Tag: Libbey

Categories
Artists of Toledo

Open letter to Sara Jane DeHoff, Chair of the Board of the Toledo Museum of Art

The heavy words inspiring the reinstallation of the Toledo Museum of Art don't have much to do with art.

Subject: Urgent Follow-Up: Further Concerns Over TMA’s Disposition of Core Artworks and Lack of Transparency

Dear Ms. DeHoff,

I hope you are well. I am writing again as a deeply concerned citizen regarding the troubling decisions at the Toledo Museum of Art, and to follow up on my February 10 email—which, like my previous correspondence, has not received a response. I have reached out on numerous occasions, yet my genuine inquiries continue to be met with silence and, more recently, outright censorship.

I am particularly disturbed by recent developments regarding our museum’s core collection.

I recently learned through a news report from New Zealand that TMA is loaning 57 Impressionist and 20th-century paintings—many are gifts from Edward Drummond Libbey and are featured in the museum’s “Masterworks” book—to the Auckland Art Gallery while TMA’s building undergoes renovations.

What is especially ironic is that Auckland is currently celebrating the recent bequeath of the art collectors, Julian and Josie Robertson with an exhibition called “The Robertson Gift: Paths through Modernity” Feb 9, 2024 – Feb 1, 2026, a collection of 15 paintings valued at $190 million.

Yet by interjecting the TMA loan into the mix, the Auckland Gallery is, in effect, dwarfing the impact of the Robertson Gift, since just two or three paintings from the Toledo collection are worth more than the total Robertson bequest that Auckland professes to be so honored to be given, and the Toledo show, “A Century of Modern Art,” consists of 57 bigger, better paintings. 

Meanwhile, back in Toledo, the museum-going public is witnessing the shoving aside of the treasured Impressionist masterworks as the museum gets them out of sight, a core collection of gifts from Edward Drummond Libbey, and an important promise that has been broken.

Seems like all around the world, the gifts of generous museum donors are being dishonored.

In 2022, the day Director Adam Levine announced the sale of the beloved three famous Impressionists paintings, in the very same email*, he promised museum supporters that the other Cezanne, Matisse and Renoir paintings would always remain on view on the museum’s walls. Now to send these paintings away under the guise of renovations when the museum boasts of 280,000 square feet of gallery space is a real betrayal, and alarms are going off that something is seriously wrong with the museum’s stewardship.

Moreover, when I asked the museum for the complete list of the 57 paintings, Adam Levine dismissed my request, telling me that “this information of course will be public domain since the works will be on display in New Zealand!” (That is, if I want to hire a detective.) He said that sharing the full list would “just be used to sensationalize” my concerns. I should be talking to him directly instead of talking about this publicly, he said, in an attempt to shut me up.

This total lack of transparency, the efforts of censorship, coupled with sudden actions by the museum make me wonder, will we ever see these Impressionist paintings hanging on the walls of the Toledo Museum of Art again? After all, in just a few short years, the museum has sold three paintings, moved the other paintings from the prominent galleries in the main museum to the Glass Pavilion across the street, and now is sending this large collection to the other side of the world without any announcement, leaving museum supporters to find out from a news article from New Zealand; bringing light to a broken promise and the museum’s total lack of transparency, all while the community is stunned over the closing of the Cloisters, and unbeknownst that the Impressionist paintings are on their way out. All of this underscores suspicion.

Considering that the museum is under the spell of DEI (DEAI) and promotes the idea that people want to see themselves on the walls, it seems that these French paintings have been banished because they are too European for the demographics of the two-mile radius of the museum that the museum is using to advance their radical DEI agenda. Maybe it’s all a guise to sell the valuable paintings, who knows?

Adam Levine certainly has minimized the importance of the Libbey Endowment to the museum by selling the three paintings in 2022 for $59 million and making a private fund out of the money. The museum has lost all credibility of being trustworthy – the one thing a museum must NEVER lose, as at the Toledo Museum of Art the current leaders are the custodians of the wonderful gift of cultural heritage that came from Edward Drummond Libbey and Florence Scott Libbey.

It is telling is that at the very same time of the January 29 announcement in New Zealand that didn’t reach the Northern Hemisphere until a week later, TMA announced the closure of the Cloisters on January 30, with only three days’ notice, announcing it on Facebook, spurring hundreds of impassioned comments from the community.

The Cloisters, consisting of ancient columns, capitals, and arches that were sourced from 12th to 15th century medieval sites in southwest France to evoke a medieval monastery cloister, collected and permanently installed into the museum over the span of five years, was the highlight of the east and west wing expansion of 1933 and symbolizes the heart of the museum. It was just renovated and reopened in 2022. But now it’s excised and relegated to the far east wing next to the Ancient court, replacing four nice little gallery rooms, just so the museum can put everything in alphabetical, oh, that is chronological order, a conveyer belt style loop design forcing visitors to look at art through a specific political prism. It sounds frankly hideous; hardly an idea worthy of gutting the museum. Adam Levine plans to use what’s left of our superlative collection for his radical ideology that he plans to use to set as an example for all other museums to follow. 

Radical plan to gut museum was only revealed this month, February 2025

The plans to dismantle the beloved, fragile historic Cloisters and move it to the Wolfe Gallery were never publicly disclosed beyond whispers to select visitors and internal sketches shared with other museums at the 2023 symposium. And now, after the closure of the Cloisters, the museum states that the Cloisters will be moved to the footprint of the current Galleries numbers 3, 4, 5, and 6.

I ask that you ensure that our public heritage is not sacrificed at the whim of the current museum director who doesn’t seem to like the museum and wants to change everything about it, right down to the “physical studs” of the building itself, as he was quoted saying in a recent Channel 11 news article.

If our mission is to integrate art into the lives of people, then rehanging our collection is only half of the equation. The reinstallation offers us a chance to go back to the conceptual as well as the physical studs, rethinking the museum experience for the 21st century. We are developing exciting plans on this front that we believe can create different paradigms for engagement. –Adam Levine

There is nothing in the 2021 five-year plan about gutting the museum and redoing it down to the studs. Back in 2018 there were plans to renovate and money was collected for that but the plan seemed to be abandoned when the museum announced their five-year plan in 2021. What happened in-between was that the director Brian Kennedy resigned just one year short of his contract, leaving the museum in the lurch. After a year or two Adam Levine was hired. But right away Adam Levine made the blunder of telling people that the museum would stay neutral during the George Floyd demonstrations. Having to walk back his statement, ever since then the museum has been practicing self-flagellation — the DEI (DEAI) came in and made sweeping changes to the museum administration, adding layer upon layer of bloated bureaucracy, and here we are now, at the sacrificial alter offering up our entire museum, the gift of Edward Drummond Libbey, witnessing it becoming a shadow of its once self.

A collection created by donor funds and connoisseurship collecting, now it’s done by identity politics, federal dollars, and the turning of the back on the founders by a director who stated publicly in a 2022 Forbes interview:

The superpower that an art museum has is when something goes up on the wall, it’s considered good. We set the canon. –Adam Levine

Levine sold a Cezanne, Matisse and Renoir with the excuse that the museum never intended to have multiple examples by the same artist in their collection. But that is not true. I researched it – see my list of multiple paintings by the same artist; of the roughly 800 or more paintings in the TMA collection in 2022, 57 are by the same artist. Collecting these paintings was clearly intentional.

The Toledo Museum of Art has never sought to have multiple examples by the same artist-fewer than 11% of the artists in our collection are represented by two or more paintings; masterpieces by Cézanne, Matisse, and Renoir will remain regularly on view on our walls. –Adam Levine

He cut ties with the founder Edward Drummond Libbey by selling gifted paintings for $59 million and not putting that money back into the Libbey Endowment but instead into a private fund. (see, April 8, 2022 email to museum supporters.)

The three paintings being sold will provide the Museum with more than $40 million, greater than the total corpus of the current Libbey Funds supporting our art purchases. We will use these proceeds to create a new acquisition endowment –Adam Levine

Contrary to this statement made in the Feb. 8, 2024 Toledo Free Press article, Patrons pay tribute to Cloister Gallery, he IS using taxpayer funds to put the wrecking ball to the museum that we know and love.

The museum did not provide details about the cost for moving The Cloister. The spokesperson wrote that TMA is privately funded and the project is one small part of the larger reinstallation that is being funded through individual and corporate philanthropy. –Doreen Cutway, museum spokesman and senior public relations manager

The museum went to the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, the President and CEO of which is also the Secretary of the Toledo Museum of Art Board of Directors, Thomas Winston, 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 was asked 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.

The museum has received many millions of dollars from Ohio and from the federal government in recent years, all grants are public record on the corresponding Ohio and federal websites. Grants that are hurting the fundamentals and founding principles of the museum.

The museum is probably taking advantage of the generous NEA Arts & Artifacts Indemnity Program to insure our 57 artworks for a billion dollars or more to send them off to New Zealand. Otherwise the loan wouldn’t be feasible. And if that program is stopped, in the current political environment while our paintings are abroad? Oh well, it’s mostly the work of old white men anyway.

As I noted above, in asking for the complete list of 57 renowned paintings going to New Zealand, Adam Levine refused to share it, saying he was afraid that I would use it to sensationalize my concerns. What is left for me to sensationalize? Adam Levine has provided all the sensationalism himself already.

I respectfully urge you, as Chair of the Board, to address these issues publicly. The Toledo Museum of Art is a treasured institution built and endowed by the Libbeys as a gift to the people of Toledo, and decisions of this magnitude must be made with full transparency and not just pushed on community using tactics like censorship and gaslighting. I ask that you halt the destruction of the Cloisters, cancel the loan to New Zealand and rehang the Impressionist and 20th century paintings.  And then find new leadership that will provide proper stewardship and keep our museum intact.

Thank you for your time and attention to this critical matter. I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Penny Gentieu

Again, I’d like to point out Adam Levine’s statements in his April 8, 2022 email about the sale of the Cezanne, Matisse and Renoir:

The Toledo Museum of Art has never sought to have multiple examples by the same artist-fewer than 11% of the artists in our collection are represented by two or more paintings; masterpieces by Cézanne, Matisse, and Renoir will remain regularly on view on our walls.

For the record, here is a list of 16 of the 53 artists of the 57 artworks going to New Zealand, major works for which information has been released to the “public domain” as Levine put it, as reported in the Auckland press release.  The artists in bold have only one painting in the TMA collection. There are 37 other artists (4 artists have more than one artwork in the show) and the museum refuses to make those names public at this time. But with this list of 16 names only, it seems like the entire museum collection of Impressionist to Modernity may be shipped off. What would Edward Drummond Libbey and Florence Scott Libbey think of that? What does the public think?

  1. Cezanne     
  2. Degas   
  3. Helen Frankenthaler   
  4. Édouard Manet 
  5. William Merritt Chase   
  6. Modigliani    
  7. Berthe Morisot     
  8. Monet  
  9. Pablo Picasso   
  10. Pissarro   
  11. Robert Rauschenberg     
  12. Renoir   
  13. Vincent van Gogh 
  14.  James McNeill Whistler   
  15. Gauguin    
  16. Mondrian

*Adam Levine rationalized the sale of the three impressionist paintings by saying that it was never the intention of the museum to have multiple examples of the same artist, that fewer than 11% of the artists in our collection are represented by two or more paintings; here is a list that I made of multiple paintings by the same artist. It’s obvious that the purchase of multiple paintings by the same artists was intentional.

Categories
Artists of Toledo

Urgent Call for Intervention: Toledo Museum of Art’s Risky Decisions Threaten Our Cultural Heritage

In 2022, our three famous French Impressionist paintings were sold for $59 Million. And that was just the beginning.

Dear Governor and Mrs. DeWine,

I write to request your urgent intervention regarding a series of troubling decisions made by the Toledo Museum of Art (TMA) that jeopardize our Ohio’s rich cultural heritage and the public trust.

Recently, TMA announced—via a Facebook post on January 30—that its historic Cloisters Gallery would be closed with only three days’ notice. This beloved space, featuring authentic 12th- to 15th-century columns gifted by Edward Drummond Libbey, has long served as a sanctuary for art lovers in Toledo. The sudden closure, which has prompted hundreds of impassioned comments from the public, is being accompanied by plans to relocate the fragile Cloisters that are permanently installed in their present location to a spot two galleries over.

Just as alarming, and happening concurrently but not revealed to Toledoans, is the news from “down under” that TMA is loaning 57 iconic Impressionist and 20th-century paintings—many of which are featured in its “Masterworks” book—to the Auckland Art Gallery in New Zealand, where the exhibition is scheduled to open on June 7, 2025. As noted in the Auckland Art Gallery’s press release dated January 29, “Visitors can expect to be dazzled by the much-loved highlights of Toledo Museum of Art’s internationally-renowned collection.” Director Adam Levine even stated, “Never have so many of our masterworks travelled together, and we could not be more excited for them to debut in Auckland.” However, this loan was not announced publicly by TMA; the news only surfaced on the Auckland gallery’s website on January 29, and it didn’t reach the Northern Hemisphere until a week later (thanks to Google)—an indication that these actions were concealed from the Toledo community.

The exhibition include works by Paul Cezanne, Edgar Degas, Helen Frankenthaler, Édouard Manet, William Merritt Chase, Amedeo Modigliani, Berthe Morisot, Claude Monet, Pablo Picasso, Camille Pissarro, Robert Rauschenberg, Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Vincent van Gogh, James McNeill Whistler, among others.

Given that TMA boasts 280,000 square feet of gallery space and that these 57 paintings represent the core of its collection—masterworks that many believe could be valued at up to $1 billion or even more—the decision to send them halfway around the world under the guise of renovations is, frankly, irresponsible. This move not only deprives the public of access to art they hold dear but also raises serious questions about how these artworks are insured. Are federal funds, such as those provided through the NEA’s Arts & Artifacts Indemnity Program, being used to safeguard these masterpieces, and is that a prudent strategy?

Furthermore, TMA’s community communications have been patchy at best. In the February 8, 2024 Toledo Free Press article, Patrons pay tribute to closed TMA Cloister Gallery, Laurie Bertke wrote, “The biggest two questions on the lips of many visitors included where is it being moved and why. Museum security guards and other employees asked about plans had limited details to share over the weekend.” This lack of transparency, coupled with the secretive nature of these decisions—as evidenced by internal sketches shared at a 2023 symposium—suggests that TMA’s leadership is not engaging the public in decisions that fundamentally affect our community’s cultural legacy.

Regarding the museum’s renovation, the museum”s PR spokesman Doreen Cutway was quoted in the article that while there may be other gallery closures in phases, “the museum’s goal is to keep things on view as much as possible during the process.” Sending off this astounding amount of the best, most beloved paintings en masse all the way across the world is the direct opposite of that promise.

As for the renovations being done to the museum, which seem to entail a complete gutting and redo of this beloved museum, they won’t provide details about the cost of moving the Cloister. It would have to cost several million dollars to move it carefully, and what a waste. As quoted in the Toledo Free Press article, the museum spokesman said, “TMA is privately funded and the project is one small part of the larger reinstallation that is being funded through individual and corporate philanthropy.” However during the past few years, the museum has received over $6 million in grants from the state of Ohio, including a whopping $1.6 grant in this year alone. They also receive money from the NEA and NEH. Not to mention the $3.58 Million Covid relief grant. Edward Drummond Libbey and his wife, Florence Scott Libbey built and endowed this museum for the people of Toledo. Many of the paintings the new director is sending away are gifts of the Libbeys. The Cloisters Gallery was a gift of the Libbeys.

I respectfully urge you to look into these developments. Our state’s cultural institutions are vital to our collective identity, and decisions of this magnitude should not be made without clear public accountability. I ask that your office inquire into whether TMA’s actions align with its legal and fiduciary responsibilities. I ask that you ensure that our public heritage is not sacrificed at the whim of the new and controversial museum director, Adam Levine, who doesn’t seem to like the museum and wants to change everything about it, right down to the “physical studs” of the building itself, as he was quoted saying in a recent Channel 11 news article.

