why isn’t it on display for Toledoans in the Glass Pavilion? It doesn’t take up much room, after all, and it’s considered such a prized possession.
Adam Levine bought the story and took it on the road.
He got plenty of national press for the $4 million hammer price. That helps him – but does it help the people of Toledo, for whom Edward Drummond Libbey, whose funds were used to buy the cup and intended for it to be on display in the Toledo Museum of Art?
Who needs the cup when $4 million gets you the story?
And a lecture tour.
On April 19, Adam Levine didn’t show the actual cup when telling the story of the cup to Toledoans.
On October 27, one week before a contentious senatorial election, he will be telling the story of the cup at the Oakland University, a public university north of Detroit. Is he using Toledo’s new acquisition to influence an election?
On December 7, Adam Levine will be giving a talk at the Jewish Museum with the director, James S. Snyder, tickets are $24.
“Since assuming directorship in 2020, Dr. Levine has led the museum through a period of significant growth…” Oh really, when the attendance never recovered after the pandemic and now the entire main building of the museum is pretty much closed, for years, to fix the HVAC and reinstall the art? Great art has been sold, and the renovated museum will have less gallery space, with no additional storage, on a smaller campus, since the Professional Building was sold last year for $2 million.
Financial growth decoupled from public engagement and exhibition output – a disconnect between visitors and revenue — and Levine is lauded by that being called significant growth! The museum campus is made smaller, art is loaned and sent on world tours for years, and meanwhile an entire generation in Toledo is growing up without the benefit of the only art museum within 50 miles.
Compared to the Jewish Museum, the Toledo Museum is about the same size, same budget, same number of objects, but the similarities stop there. The difference is that the Jewish Museum managed to completely renovate and reinstall two floors while still remaining open to the public on the other two floors, and they did it for $15 million — they are transparent about it – unlike the Toledo Museum. 
Who benefits from the way this charitable asset is being used, and where is the Toledo public’s benefit in the arrangement?
To recap:
TMA spends $4 million acquiring a major object.
The object is not exhibited in Toledo; it is loaned to a prominent New York museum. The TMA director is invited to New York to speak about it. The program’s description prominently markets his credentials and his tenure at TMA, but not how great the museum itself is. The object becomes a vehicle for discussing Adam Levine’s leadership and his transformation of our beloved museum.
What public benefit does TMA receive from this particular disposition of a $4 million acquisition, and what was the basis for deciding that the object should be loaned immediately to an institution outside Toledo rather than first being exhibited to the Toledo community?
Levine is scheduled to discuss the “Cup of Joy” in Michigan immediately before the November 3, 2026 U.S. Senate election, in a state where the election has received national attention because Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed could become the first Muslim U.S. senator.
It makes you wonder whether this new acquisition advances the Museum’s public and institutional purposes, or does it primarily provide substantial professional and reputational benefit to its director? The circumstances warrant examination because the $4 million acquisition was not initially made available to the Toledo public, was instead placed on loan outside Toledo, and now is serving as the subject of a high-profile program in which the Museum’s director is the featured speaker and his personal leadership biography is prominently presented.
Is TMA is operating its charitable assets primarily in accordance with its public obligations, or according to the interests and ambitions of Adam Levine?
And what’s up with the color?
They spent $4 million of Edward Drummond Libbey’s money to acquire this object that has an actual appearance quite different than the image used to represent it to the public. That, and the museum has not put the cup on view in Toledo. Does the museum know why the silver surface turned color since the purchase one year ago from Sotheby’s? Why does it look the way it does?
What is the relationship between the acquisition, the immediate loan to the Jewish Museum, and the promotional/public relations use of the object?
The museum is promoting an image of the acquisition that does not correspond to the object as it is actually experienced by visitors. There is no apparent public explanation of this discrepancy.
The Jewish Museum completely renovated and reinstalled two floors of their museum while still remaining open to the public on the other two floors, and they did it for $15 million.
Why couldn’t the Toledo Museum stay open? Why isn’t the Toledo Museum telling us what they are spending? How they are paying for it? What is the anonymous money?
On Facebook:
October 25: When a Director is Celebrated as “Transformative,” What Does That Mean for Toledo?
October 23: Before Adam Levine’s Talk, Who is the Toledo Museum of Art being Reimagined For?
Sign the Petition to Enforce Edward Drummond Libbey’s Will and Protect Toledo’s Art here: