“The thought was that if we focus on quality, we’ll end up not only with a superlative collection, but we’ll end up with a collection that tells a global art history,” Adam Levine is thinking. He probably means, if you want to tell a story about global art history, and if you focus on quality, you will end up with a superlative collection. But he also says that the museum has the superpower to wave a magic wand and make great art out of crap. So what is it?
The writer points out that the museum had 386 new acquisitions in 2023, up from 60 in 2022. She did not mention that that includes the 306 Japanese Netsukes (little toggles) donated by Richard R. Silverman to go along with the hundreds of other such pieces that he had previously donated. This repetition expands on world art history? 30 of the 386 acquisitions are photographs donated by Spencer Stone. 19 are works on paper by Barbara Jones-Hugo (who?), some purchased & some donated by the art dealer David Lusenhop of Cleveland, who sold them the controversial burnt American flag piece in 2022. The museum also acquired six works on paper and one 3-D object by Matt Wedel, the ceramist who had the five-month long show in 2022-2023 that filled up the Levis Gallery with “Phenomenal Debris.” Reflected in that title, the new acquisitions are nothing to brag about.
The writer falsely claims that “as a non-profit institution, TMA is obligated to educate on the entire world,” which is absurd. Did Adam Levine tell her that and she blindly repeated it? Comparing their new acquisitions to their mission to cover the entire globe, the writer equates it to the “coming of fruition” of the founders’ dream of “building an art collection of the highest caliber.”
The writer fails to mention that the overwhelming majority of the recent acquisitions do not advance the museum’s ambitious new mission to expand the narrative of world art history, in fact it defeats it. Quality, not quantity, made our encyclopedic museum collection great.
The writer cutely writes that “Egyptian curios and mummified cats wouldn’t cut it anymore.” Obviously she knows nothing about the museum’s collection. If only she would have read her own newspaper’s article two weeks before about the newly appointed assistant curator of ancient art, Roko Rumora. Here’s what he said: “In the field of classical archaeology and ancient art history, the Toledo Museum of Art is something of a household name. TMA’s ancient collections are among the richest and most diverse in the United States…”
The Libbeys founded an art museum, but it seems that Adam Levine wants to turn it into a folk art natural history museum to cover every civilization and time period and call it art, perhaps to influence the art market.
The museum has lost direction and the director has run off with it.
Why is Adam Levine literally tearing apart the museum that we love, selling great art and not replacing them with new art as per the rules of Libbey Endowment, nor putting the proceeds back in the Libbey Endowment (which is accountable to the public), but keeping it separate and private? He’s moving the museum further away from the founders, adding layers of bureaucracy, remodeling the interior and exterior and shifting everything around including the removal of the glass art out of the Glass Pavilion that was just built in 2006 for the display of the glass art collection. What drastic changes, yet Adam Levine has a fiduciary duty to care for the art and the art museum for future generations. But he’s minimized the founders wishes and rules for the museum by selling three paintings so valuable that they are equal to the value of the Libbey Endowment, and used the paintings gifted by Edward Drummond Libbey to loosen the ties to Edward Drummond Libbey and blur his vision.
Gaslighting
Adam Levine arrogantly says that the superpower of museums is that they can display anything and the art world will call it quality. That’s no dream — that’s Libbey’s nightmare.
Screenshot of museum’s Facebook and point of view – Edward Drummond Libbey would be getting the finger from the new curators if only the artwork had arms.
Buying moccasins and marked-up bear skins and editioned statues of life-size armless women with their midriffs split in two just won’t cut it, for more than a season or two.
The heavy words of Toledo Museum of Art's reinstallation inspirational word cloud shown at their symposium, Expanding Horizons: New Approaches in Display and Interpretation.
they will tell you exactly how to think.
They will tell us what art we can make.
They will make their own art.
It’s a new year with lots of action at the Toledo Museum of Art. They are putting into motion the changes they deem necessary due to the colonial and racial history of the museum. They can’t help themselves from offering up the Toledo Museum as a sacrifice, and by doing so, it is their goal to be the example for all other museums to follow.
They hosted a symposium on July 21, 2023, attended by dozens of museums nationwide, to discuss the changes that need to be made as retribution for the sins of our non-Native American-born ancestors, and the art they collected. This is regardless of the Toledo Museum of Art having been the most progressive of museums from the very beginning, thanks to the generosity and forethought of the founders Edward Drummond Libbey and his wife Florence. But somehow the ever-expanding Museum Board of Directors have allowed these ambitious outsiders to use our venerable populous institution for their collective frustrated-artist projections.
After the ritual land-grab apology to the Native American ancestors who used to live on the land on which the museum is built, and their descendants, (but notably no apology given to the artists of Toledo for taking away their culturally rich nearly 100-year old annual Toledo Area Artists Exhibition) the symposium commences by pointing out the troubling colonial and racist histories and legacies of the museum.
“Everyone is thinking of re-installations and reinterpreting collections today especially as a field and as institutions we’re coming to terms with the colonial and racist histories and legacies of our own institutions and their continued impact on what we do and how we do it today.”
The following are a few comments by Diane Wright, Curator of Glass and Decorative Arts: (who is perfectly fine with dismantling the Glass Pavilion to distribute the glass art chronologically throughout the main building.)
“Making efforts to get things right, we will inevitably get things wrong too.”
“My hope is that this will not inhibit us from taking risks finding our collective and our individual voices and using the light that day, maybe the angle of our hand that we’re holding our kaleidoscope, or just how we experience color and structure and patterns.”
“As museum professionals we are focused on content structure and creating connections. Yet it is the individual human engagement with our museums that is what turns this into something truly extraordinary. And making efforts to get things right most creativity that we can muster being true to who we are as Museum professionals and institutions to connect art and people.”
Accompanying Diane Wright’s presentation is a word cloud defining their collective goals for the museum:
I asked AI to write a story about an art museum, using their word cloud words. What it came up with is so weird, and oh-so eerie. It was written in the past tense! Lo and behold, this is what the computer wrote —
The Museum of Continuities
Nestled in the heart of Toledo, a city known for its resilience and rich history, stood the Museum of Continuities, a revolutionary institution dedicated to exploring the intersections of art, society, and humanity. From its inception, the museum sought to dismantle traditional boundaries, inviting visitors to step into a dreamscape where the past, present, and future collided.
A Network of Interconnected Themes
The museum’s galleries were designed as ecosystems, each exploring different facets of the human experience. The Networks of Power exhibit examined the invisible structures that shape societies, from colonialism and globalism to modern-day economic systems and technology. Visitors traced the chronology of humanity’s struggle with (in)equality, resistance, and the resilience of marginalized communities.
In another wing, Interiors of Memory & Memorial invited reflection on trauma and the continuity of kinship through time. Interactive displays used cross-cultural exchanges and storytelling to explore how families and communities have navigated war, gentrification, and displacement. Toledo’s local stories were interwoven with global narratives, emphasizing shared humanity and the power of collective memory.
Art and Intersectionality
At the center of the museum was the Intersectionality Atrium, where gender, race, and class converged in bold installations. One piece, Dreams of (In)Equality, juxtaposed images of feminist mythmaking with depictions of the labor industry, exploring how materiality and mythology shape identity. Another installation used vibrant fabrics and recycled materials to symbolize the intersection of climate, energy, and health within modern agricultural practices.
A nearby exhibit, Borders and Nations, deconstructed the politics of colonialism and its lingering effects on modern-day race and racism. Interactive timelines allowed visitors to explore how the concept of nationality evolved alongside trade, medicine, and cultural change.
Fantasy Meets Reality
One of the museum’s most popular exhibits, The Dreamscape of Humanity, blended fantasy and reality, reimagining the world through a child’s eyes. Using augmented reality technology, visitors could wander through vibrant environments filled with mythical creatures, industrial landscapes, and symbolic depictions of spiritual resilience. The exhibit challenged viewers to consider how mythology and childhood fantasies shape adult notions of identity and spirituality.
The Humanities of the Future
Dedicated to exploring the intersection of humanities and science, the Health and Humanities gallery highlighted advancements in medicine and disability studies. Visitors could engage in discussions about the ethics of healthcare, the politics of gender and race in medicine, and how global climate change impacts public health.
Another forward-thinking space, Art in the Age of Globalism, showcased works that addressed the environmental impact of modern industry and the need for sustainable energy systems. Pieces emphasized how art can drive social and political change, encouraging resistance against exploitative systems while imagining a more equitable future.
Kinship Across Time
The museum concluded with Kinship and Continuities, a celebration of family, community, and the timeless bonds that connect people across borders and generations. Visitors left with a sense of empowerment, their hearts and minds brimming with inspiration to enact change in their own lives.
The Museum of Continuities in Toledo stood as a beacon of hope and transformation—a place where the humanities collided with pressing global issues, reminding all who entered of the interconnectedness of humanity and the enduring power of art to inspire change.
###
I asked AI to tell a story about the downfall of the Museum of Continuities
The Downfall of the Museum of Continuities
The Museum of Continuities was born from an audacious vision: to connect humanity’s diverse histories, struggles, and dreams within a single, evolving institution. For years, it thrived as a beacon of progressive thought in Toledo, drawing acclaim for its interdisciplinary approach and global partnerships. Yet, the very ambition that defined its success also laid the groundwork for its downfall.
Overreach and Financial Instability
The museum’s expansive vision demanded equally expansive resources. Its commitment to addressing complex issues—intersectionality, globalism, climate change, and the politics of identity—required cutting-edge technology, an ever-growing staff, and a continuous influx of groundbreaking exhibitions. However, as operating costs soared, its reliance on grants and philanthropic donations exposed its vulnerability to economic systems beyond its control.
The 2030 global recession hit the museum hard. Several key donors redirected funds to more immediate humanitarian crises, and grant opportunities dwindled as governments prioritized basic infrastructure over cultural institutions. Efforts to stabilize finances by monetizing popular exhibits like The Dreamscape of Humanity alienated the museum’s core audience, who saw it as a betrayal of its egalitarian principles.
Internal Conflicts
As financial pressure mounted, the museum’s leadership fractured. The intersectionality-focused Equity and Inclusion Council clashed with the board of directors, who prioritized solvency over the museum’s social justice mission. Debates over whether to commercialize exhibits like Borders and Nations or cut staff from the Health and Humanities program led to resignations and public criticism. Accusations of racism, sexism, and colonialist attitudes among board members further eroded trust.
Gentrification Backlash
While the museum claimed to champion community and resistance to gentrification, its presence in Toledo’s urban core had unintended consequences. Real estate prices in surrounding neighborhoods skyrocketed, displacing many of the working-class families the museum sought to serve. Activists began protesting the museum, accusing it of hypocrisy and demanding reparative action. The Museum of Continuities found itself at odds with the very community it was meant to uplift.
Climate and Infrastructure Challenges
In a cruel twist of irony, the museum’s location became a liability as extreme weather events, exacerbated by climate change, took their toll. Persistent flooding damaged the building’s state-of-the-art technology, while the soaring cost of energy to maintain environmentally sensitive exhibits drained its dwindling budget. Efforts to secure emergency funding were hampered by political resistance, as critics labeled the museum a “vanity project” for elites.
A Fading Dream
By the late 2030s, the museum had become a shadow of its former self. Its once-thriving galleries stood empty, the vibrant voices of artists and activists replaced by silence. The Dreamscape of Humanity exhibit, once hailed as a masterpiece, was dismantled and sold to private collectors.
In its final days, the museum attempted one last exhibit: Memorials and Memory. It sought to reflect on its legacy, the challenges it faced, and the stories it told. The exhibit drew modest crowds, a poignant reminder of the museum’s impact, but it was too little, too late.
In 2040, the Museum of Continuities officially closed its doors. Its downfall became a cautionary tale about the challenges of sustaining ambitious cultural institutions in a world grappling with economic inequality, political division, and environmental catastrophe. Yet, in its absence, its mission lived on in the hearts of those it inspired, proving that even in failure, art and ideas have the power to endure.
###
How much of the collection of the Toledo Museum of Art today would be irrelevant in this Museum of Continuities, tell a story about how it fits in and how it doesn’t
ChatGPT said:
The Toledo Museum of Art (TMA) holds a diverse collection spanning centuries, from ancient artifacts to contemporary works. While the Museum of Continuities would embrace much of TMA’s art for its emphasis on interconnected histories and global perspectives, certain pieces and categories might face challenges in fitting into its highly thematic, activist mission.
How TMA’s Collection Fits
Global Art and Cross-Cultural Exchange:
TMA’s ancient Greek and Roman artifacts, as well as its Asian, African, and Islamic art collections, would align well with the Museum of Continuities‘ focus on cross-cultural exchange and globalism. These works illustrate the blending of traditions and ideas across borders, a central theme for the Museum of Continuities.
The museum’s contemporary art, which often addresses issues like identity, gender, and politics, would also resonate. Pieces from feminist artists or works tackling themes of race and colonialism could easily find a home in exhibits addressing intersectionality and resilience.
Glass Collection as Environmental and Industry Commentary:
TMA’s renowned glass collection could anchor exhibits on materiality, industry, and climate. Glass, as a material tied to both ancient craftsmanship and modern industrial processes, serves as a symbol of the intersection between art, technology, and economic systems.
Mythology and Spirituality:
The museum’s paintings and sculptures inspired by mythology, including works from the Renaissance and Baroque periods, would fit into exhibits exploring how mythology shapes cultural identity and spirituality.
What Might Not Fit
Purely Aesthetic Works:
Many works in TMA’s collection, particularly those from the Impressionist and Post-Impressionist eras, might struggle to find a place. While beautiful, these works were often created with less explicit attention to the social and political themes central to the Museum of Continuities. For example, Monet’s landscapes or Renoir’s portraits, while masterpieces, may be seen as disconnected from pressing narratives of intersectionality, trauma, or globalism.
Western-Centric Historical Narratives:
Works that reinforce colonial or Eurocentric perspectives might face reinterpretation—or exclusion. For instance, depictions of “exotic” subjects painted by European artists during imperial eras could be criticized for perpetuating stereotypes. The Museum of Continuities would likely demand a critical lens to reframe these works within broader discussions of racism and colonialism.
Decorative Arts without Context:
Decorative arts like ornate furniture or purely ornamental pieces may not align with the museum’s activist mission unless contextualized within broader discussions of class, labor, or material economies.
Toledo Museum facebook post dated January 1, 2025. (behold, the museum’s transformative power with art) And what to do with this post-colonial Tiffany lamp? Let’s paste it on the European painting, which must be the most creativity Diane Wright could muster, being true to who she is as a museum professional and as the Curator of Glass and Decorative Arts.
Story: A Place for Reinterpretation
In the Museum of Continuities, an exhibition titled Glass: From Industry to Ecosystems prominently features TMA’s glass collection. One piece, an 18th-century Venetian goblet, is juxtaposed with a modern glass installation addressing climate change. The exhibit explores the journey of glass as a material shaped by the hands of artisans and mass industrialization, linking it to themes of labor, environment, and resilience.
Meanwhile, a small gallery is devoted to The Shadow of Mythology, reframing classical works like TMA’s Greco-Roman sculptures. These pieces are displayed alongside modern reinterpretations by feminist and indigenous artists, creating dialogue about how mythology is co-opted and reshaped by different cultures.
In contrast, a corner of the museum’s Impressionist works lies largely unvisited. A Renoir portrait hangs with a new caption: “The Absence of Intersectionality: Aesthetic Beauty in Isolation.” The lack of critical social engagement in these works leaves them at odds with the museum’s thematic priorities, relegating them to an exhibit of “historical artifacts of an era of artistic privilege.”
The Absence of Intersectionality: Aesthetic Beauty in Isolation.Historical artifacts of an era of artistic privilege: Pierre-Auguste Renoir, The Green Jardinière
Conclusion
While much of the Toledo Museum of Art’s collection would thrive in the Museum of Continuities due to its historical depth and global scope, certain works would require reframing or risk irrelevance. This recontextualization challenges traditional narratives of art, pushing visitors to consider the deeper social and political implications of the works they admire, according to the current art museum authorities.
—————
what is the estimated worth of the artwork that won’t thrive?
ChatGPT said:
The estimated worth of the artwork in the Toledo Museum of Art collection that might not align with the thematic focus of the Museum of Continuities—particularly Impressionist and Post-Impressionist works—can be substantial. For example:
In 2022, the museum deaccessioned three significant Impressionist works by Cézanne, Renoir, and Matisse. The sale of these paintings alone fetched around $60 million. These works included:
Henri Matisse’s Fleurs ou Fleurs devant un portrait (estimated $15–$20 million).
Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s Nu s’essuyant (The Bather) (estimated $3–$4 million).
Paul Cézanne’s Clairière (The Glade) (estimated $30 million)【259】【260】【262】.
While these specific pieces have been sold, they reflect the general high market value of similar works in the collection. The value of other Impressionist works that might not thrive in a socially critical institution like the Museum of Continuities could potentially exceed this amount, particularly if more iconic or highly coveted pieces are included.
This highlights a tension between preserving traditional aesthetics and reconfiguring collections to align with contemporary sociopolitical themes, a challenge many museums face today.
You said:
how about their 20th century paintings, abstract to 1970’s
ChatGPT said:
The Toledo Museum of Art’s 20th-century paintings, especially those in abstract and modernist styles up to the 1970s, hold significant value, both culturally and financially. Their worth depends on specific artists, pieces, and market trends. For example:
Significant Works: The collection includes pieces by renowned artists like Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, and Wayne Thiebaud, whose works often fetch millions at auction. For instance, works by Pollock can sell for tens of millions depending on their size and historical importance【268】【270】.
Cultural Context: These paintings are central to understanding mid-20th-century art movements like Abstract Expressionism and Minimalism. However, if the Museum of Continuities focuses heavily on sociopolitical themes and intersectionality, abstract works that are seen as apolitical or rooted in Western traditions might be considered less relevant.
Value: If sold, mid-century masterpieces could generate substantial revenue. Similar auctions of high-profile 20th-century works have fetched between $10 million and $50 million for single pieces, depending on the artist and the artwork’s historical significance【269】【270】.
The value of these artworks lies not only in their monetary worth but also in their ability to provoke thought about the artistic and cultural shifts of their time. The Museum of Continuities would likely retain pieces that align with its themes, such as those exploring identity, trauma, or the interplay of technology and art, while others may face reinterpretation or deaccessioning.
You said:
how many painting does the TMA have from about 1850 to 2000?
ChatGPT said:
The Toledo Museum of Art has over 30,000 works of art in its collection, with many falling within the time period of 1850 to 2000. While a specific count for paintings in this range isn’t explicitly provided, the museum holds significant works from key movements, including Impressionism, Modernism, and Abstract Expressionism. These include notable pieces by artists such as Claude Monet, Pablo Picasso, Joan Miró, and Jackson Pollock, all housed within their vast 40-gallery campus【276】【269】. For a detailed breakdown, their eMuseum database offers insights.
You said:
would these paintings fit in at the Museum of Continuity?
ChatGPT said:
Whether the Toledo Museum of Art’s paintings from 1850 to 2000 would fit into the Museum of Continuities depends on how they are interpreted and contextualized.
Works That Could Fit: Many Modernist and Abstract Expressionist paintings explore identity, emotion, and social upheaval, aligning well with the Museum of Continuities‘ focus on intersectionality, resilience, and political change. Artists like Picasso or Pollock often addressed universal themes that resonate with the museum’s mission.
Challenges: Paintings emphasizing pure aesthetics or Eurocentric narratives without broader social context might require reinterpretation to align with the new museum’s activist and thematic framework.
Would you like detailed examples or a specific exploration of their alignment?
You said:
yes
ChatGPT said:
Paintings That Could Fit Well:
Modernist Works: Artists like Picasso or Joan Miró often challenged traditional norms, explored identity, and addressed social change. These themes align with the Museum of Continuities’ focus on intersectionality, resistance, and globalism.
Abstract Expressionism: Paintings by Jackson Pollock or Mark Rothko evoke themes of trauma, emotion, and the human condition, which could be framed as responses to war or cultural shifts.
Surrealism: Works by Salvador Dalí or similar artists could fit into exhibits on dreamscapes or fantasy, connecting to psychological and spiritual exploration.
Paintings That Might Need Reinterpretation:
Impressionist Pieces: While aesthetically significant, works by artists like Claude Monet or Renoir may be viewed as disconnected from the social and political narratives central to the Museum of Continuities.
Eurocentric or Colonialist Narratives: Paintings reflecting imperial ideologies or purely decorative works might require critical reframing within contexts of colonialism or global inequality.
How They Could Be Reframed:
Impressionist Landscapes: Positioned as reflections of industrial change and environmental impact.
Portraits: Interpreted through the lens of race, gender, and societal hierarchies.
Abstraction: Framed as universal expressions of resilience or the effects of trauma.
In this way, the Museum of Continuities could adapt TMA’s collection, retaining works that contribute to its mission and critically engaging with those that don’t naturally align. Would you like specific examples of paintings from TMA’s collection analyzed?
yes
ChatGPT said:
The Toledo Museum of Art’s collection includes numerous significant works from 1850 to 2000, ranging from Impressionist paintings by artists like Monet and Renoir to powerful American modernist pieces by artists such as Thomas Cole and George Bellows. Additionally, there are modern and abstract works, including masterpieces by Pollock, Rothko, and others, that reflect the evolving art movements of the 20th century.
Fit with the Museum of Continuities
Perfect Fits: Many of the museum’s paintings would align well with the Museum of Continuities. Works like Thomas Cole’s The Architect’s Dream (1840) could be reframed within themes of mythmaking and the interplay between industry, environment, and time. Similarly, American works from the Harlem Renaissance or Abstract Expressionism could highlight intersections of race, resilience, and identity.
Needs Reinterpretation: Impressionist pieces, while aesthetically important, might require new narratives to align with the Museum of Continuities’ emphasis on social and political themes. For example, Monet’s Water Lilies could be integrated into an exhibit on climate change and the environment.
Value and Potential Issues
Pieces that do not align thematically, such as more decorative works or purely aesthetic landscapes, might be relegated to secondary roles or considered for deaccessioning to fund more relevant acquisitions. However, with Impressionist and Modernist works from TMA having fetched tens of millions at auction in the past, the financial implications of these choices would be significant.
###
Wow. What a gold mine. If it weren’t for the fiduciary duty of the museum staff and board of directors to care for the art for future generations, they could sell whatever art they deemed to be politically “irrelevant” and cash in BILLIONS of dollars…. but I wonder who is going to stop them?
“Our visitors will see their histories on display,” so says the new director Adam Levine, who is from New York, as he and the former director John Stanley, also of New York, have their way with Toledo’s once and future
Toledo Museum of Art.
Famous Impressionist paintings thrown out the door.
The museum conducted surveys of all the people living in the two-mile radius of the museum. They want to get them to come. They are trying everything. They must completely redo the museum.
They rebranded at great expense, creating a $200K operating deficit for 2023 (they spent much more than that). The redesigned logo looks like a gun scoping you out. It’s animated and dominating and goes back and forth tracking everything you look at. Don’t get in the way because it’s about to kill the artwork. Especially the American and European artwork because it’s not politically correct.
Enough with the European paintings that the Libbeys and others donated. That kind of art, that the museum was built on, does not speak to the people. They don’t like that kind of culture even if it is great art. The amazing thing about a museum is that it has this amazing ability to say whatever the museum puts up on the walls – it’s instantly going to be great art. This is what the new director says after previous directors really did collect great art, which is what really made the Toledo Museum of Art so great. But the new guy replaced the connoisseurs with culture workers and lowered the bar. Because the museum sets the cannon. Boom!
Instead of adding to the collection to create more diversity, he is subtracting from it, and the money’s good. They sold three French Impressionist paintings for 59 million dollars! They can get billions for all the irrelevant art they can subtract from the collection. Boom!
The new Glass Pavilion was designed by the famed Tokyo-based architects Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa specifically for the glass art collection in 2006 for $30 million 18 years ago. But in hindsight that was a mistake and they will correct that — the fixers have arrived.
They are taking the glass collection out of the Glass Pavilion and it will be spread around the 2-D art in the main building, arranged chronologically. The Glass Pavilion will be for special exhibitions and to serve as the graveyard for Impressionist paintings, which have already been removed.
In place of the prominent Impressionist gallery that showed Impressionist art, they will install a display showing Toledo’s glass industry history and the history of the Museum.
The museum’s campus-wide reinstallation is mostly led by employees and consultants who are brand new. The museum doesn’t bother to mention it in the five-year plan, nor in the 2023 annual report. That’s because they just thought of it. Spending as much money as they can, they hire numerous firms, consulting curators and simpatico fellows to help them, making sure that they are all from out of town.
The Chairman of the Board of the Museum, Sara Jane DeHoff, is thrilled that such noteworthy architects competed for the job, commenting to The Blade in the November 22 article, “I can’t tell you how many international designers applied for this project.” Who wouldn’t want the cushy job of an ambitious renovation and reinstallation from an ambitious museum with supposed unlimited funds?
According to the new architectural renderings, the redone museum will look like a hospital with a bad facelift. The walls are white and devoid of art, and on the floor are curvy glass display tables mazed throughout what looks to be the Great Gallery. People are not happy about it.
Imagine, The Crowning of Saint Catherine, considered to be the best painting by Peter Paul Rubens that is in America, the two paintings called Lot and His Daughters, one by Guercino and one by Artemisia Gentileschi, along with many others being taken off the walls of the Great Gallery. Oh yes they will.
They advanced the rumor that they were getting rid of the Cloisters, only to let it leak that they are just moving the Cloisters. To a smaller area behind the the ancient art. Imagine the dismantling the ancient tile floor and the taking apart of the delicate and very old four walls of columns, all related in history, that form the Cloister gallery. It will never look or be the same.
To find a spot for the Cloisters, they will dismantle the 12-year old Frederic and Mary Wolfe Gallery that was built for contemporary art. It too was a mistake made by previous museum directors that the new people are going to fix now. Two million dollars towards the renovation of the former glass gallery that was made into a contemporary art gallery (mistakenly) was donated (stupidly) by Mary and Fritz Wolfe, who are both dead now.
Fritz Wolfe served 27 years on the Museum board and Mary Wolfe co-chaired the 100th anniversary celebration in 2001.
The new museum people don’t care about respecting donors. They get their money from the government now.
Museum floor plan in 2014, note the purple + bright blue will be moved to the orange galleries — the museum’s greatest paintings, European, Renaissance now hanging in the Great Gallery and adjacent galleries getting shoved aside, in a much smaller area. The Cloisters to be moved to where the new two-story Wolfe Contemporary gallery is now.
Sketch presented by the museum to other museums at the symposium they sponsored in the summer of 2023.So much for the “stewards” of the “art museum” and their “fiduciary duty” to “care for the art” so that it is “passed on” to “future generations” of “Toledoans.” Adam Levine, a “financial” “crypto” “specialist,” sees the future of museums as being “screen-based.” He is not the best person to be put in charge of caring for and keeping the art and the art museum, let alone to be given the right to remodel it.
It is very risky as well. Remember the disastrous fire of Notre Dame was caused by a mistake made during a renovation.
For Toledoans, including the Toledo Museum Board of Directors, if they don’t stop this disastrous dismantling of the museum we love, the history being made now will leave them with a pathetic legacy, and will leave the city with the loss of what made it so good.
Contact the board members of the Toledo Museum of Art if you agree with me.
This is a photo of the Libbey grave on Easter 2023 showing that the museum left it in tatters in spite of the directive of the Libbey Endowment. The Libbeys are the founders of the museum.
Why are Toledoans letting this happen to the museum that was meant for them?
If the museum needs to make repairs to its HVAC system, and it doesn’t have the money in its own operating funds, why doesn’t it take more money from the Libbey endowment? If the museum can’t find enough money in the Libbey endowment because the Endowment requires that 50% needs to be spent on art, why not do a fundraiser? If the museum can’t raise enough money from a fundraiser, why doesn’t it apply for grants? If the museum still can’t raise enough money to repair the HVAC system from the endowment, fundraisers and grants and its own operating funds, why doesn’t the museum apply for a loan from a bank?
These are fair questions. Instead, the museum went to the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, asking them to install “port authority facilities” into the museum in the form of an HVAC system. The port authority eagerly agreed and posted a bond for the museum as a part of their .4 mill operating levy that was passed by voters on November 5. More money came from the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority and the Columbus-Franklin County Finance Authority for the total of $24.89 million for a new HVAC system. Pretty slick.
The Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority owns and operates “port authority facilities” such as the Port of Toledo, Toledo Shipyard, Toledo Express Airport, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Plaza train station, ParkSmart Parking Facilities, General Cargo Terminals. And now the port authority is adding one more “port authority facility” to this governmentally controlled list — the HVAC system at the Toledo Museum of Art. The port authority approved a $25 million bond, together with the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority and the Columbus-Franklin County Finance Authority, then approved by taxpayers, the constructing, developing, equipping, improving, and installing “port authority facilities” across the 328,568 square foot museum.
Interestingly, the Secretary of the Toledo Museum of Art Board of Directors, Thomas Winston, is also the President and CEO of the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority. The Vice Chair of the Toledo Museum of Art Board of Directors, Sharon Speyer, is on the Board of Directors of the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, among other interested parties, including a banker.
Now the big question is, where is the money coming from for the rest of the “improvements,” “remodeling” and “reinstallation” for the newly planned “facelift” of the Toledo Museum of Art, as every gallery gets remodeled and painted white, and the recently renovated Cloister gallery gets disassembled and moved to the east, and new technologies get installed in every gallery, and all of the art gets shifted around and arranged chronologically? The Glass Pavilion, which cost $30 million to build in 2006, will be repurposed as the glass gets removed and scattered among the art in the main building arranged by date. What is it going to cost, and what will the museum have to do for that? Are they going to sell their soul, as they have already let the port authority claim “port authority facility” ownership to infiltrate the very air they breath? Do people need or want this radical change?
And the even bigger question is, how much great art that the public loves will fall through the cracks during this seismic shift?
Remember the sale of the three French Impressionist paintings for $62 million in 2022, and the promise for new art, which never happened. And then the removal of all the rest of the Impressionist paintings to a back room of the glass museum.
Art. think about it. Is it inevitable that the last bastion of freedom and independence and great wealth in Toledo, the freedom of art, will get gobbled up by the turkeys?
I have a quiet little Facebook page titled “Toledo Now.” Lately I’ve been posting about the doings of the Toledo art museum. My posts don’t go around that much, but I noticed a lot of activity on this post that I put up on November 16, going around many thousands of times! I saw that it had been shared on November 19 around 5pm (not by me) on a Facebook group called “Toledo Then and Now” which has 32,000 followers. This page states that it is run by AI. Apparently it stops the commenting after a period of time or activity, and when I first saw it, two hours after it was shared, the commenting had been stopped. But during that short time the post was shared many times and had inspired dozens of comments — each one expressed disappointment in the direction of the museum.
The photo is an architectural rendering provided by the museum to publicize their announcement of their selection of design partners for a major reinstallation project.
Two hours after it was posted, commenting has been turned off for this post.
Here are a few comments I was able to document —
Horrible! We have one of the finest museums in the world. Keep it in the classic Grecian style. (7 likes)
I agree. Don’t mess with perfection.
THAT is hideous.
The museum was designed to mimic the Louvre in Paris. I hope this is a joke, it looks ugly and uninviting. The building itself is a work of art. If this is true, it could lead to a decline in visits and threaten the uniqueness of our museum.
Do you ever read about art restorations and upgrades and say, “What were they thinking?” We’re living in one of those.
No!
Apple store
Leave it alone keep it like it is don’t destroy the museum
Nooooo!
Cold and stark. Why the need to mess with the beautiful, classic style?
It looks like a mall.
It sure does.
Why???? Horrible. Feels like a hospital.
(crying emojis)
(mad face emoji)
The public comments on the shares remain on the Facebook pages of those who shared the post, with the actual post removed and the group’s banner replacing it, leaving all their comments out of context, but here are some of those comments —
Please god no
Wow, that is history they are messing with…how disappointing they would do that
man toledo be really pissing me the f— off
That’s terrible! A museum should reflect and honor the past.
It literally doesn’t need to change. That modern white is so ugly. They’re about to ruin one of my favorite places.
I hate the new design, will not go back, they are going to ruin the museum.
Wow I love when historical legacies with real beauty get removed to have a museum that looks like an apple store.
Use this money to fix the roads/schools, the art museum is beautiful the way it is
It looks so minimal eww
I’m pissed!
asf, ruins the whole vibe
Lookit this garbage they are tryna do to our art museum
They better not smh
Yeah they better not
NOT a fan (of the changes)!
Disgusting
if they do this will never go back fal@ don’t make the art museum look like a damn hospital plsss
Maaan
What the hell
It literally doesn’t need to change. That modern white is so ugly. They’re about to ruin one of my favorite places
Stupid
Ts take the history out the museum??
That’s terrible! A museum should reflect and honor the past.
I will actually sob uncontrollably
That looks so boring why would they want that??
The Blade asked me what I thought of the museum’s reinstallation plan, to include a quote for their news article, Toledo Museum of Art furthers reinstallation plans, which was published on November 21. I was looking forward to sharing the link with the group, but I wasn’t allowed to share it or anything else, and then I noticed that my post was removed! And I was censored!
Many people went to the trouble of posting their displeasure with the direction of the museum. Their voices were censored too.
Here’s my quote in the article that was published in The Blade:
And just to make my feelings perfectly clear
It should disgust the community that the museum sells its great paintings and diminishes its collection, after stopping its decades-long Saturday classes that brought together 2500 children from all over the city. It’s disgusting that the museum brands itself with the “community” buzzword after killing the Toledo Area Artists Exhibition. How patronizing it is to use the 2-mile radius of the museum as an excuse to rip apart the museum as if to make it more appealing to the neighborhood…… When all Adam Levine wants is attention from other museums so he can have a way out of Toledo, after spending a fortune giving the museum the wrecking ball. The museum never had to worry about its reputation before, because they truly were great, and now they are just running on fumes.
Adam Levine believes that the future of museums is screen-based. Should he really be at the helm of our museum today? Hmmm….
Pondering prospects of the Toledo Area Artists Exhibition that was shamefully taken away from local artists in 2014
The irony is striking: over the past three years, the Toledo Museum of Art has introduced layers of new bureaucracy—hiring a “chief people officer,” a “belonging and community engagement” czar, and even establishing a “branding” department. Add to this a new position perpetually funded by the Conda family to ensure that a “director of access initiatives” is always on payroll. All these changes are made under the guise of fostering a caring, inclusive community museum.
Yet, just a decade ago, this same museum abruptly canceled the Toledo Area Artists Exhibition, a long-standing tradition that enriched the city’s cultural landscape for nearly 100 years. The exhibition not only helped launch local artists’ careers but also provided a valuable platform for Toledo’s artistic community. Former museum director Brian Kennedy axed the tradition before he himself left town, and his successor, Adam Levine, appears more interested in making a name for himself nationally with his phony belonging mantra than in doing something real by restoring this local cultural treasure.
For a museum that once prided itself on being a national example of excellence, this shift in priorities to the director’s self-interest is despicable.
Reinstating the Toledo Area Artists Exhibition would genuinely foster the sense of belonging that the museum now claims to value. If the Brooklyn Museum’s recent revival of its local artist show after 20 years is any indication, perhaps Toledo will see the value in embracing its local talent once again. Until then, one can only hope that Toledo’s art community doesn’t have to wait another decade for its rightful place in the museum to be restored.
(For more background on the demise of the Toledo Area Artists Exhibition, feel free to explore my numerous blog posts detailing its history and the museum’s decline.)
This weekend the Brooklyn Museum local artists show, which began in 1980 and ended in 2004, was revived with the opening of The Brooklyn Artists Exhibition, of 2024.
Exuding community energy and a sense of belonging, the Brooklyn Artists Exhibition was pretty great. This piece, a beautiful sculptural dress made out of packets of hair weave, was created by Tinuade Oyelowo. It would make a great addition to the collection of the Toledo Museum of Art — because the museum likes artwork to talk to each other, and I can see this artwork in conversation with the 1893 Libbey glass-spun dress, or of course in the contemporary galleries.
Incidentally, along with adding all of the above-mentioned bureaucrats, the Toledo Museum carved out a new position for a contemporary art curator in 2021 hiring Jessica Hong, who is leaving already! Has the contemporary art curator position been eliminated? Will this institution in transition (hard to call it a museum anymore after they moved out the Impressionist paintings) hire a general “cultural worker” instead – that is, a worker who is merely “accountable to the idea of culture” with no art history degree necessary? After all, you don’t need a PhD to buy a burnt American flag to hang in the American gallery, as did Jessica Hong. Perhaps these days a genuinely educated art historian/art expert is passé, even superfluous for whatever it is that this bloated bureaucracy is trying to achieve.
Speaking of the bloated bureaucracy, it is interesting to note that Rhonda Sewell, who was initially hired in 2021 for the new post of “Belonging and Community Engagement Director” transitioned to another new bureaucratic museum post, that of “Director of Advocacy and External Affairs” in June 2023. This role is described as “forming and maintaining key relationships with legislators and policy makers at the local, state and federal levels.” Fascinating, since it was only a month before that the Ohio Attorney General embarked on an investigation of the Toledo Museum of Art regarding the circumstances surrounding the sale of three famous Impressionist paintings for $62 million in 2022 and the apparent breach of fiduciary duty by the trustees of the Edward Drummond Libbey and Florence Scott Libbey endowments – the Libbeys being the museum founders. Ms. Sewell must have her work cut out for her.
Curiously, but not surprisingly, the short-lived position of “Belonging and Community Engagement Director” at the Toledo Museum of Art has been abandoned.
Stuffed with bureaucracy, but no meat on the bones.
The Glass Pavilion was built in 2006 to display the glass collection.
New at TMA: The Glass Pavilion as Dumping Ground
Toledo Museum of Art’s outstanding collection of Impressionist and Post-Impressionist paintings have been moved to a back room gallery at the Glass Pavilion.
The Glass Pavilion, with its curved glass walls was built in 2006 to display the museum’s glass collection.
But since then, the leadership of the museum has completely changed. The new people, not from Toledo and with little if any experience running a museum, are having a field day “rebranding” the museum and selling off valuable paintings from the Impressionist collection. They act with no regard for the museum!
The Impressionist paintings hung in two front galleries of the museum — they were often the first galleries a visitor would go to. The famous French paintings, made by white men, had to go, regardless of how important they are to the history of art, and to the museum’s collection.
Islamic and Asian art, regardless of the importance of this collection to the museum, will occupy the former Impressionist galleries — contemporary Asian art all the way back to ancient Asian art. Visitors can now contemplate the politics of looted art (which is also on view in the African collection in the opposite front gallery).
It was just last year that they took the American art from the American Galleries in the west wing that had been thusly funded by the Barbers, and moved it all to the back of the museum, shaming the art with controversial wall text.
The relocation of the popular paintings from the museum to the Glass Pavilion makes it hard for visitors with mobility issues to have equal access to artwork. Visitors must go down 26 steps to get to Monroe Street, then cross the four-lane busy street without a traffic light to follow a long curvy sidewalk leading to the Glass Pavilion. The relocation contradicts the principles of the newly formed Access Initiatives Department. This issue exists, in spite of the new Conda Family Manager of Access Initiatives (the department manager’s salary being perpetually funded by an endowment from the Conda family). How does the manager of Access Initiatives, Katie Shelley, justify her salary after she let that happen? She starred in a video, describing the long trek over to the Glass Pavilion, and blaming the historic museum for its lack of access – this – after the museum purposefully moved the paintings out of reach.
It seems that nobody running the museum these days cares about art, least of all the new donors like the Condas, and also the Savages (the namesake of the new “community gallery” which has proven to be an insult to local artists.) Donors of the past as well as board members used to be great art aficionados — check them out — but today’s museum board’s appreciation of art is questionable to say the least. The museum’s stellar reputation for being a great art museum is running on fumes.
How long before the Toledo Museum of Art is entirely dismantled? They work fast!
art is not mentioned in the museum’s new mission statement
The museum can’t stop spending money on surveys and branding and rebranding. Here are some quotes from the design firm, Scorpion Rose Studio, who designed the museum’s new spyglass logo, about how the museum came to them for branding because they wanted to look modern and inclusive.
We answered with a total rebrand, including strategy and a holistic design system, that will help TMA continue its journey toward the kind of modern museum they strive to be – one that has its doors open to all.
We grounded the rebrand on a strategic platform: The transformative power of art is for all of Toledo.
TMA’s previous brand voice – academic, critical, elite – created a barrier to expanding its audience to those who felt historically excluded.
B.S.!!
I took art classes at the museum for years. Everyone was included, no one felt unwelcome. Then two years ago, they hired a Brand Manager from Colorado for a new branding department who branded the museum “academic, critical, elite” to justify the “new” branding of being inclusive and welcoming – the very qualities the museum possessed from the beginning.
THE MUSEUM IS FREE FOR EVERYONE, THANKS TO THE FOUNDERS.
The Toledo Museum of Art was built on the principle of community.
November 1919 in front of the art museum: looks like inclusion to me.
a wicked opportunity
Adam Levine, who is from New York, came to our democratic museum in 2020 as the new director. He made a huge blunder right away by saying the museum should remain neutral during the George Floyd crisis. Ever since then he’s been bending over backwards, blaming the museum for being racist. He condescendingly reduced the standards of the museum, as if it is morally necessary to lower the quality to what he perceives to be the lowest common denominator. Is Adam Levine an opportunist? Read this blog post from April 2022:
Could all of this be a smokescreen for selling off our famous Impressionist paintings by Cezanne, Renoir and Matisse to private collectors — making $61 million on the three paintings in 2022? The woke quote floated by museum insiders in 2022 was, “Who cares about a few old white men?”
Three famous French Impressionist paintings – a Matisse, Renoir and Cezanne – thrown out the door of the white marble pillared museum and sold to the highest bidder, grossing $61 Million, on May 17, 2022.
“Museum-goers want to see themselves on the walls!”
In 2012 the museum came up with the bright idea to invite Toledoans to pose for a community portrait that would be a part of an exhibit in Gallery 1. Since then, most of the community has been crossed out, along with the Impressionist paintings.
With an engorged staff having been added for a new department for “Belonging” and another for “People” and another for “Access Initiatives” as well as for the “Branding” department, the museum started concentrating on the nearby black community exclusively, actually going personally to their doors to get them to come to the new woke museum, all redone to what Adam Levine condescendingly thought would be to their liking. Now, what to do with those paintings by old white men? They have to go! Conveniently, the paintings are so valuable as well…
about being a good steward and having a fiduciary duty
Soon after the Ohio Attorney General’s investigation commenced, Adam Levine moved the Impressionist paintings across the street to the unlikely room in the Glass Pavilion. How very arrogant to appear so untouchably righteous.
Edward Drummond and Florence Libbey, the museum’s founders, would wonder, who are these people entrusted with their generous gift to the people of Toledo, and what do they think they are doing? And that is why the museum is being investigated by the Charitable Law Section of the Ohio Attorney General’s office.
“The superpower that an art museum has is when something goes up on the wall, it’s considered good. We set the cannon,” told the new Director of the Toledo Museum of Art, Adam Levine, to Forbes.com in 2022.
Our museum should not be a catalog for billionaires to add to their art collection at our expense.
The day I shot these photos, on October 13, 1979, I was teaching a children’s Saturday photo class. It took place under the stage of the Peristyle. We went up to the galleries, as Saturday classes often would.
This photo is of the center entrance of the museum. The first gallery a visitor would come to was that gallery in the upper left, and on view here, in the distance, is the famed Cezanne, The Glade, that Adam Levine sold at auction on May 17, 2022, touting it was necessary in order for diversity.
This is a student in my class. She’s taking her first photo — in it appears The Glade by Cezanne, which is right next to Renoir’s Bather, which was also sold off by Adam Levine.
This photo shows a diverse group of people in that very gallery — so why did Adam Levine think that the museum did not attract diversity? Is it because he was using diversity as a smokescreen for his outrageous sale of three French Impressionist paintings, two of which were bought with funds from the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment and were Libbey’s gift to to the people of Toledo, but Adam Levine took those proceeds and funded a separate private fund devoid of public scrutiny and against the wishes of the Libbeys — in the amount equal to that of the Libbey Fund?
Right next to the Cezanne and the Renoir paintings that Adam Levine sold is Renoir’s sculpture of a bather, shown here on the left. Adam Levine considered the painting of the bather by Renoir redundant and not necessary for the museum to keep, since they had the sculpture of the bather by Renoir. He said that the museum never intended to have more than one example of any one artist so therefore they sold the Renoir painting of the bather. Note the diverse group of children drawing on the floor in this room.
After leaving the first gallery, where the Cezanne and Renoir paintings were shown prominently, a visitor would enter the next gallery, where one of the first paintings in the gallery hanging on the right would be Henri Matisse’s Fleurs ou Fleurs devant un portrait that Adam Levine also sold. Here, a visitor examines a sculpture by Aristide Maillol (1861-1944), Le Monument à Debussy, (in conversation with the Renoir sculpture in the first gallery) with the Matisse painting hanging in the background.
Important to the museum’s collection.
So that’s three very famous, highly valuable paintings that were prominently on display at the Toledo Museum of Art, showing that these were the first paintings out of hundred of works of art that a museum visitor would encounter. But in 2022, these highly valuable paintings were called redundant and mediocre by Adam Levine, and sold for “diversity,” supposedly.
Here are two young black men enjoying the museum. This was in 1979. The museum has always had a diverse audience. But now Director Adam Levine keeps careful head count, mapping and going out of his way to exploit diversity or is that just a cover for the unconscionable sales he made of the museum’s great artwork?
Here’s a shot of the photography classroom under the stage of the Peristyle. In the background, a student is drying his print on the ferrotyping drum.
Incidentally, the children’s Saturday photography classes have also disappeared.
Photography is such an interesting medium. How could I have known then, when I was taking these photographs, that they would have such meaning today?
43 years later, three important and significant paintings that were hanging in the museum’s main galleries would be shipped to Sotheby’s where the Cezanne and the Matisse would be sold to the same buyer, for $57 million, and all three, grossing $61 million, would duplicate the value of the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment Fund, putting the money into a private fund, not subject to public scrutiny, and skirting past Libbey’s rules and wishes for the museum that the Libbeys began. Reducing the art collection and taking away Libbey’s legacy. Shame on Adam Levine and shame on each one of the museum board members and Libbey Endowment trustees for their total breach of fiduciary duty and loyalty to the Libbey Trust and to the Toledo Museum of Art.
We will never see the paintings on the museum walls again. But I have photos. And this story to tell.
(If you zoom in on the flash, you will see me there.)
I am hoping that the findings of the Charitable Law Section of the Ohio Attorney General, which has been investigating the museum and the Libbey Trust for about five months now, will be bringing justice to Libbey’s trust, to our museum, and to the people of Toledo. The Ohio Attorney General’s office has the power to find out who bought the paintings and under what circumstances. They can investigate all the inner workings of the board of directors and the trustees of the trust that let this happen. They can do a complete audit. Can Adam Levine and the trustees of the museum and the Libbey trust actually be allowed to transform Libbey’s endowment into private funds devoid of the restrictions of the Libbey Endowment?
The TMA collection is splendid, with encyclopedic range and surprising depth. But, sadly, the museum seems intent on making race and grievance, not art, the center of visitors’ experience there. | By Brian T. Allen https://t.co/VYwIT2dZCu
The Toledo Museum of Art is getting national attention — but not in a good way. Unfortunately the unflattering critique by art critic, Brian T. Allen in the National Review is right-on. The museum is using its stellar collection to promote a trite, tired and divisive political point of view, reducing great art to the level of mere illustration, targeting the lowest common denominator. Dumb, dumb, dumb!
It’s missing a few points though…. like perhaps the museum has gone all out with their inclusion theme as a smokescreen to cover the bigger picture. They want us to look over here at their diversity theme and not follow the money. Like the questionable sudden selling of the museum’s three great Impressionist paintings for over 61 million dollars and starting a whole new unrestricted fund with it. Taking from Edward Drummond Libbey’s bequest and defying his rules. And who exactly bought TWO of these paintings? Hopefully the Ohio Attorney General, in their current investigation of the Libbey Endowment Trust funds, will uncover it all.
The mayor is a dope
Toledo’s mayor, in a dollop of snark and a show of ignorance, said the museum catered to “Florence Libbey types,” which means a high-society dame, the kind who wear a tiara to weed the orchid patch. It’s safe to say he’s a dope. The museum’s not a colony of the country club. It has cultivated a broad-based appeal and affection. And a mayor shouldn’t trash the thing that adds the most class and cachet to his city. Toledo, after all, isn’t the Paris of Ohio. – Brian T. Allen, Toledo Museum: A Treasure Trove of the Best, National Review
Yes, the mayor of Toledo, Wade Kapszukiewicz, is a dope. And it is safe to presume that this line of thinking was fed to him by the museum’s newly appointed “Brand” department and manager — a man who lives in Colorado! Once you trash the beginnings of the museum, and the Libbeys, and the museum’s history — a museum built by progressive founders who gave the gift of the museum to all of the people of Toledo — the exact opposite of the image that the mayor of Toledo is promoting — it’s easy enough to trash the art inside of it and whisk it away.
As they destroy the museum’s legacy, they can easily sell off the museum’s masterpieces. If they can get away with secretly selling valuable paintings that were purchased with funds from the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment, a publicly scrutinized trust fund, and move those assets into a secret private fund, or who knows what they do because the public no longer has access, they set a precedent and can keep doing it until the museum has no resemblance to the intentions of the founders.
If they were not going to buy art right away with the proceeds (as per the wishes of the Libbey trust) then why didn’t they simply put it back in the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment Fund? I’ve read Libbey’s will in regard to the trust and there is absolutely nothing in it that would stop them from putting the money back into the endowment fund.
The wills of the Libbeys make it very easy for the Trustees to do what they think is best — but of course that freedom is predicated on the Trustees’ fiduciary duty. The Trustees are legally required to do their best to act in Libbeys’ stead, but it appears that they are breaching that trust. And they are dwindling the endowment away (check it out for yourself at the Lucas County courthouse — it’s public information) while the museum builds up a private fund. Is there a conflict of interest? Some of the same Trustees of the Libbey Trust are on the Board of Directors of the museum.
While they, to quote the article, “cater relentlessly to Toledans living within a two-mile radius of the museum” and “drag people from their homes to raise that percentage for what is, after all, an ego trip” (but never answer the emails of community members or respond to open letters on blogs, being the hypocrites they really are) they are actually stealing from the people of Toledo.
This happens because the mayor of Toledo, city council, museum board members, donors, members, etc., play along with them (after all, they go to the same parties and have the same lawyers) and they are all such dopes.
Edward Drummond Libbey and Florence Scott Libbey gave their money to fund and start the Toledo Museum of Art, and to keep it going with stipulations made in their wills and trusts. The museum sold paintings that the Libbey Endowment paid for and started a new fund equal to the amount of the Libbey Endowment that takes the Libbeys out of the equation. In theory, the Toledo Museum of Art has always been Edward and Florence Libbey’s creation and gift to the city of Toledo. The current “stewards” of the museum are breaking their fiduciary duty to the museum and to the city of Toledo.
One year ago today, on May 17th, our valuable French Impressionist painting, The Glade by Paul Cezanne was sold at auction at Sotheby’s for $41.7 million, along with Matisse’s Fleurs ou Fleurs devant un portrait for $15.3 million, to the same mysterious buyer. Both of the paintings were bought with funds from the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment. Renoir’s Nu s’essuyant (Bather), was also sold at auction, for $2.7 million, possibly thrown in as a red herring.
Although the museum has recently spread the rumor that this painting had been in storage in the museum’s basement for a long time, this photo, above, is proof that it was not in the basement. On the left is a section of a photo that I took on October 27, 2021, and on the right is a Toledo Museum of Art-credited photo of Bob and Sue Savage with the painting on the wall behind them. The photo of the Savages was used in a press release in regard to their recent donation and was published in at least one newspaper in June 2021, this found online on the BG Independent News.
The current so-called “stewards” of our museum took the Cezanne painting right off the wall of Gallery 33 and shipped it to Sotheby’s. But it was an important painting. Cezanne is considered the father of modern art. It was one of the first paintings a person would see when they visited the Toledo Museum of Art.
We were told this:
The director, Adam Levine and the board members and other so-called museum “stewards” as well as an outside consultant took a vote as to which of the two Cezanne paintings that the museum owned they thought was the best, The Glade or Avenue at Chantilly. They all decided that Avenue at Chantilly was the best. So then they told us that the museum had never intended to have multiple examples of an artist, so they were selling The Glade, along with an “extra” Matisse, as well as the Renoir painting of the nude bather that was apparently too similar to the Renoir sculpture of the nude bather in their collection. Adam Levine told us that Edward Drummond Libbey would want them to get rid of the Cezanne, Matisse and Renoir because they were mediocre, invoking Libbey in this quote:
As Edward Drummond Libbey put it in 1912: “Let the multitudinous array of the mediocre be relegated to the past and in its place be found the highest quality, the best examples and the recognition of only those thoughts which will stand for all time.”
Announced only 38 days before the auction, Toledoans protested the sale. The Blade and the Los Angeles Times published editorials against the sale. The Blade wrote that it doesn’t make sense to deaccession the museum’s best paintings, and that as the museum represents Toledo, they shouldn’t be selling them. The Los Angeles Times wrote in authoritative detail that the deaccession was unconscionable. But it didn’t stop our museum “stewards,” because the museum had arranged with Sotheby’s for it to be a done deal. Our “stewards” stipulated the auctioned paintings to be “Guaranteed Property” with “Irrevocable Bids.” If the paintings didn’t sell, they became the property of Sotheby’s.
How important was our Cezanne?
It was very important. Here it is on the cover of Museum News after it was acquired in 1942, and the text.
LANDSCAPE by Cezanne brings to the Toledo Museum the union of nature and an intellect especially attuned to it. Here is a man who worked always from fact and expanded it enormously by his understanding. When morning lights the southern wall of Gallery Twenty-four, The Glade admits us to its spell. Sit down for twenty minutes and enjoy it without effort or prejudice, as if pausing here to await a friend on a morning’s walk. Surely a simple landscape, this place where we choose to rest. Sunlight laps the warm earth at our feet; the low scrub flares into second-growth trees, none of them remarkable for size or majesty. Yet the place has elemental grandeur; this small area is instinct with sun and wind, the joy and sparkle, the grace and severity of life itself. Through to the left opens a little vista, made more intriguing by the slender tree that cuts our view. Trunks at the right have grown aslant toward the sunlight. Cezanne was deeply conscious of his “sensations in the presence of nature” and he is able to convey them to us in the surface sparkle of his brilliant brushwork and the solid foundations of form and space and volume that compose this world about us. These sapling trunks fling pyramids of foliage on the summer air. Between them pulses heat and light. Tree after tree separates itself from the mass and takes on individuality. Far to the left, the sun strikes the ruddy earth once more. The distance grows with contemplation.
Beside the Cezanne hangs a landscape by Monet, and we learn to see more truly if we compare the two, the Monet representing the high tide of Impressionist painting, and the Cezanne still Impressionist but with instinctive turn toward those more solid qualities which were to rebuild international art in our time. Monet’s objective was light and atmosphere, colors laid side by side, not mixed on a palette, but fused by our eyesight to more sparkling vivacity. Monet in this canvas shows more of heat and sun and shimmer, but the distance down The Glade is more firmly defined than are Monet’s miles across the bay to Antibes. Cezanne’s trees toss more solid form into the air than Monet cared to give to the very walls and towers of his city. Monet’s summer day is the gayer of the two, more lyric, not so epic as the Cezanne of darker majesty. Turn to the left of the Glade and you will see the work of Pissarro, with whom Cezanne painted the summers of 1873 and 1874 at Auvers. From this older French master stems Cezanne’s only recognizable heritage in art. From him he learned to look with care at the world before him and to be more aware of nature than introspective in his vision. Pissaro’s methods of painting were effective, flexible and assured, and Cezanne went on to develop them further into his own idiom.
Cezanne said, “I wish to make of Impressionism something solid and durable like the art of museums.” He worked a lifetime from dawn to twilight to keep the light and atmosphere at their height yet give them a foundation of geometric forms, the solid structure of all things, set in resounding space. Volume and space were aims in some degree of most masters in the history of art, yet Cezanne unified these objectives and knit them into a single powerful restatement, from which derives much international art of our time. All artists today who emphasize three dimensions, all those who go deeper than decorative surfaces, all modern artists are somewhat different since Cezanne lived his years of unremitting work from 1873 to 1906. Some artists can only reflect the great; being devoid of creative gifts themselves, they add nothing of their own temperament. Other imaginations speak their own native dialect of the Cezanne language. None would have painted the same, had not this quiet, shy man lived before them. The Glade gains its form through Cezanne’s minute observation of color. His eye took in not only the local color inherent in an object, and the colors reflected upon it by surroundings, but the subtle changes of hue which shape for our eye the recession and turn of surfaces which enclose the volumes of reality. He pursues these manifold aims with innate simplicity and discretion. So interwoven is the resulting fabric of color, texture, volume, and space that no one aspect of the creation breaks through the grave composure of the whole. Minute and unremitting was his scrutiny of nature. Across the surface of his canvas flickers unceasing life compounded of transparent slender brushstrokes. Effects were built up, layer upon layer, hour after hour of slow contemplation, conviction, action. Often his brush was washed in turpentine between strokes to keep his color more exact and pure. Slow work and humble effort and absorbed devotion to nature filled his life to the exclusion of all but a few friends, his wife and affectionate son. From 1892 to 1896 he painted in the forest of Fontainebleau and along the river Marne. Some time he passed at Aix in Provence. As The Glade would seem to have been painted between these years, we are not sure of its exact locale. Perhaps near Aix or not far from Paris he found this clearing circled by rich green. Landscapes are frequent in his masterly production. A writer has compared his canvases with photographs of the scenes he chose to paint. He can see with striking clarity how much Cezanne’s vision simplified and reinforced the salient facts of nature. From her casual vegetation he developed a vast and solid structure of space, volumes, dramatic sequence of related objects.
Because of his methods of work, his exceedingly patient analysis of nature, this artist had need of equal patience in all his subjects. His great still life compositions are instinct with apples, bottles, clocks, fabrics whose complete lack of motion is but one step beyond the painter’s exceedingly slow method of painting them. His still lifes are among the most remarkable of all time. Resolute and personable, these inanimate objects take on a majestic finality which is the reward of his intellectual and sensitive perception and translation of a three-dimensional world into the two dimensions of the picture plane. His portraits are equally magnificent, forceful and direct. They are limited to the figures of friends, those relatives or devoted ones who could be asked for even a hundred and fifteen hours of unflinching quiet, as was Vollard. A village group sat absorbed by their cards day after day while Cezanne immortalized them as The Card Players. The nude attracted him throughout his life, but with slight success due to the hazards inherent in his dream of having large groups of unclothed models motionless for long periods outdoors in a provincial society. He was too sincere to paint them in the comfort of a studio and by imagination surround them with the light of heaven. Born to security beneath the rule of his most autocratic father, he was always assured of funds for a modest existence. Later inheritance brought him comparative wealth, but he continued a simple life, devoid of ornament. Sincere and shy, despite profound intelligence, he guarded his independence and in isolation dedicated himself to research in vision and paint. We learn the truth direct from the words of an artist and so can picture Cezanne profligate with paint, squeezing the luscious tubes of expensive colors and exclaiming, “ I paint as if I were Rothschild!” And, more seriously, “I live under the impact of sensations. I go ahead very slowly, as nature appears very complex to me and incessant effort is required. One must look at the model carefully and feel very exactly and then express oneself with distinction.”
oil on canvas, 39 ½ by 32 in. 100.3 by 81.2 cm., Executed circa 1895.
Clairière (The Glade) is one of the largest landscapes Cézanne ever painted, measuring a meter in height. Recent scholarship by Walter Feilchenfeldt has brought a new focus to the significance of size in the artist’s paintings: “There is no question that an artist such as Cézanne chose the size of his canvases with deliberation. Though we will never be able to discover why he used different small sizes, he must have chosen the large ones with the intention of creating an important painting” (Walter Feilchenfeldt, By Appointment Only: Cézanne, Van Gogh and some Secrets of Art Dealing, New York, 2006, p. 237). Feilchenfeldt examines large-scale canvases of figures, still lifes and landscapes: “The most enlightening statistical outcome,” he writes, “is the evaluation of the large-size landscapes. They represent all of Cézanne’s motifs, with the exception of Jas de Bouffan and the Quarry of Bibémus, and are all to be considered among the artist’s masterpieces. There are only two early ones…. Of the remaining seventeen canvases, the majority group themselves by subject in twos, making us wonder if this was intended by the artist” (ibid., p. 240). The present work is paired with Sous-bois (see fig. 1), a part of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s permanent collection.
Provenance
Baron Denys Cochin, Paris
Ambroise Vollard, Paris (acquired on 26 October 1899)
(possibly) Auguste Pellerin, Paris (acquired by March 1901)
Emil Staub-Terlinden, Männedorf (acquired by 1923)
Wildenstein Galleries, New York (acquired from the above in 1942)
Acquired from the above in 1942 by the present owner
Literature
Fritz Burger, Cézanne und Hodler, Munich, 1913, pl. 104 (titled Waldlichtung)
Fritz Burger, Cézanne und Hodler. Einführung in die Probleme der Malerei der Gegenwart, Munich, 1918, pl. 109, illustrated (titled Waldlichtung)
Fritz Burger, Cézanne und Hodler, Munich, 1919, pl. 109, illustrated
Fritz Burger, Cézanne und Hodler, Munich, 1920, pl. 109, illustrated
“Vie de Cézanne” and ”Lettres de Cézanne,” L’Esprit nouveau: revue internationale d’esthétique, no. 2, 1920, p. 142, illustrated
Fritz Burger, Cézanne und Hodler, Munich, 1923, pl. 108, illustrated
René-Jean, “L’Art français dans une collection suisse: La Collection de M. Staub-Terlinden,” La Renaissance de l’art français et des industries de luxe, vol. 6, no. 8, August 1923, p. 472 (titled Sous bois)
Pierre Courthion, “L’Art français dans les collections privées en Suisse (suite): La Collection Emile Staub,” L’Amour de l’art, vol. 7, no. 2, February 1926, pp. 42-43 and p. 40, illustrated (titled Paysage)
Lionello Venturi, Cézanne: Son Art, Son Oeuvre, Paris, 1936, no. 670, vol. I, p. 209, catalogued; vol. II, pl. 215, illustrated (titled Clarière and dated 1892-96)
Maximilien Gauthier,”L’Art français du XIXe siècle dans les collections suisses: une heure avec Charles Montag devant les chefs-d’oeuvre de la peinture française réunis à la Galerie des ‘Beaux-Arts,'” Beaux-arts: Chronique des arts et de la curiosité, no. 285, 17 June 1938, p. 12
“Art News of America: Toledo’s Cézanne,” Art News, 15 April 1943, p. 6, illustrated (titled The Glade)
Abraham A. Davidson, “Toledo Acquires Fine Cézanne Landscape,” Art Digest, vol. 17, no. 16, 15 May 1943, p. 9, illustrated
Toledo Museum of Art, ed., Museum News, no. 101, March 1943, illustrated on the cover
Edward Alden Jewell, Paul Cézanne, New York, 1944, p. 20, illustrated (titled The Glade and dated circa 1892-94)
Molly Ohl Godwin, Master Works in the Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo, 1953, p. 32; p. 33, illustrated (titled The Glade)
Alfonso Gatto and Sandra Orienti, L’Opera completa di Cézanne, Milan, 1970, no. 689, p. 117, illustrated (titled Radura and dated 1892-96)
John Rewald, The Paintings of Paul Cézanne, A Catalogue Raisonné, New York, 1996, no. 814, vol. I, p. 58, illustrated in color and p. 490, catalogued; vol. II, p. 284, illustrated (titled Clarière and dated circa 1895)
Walter Feilchenfeldt, By Appointment Only: Cézanne, Van Gogh and some Secrets of Art Dealing, New York, 2006, p. 242, illustrated in color (titled The Glade and dated circa 1895)
Walter Feilchenfeldt, Jayne Warman and David Nash, “Clairière, c.1895 (FWN 302).” The Paintings, Watercolors and Drawings of Paul Cezanne: An Online CatalogueRaisonné https://www.cezannecatalogue.com/catalogue/entry.php?id=790 (accessed on April 1, 2022)
Exhibited
Basel, Kunsthalle, Paul Cézanne, 1936, no. 50 (titled Waldichtung and dated circa 1896)
Columbus, Ohio, Columbus Gallery of Fine Arts, Five Major Paintings by Paul Cézanne, 1936-37
Paris, Galerie de la Gazette des Beaux-Arts, La Peinture française du XIXe sièce en Suisse, 1938, no. 11 (titled Clairière and dated circa 1892-96)
Toledo Museum of Art and Toronto, Art Gallery of Ontario, The Spirit of Modern France, 1946-47, no. 55, illustrated
New York, Wildenstein & Co., Inc., A Loan Exhibition of Cézanne for the Benefit of the New York Infirmary, 1947, no. 55, p. 60, illustrated (titled Clarière and dated 1892-96)
Montreal, Museum of Fine Arts, Six Centuries of Landscape, 1952, no. 56, n.p. (dated 1892-96)
New York, Wildenstein & Co., Inc, Loan Exhibition: Cézanne, 1959, no. 41, n.p., illustrated (titled Clarière and dated 1892-96)
Vienna, Kunstforum and Zurich, Kunsthaus, Cézanne: Finished—Unfinished, 2000, no. 113, p. 334, illustrated in color (titled The Glade and dated circa 1895)
Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art and Aix-en-Provenance, Musée Granet, Cézanne in Provence, 2006, no. 145, p. 268, illustrated in color (titled Clearing and dated circa 1895)
Humelbaek, Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Cézanne & Giacometti—Paths of Doubt, 2008, no. 42, p. 318, illustrated in color (titled Glade and dated circa 1895)
What the auction looked like at the moment of the winning bid on Cezanne’s The Glade, sold at auction on May 17, 2022 going for $41.7 million – same secret buyer also buying the Matisse for $15.3 million on the same night:
Who bought the paintings? Was it prearranged?
What happened to the money – money equal to the value of the Libbey Endowment?
The painting was deaccessioned because it was mediocre, at least that is what the museum “stewards” and “trustees” gave us as an excuse for them to take it off the museum’s wall and ship it to Sotheby’s. It was all done in secret. Makes one wonder that under these circumstances, since nobody gets to know anything, perhaps our museum could be used as a catalog for a wealthy buyer to arrange a purchase.
Secrecy at this level is incredibly powerful. The stewards of the museum, with the very high level of trust and privilege given to them, have the responsibility to act within the founding principles of the Libbeys, and to not betray the museum by using Libbey assets to create a whole new fund without any of the rules and the public scrutiny and oversight required by the Libbey Endowments.
This painting, as shown above, meant a great deal to our museum. An issue of Museum News featured it on the cover. It was a big part of our story.
Decades later, for an entirely new set of “stewards” to treat it like crap is so disloyal. To spread it around that “people are sick of the paintings by tired old white men” is subversive and traitorous, not to mention divisive.
They were put in charge of caring for our museum and preserving our collection – it is not theirs to tear apart and sell off.
Lying about the quality of the painting and the number of artworks intended to be collected by one artist as a reason to deaccession an important masterpiece by Cezanne is dishonest and a breach of fiduciary duty.
The Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment Trustees are negligent:
Why didn’t the Libbey Trustees get the Libbey Endowment Fund Account Statement filed with the Lucas County Probate Court on time this past year? They received a “Notice To Trustee of Failure to File an Account” from the Probate Court Judge.
Why is the balance of the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment Account 20% less in value on June 30, 2022 than it was on July 1, 2021? Are they that bad with money, that the fund would drop in value by $12,000,000, when it never even grew during the high-flying pandemic years when stock portfolios at other museums increased quite a lot?
Why would the Trustees of the Trust allow the museum to take money from the sale of two paintings purchased from the Libbey Endowment Fund and not oversee that it was returned to the Libbey Endowment Fund until it was used to purchase art?
Isn’t it a conflict of interest for Libbey Endowment Trustees to also be on the Toledo Museum of Art Board of Directors?
Why did the Trustees file for a variance from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022 to use money from the Trusts of both Edward and Florence Libbey that was required to be spent on artwork, to be spent on something else, claiming pandemic hardship, considering that Adam Levine announced in The Blade on March 26, 2023 that they had actually increased their budget by 20% during the past three years? If they could increase their budget by 20%, then they were dishonest about needing a variance due to Covid hardships. They also received $3,484,260 in Covid relief money which was disclosed on their public charity 990 tax filings.
Why didn’t the Toledo Museum of Art celebrate the 110th anniversary of opening of the museum on the first Monday the museum was ever opened, which was for Martin Luther King Day in 2022? They couldn’t manage to celebrate both? Or do they simply not care whatsoever about the museum?
Do the current “stewards” of the museum actually hate the museum? – Are they robbing the museum of assets in order to create an entirely different institution without any of its rules?
Are the current “stewards” of the museum and of the Libbey Endowment purposefully defying the intentions of the Libbeys, who started the museum and funded the museum throughout its history?
Why did the Toledo Museum of Art kick out the local artist community by taking away our once-proud Toledo Area Artists Exhibition that brought the entire community together?
Will the Toledo Museum of Art be selling more artwork and not be telling us?
Should the current “stewards” of the Toledo Museum of Art be allowed to sell off the artwork of the museum and funnel the money into a completely different fund – a new fund without any of the restrictions that the Libbey Trust has – restrictions that helped make the Toledo Museum of Art become what it is today? Don’t the Libbey Endowment trustees have a fiduciary duty to look out after the best interests and the intentions of the Libbeys for the museum, as put forth in the Libbey wills? How could they let this happen?
Is it fair that the Toledo Museum of Art gets grant money in the name of the Toledo Museum of Art for them to spend that money on only on a 2-mile radius for 12 afternoon art sessions for seniors averaging $9,998 for each session (my goodness!) instead of sharing that grant money and programs with the entire Toledo area community of seniors? Will the museum disclose exactly what they are spending the money on?
After leaving the first gallery, where the Cezanne and Renoir paintings were shown prominently, a visitor would enter the next gallery, where one of the first paintings in the gallery hanging on the right would be Henri Matisse’s Fleurs ou Fleurs devant un portrait that Adam Levine also sold. Here, a visitor examines a sculpture by Aristide Maillol (1861-1944), Le Monument à Debussy, (in conversation with the Renoir sculpture in the first gallery) with the Matisse painting hanging in the background.