For your reference, please see the following links:

Thank you for your time and attention to this critical matter. I trust that you share my concern for preserving Toledo’s cultural heritage for current and future generations.

Sincerely,

Penny Gentieu

pages from Toledo Museum of Art Masterworks, published in 2009

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 while the Cloisters get moved two galleries over.

The art museum is renovating. Glass art will be taken out of the Glass Pavilion, the $30 million building that was built in 2006 to show the renowned glass collection. It will be interspersed amongst other artwork across the street in the main building, arranged chronologically. They have already relocated, one year ago, the impressionist paintings to the Glass Pavilion. UPDATE: Feb. 7, 2025 — they are lending 57 of the impressionist and 20th century core art collection to New Zealand.

The heavy words of Toledo Museum of Art’s reinstallation word cloud have little to do with art.
Save the art museum.
Categories
Artists of Toledo

Urgent Follow-Up: Reckless Disposition of TMA’s Core Art Collection

Regarding the much-loved highlights of Toledo Museum of Art’s internationally-renowned collection being sent overseas

The objection is not that TMA is lending one or two paintings, the objection is that 57 is a huge number of beloved masterpieces to be taking away from public view and sending to the other side of the world — 57 — outrageous! And why didn’t the museum publicly announce this loan of an extreme number of paintings being sent to New Zealand for a special exhibition?

Cezanne     Degas    Helen Frankenthaler    Édouard Manet  William Merritt Chase    Modigliani    Berthe Morisot     Monet   Pablo Picasso   Pissarro    Robert Rauschenberg     Renoir   Vincent van Gogh   James McNeill Whistler   Gauguin    Mondrian

Sent by email on February 6, 2025:

Dear Charitable Law Section, Ohio Attorney General’s Office,

I write as a concerned citizen to follow up on my previous correspondence regarding the Toledo Museum of Art’s (TMA) reckless decisions concerning its core cultural assets. In addition to the issues raised earlier—namely, the planned dismantling of the historic Cloisters, the demolition of the Wolfe Gallery, and the repurposing of the Glass Pavilion (a $30 million structure built in 2006 specifically to house its renowned glass collection)—breaking news from New Zealand now reveals further alarming developments.

Reports from across the world indicate that TMA is loaning 57 Impressionist and 20th-century paintings—many being gifts from Edward Drummond Libbey and described as “the much-loved highlights of Toledo Museum of Art’s internationally-renowned collection”—to the Auckland Art Gallery in New Zealand while TMA’s building undergoes renovations. Notably, most of these paintings had already been moved to the Glass Pavilion one year ago, and this decision to send such core works overseas has not been publicly announced on TMA’s website or through any press release. Given that TMA houses 280,000 square feet of gallery space and these works form the core of its collection, their removal not only deprives the local public of access to many of their most beloved paintings but also puts these invaluable works at significant risk. How are these works insured? Is TMA relying on the NEA’s Arts & Artifacts Indemnity Program or another mechanism to safeguard artwork potentially valued at up to $1 billion? Is it safe in today’s climate to depend on federal funds for such crucial protections?

Furthermore, this move is particularly alarming in light of the Auckland Art Gallery’s current major exhibition, “The Robertson Gift: Paths through Modernity.” This exhibition, which displays art movements very similar to those represented by the loaned TMA works, is effectively duplicative—ironically underscoring the historical and cultural significance of donor gifts while highlighting TMA’s pattern of secretive decision-making. Adding to the dismay is a stark reminder of an April 8, 2022 email from Adam Levine, in which TMA assured the public that “masterpieces by Cézanne, Matisse, and Renoir will remain regularly on view on our walls,” emphasizing that fewer than 11% of the artists in their collection are represented by multiple works. Clearly, these current actions contradict that promise.

It is outrageous that TMA now plans to relocate the historic Cloisters—featuring authentic 12th- to 15th-century columns gifted by Edward Drummond Libbey—to the site currently occupied by the Wolfe Gallery, at an estimated cost between $2.5 million and $10 million. This move risks irreparable damage to these fragile, centuries-old artifacts. Equally troubling is the decision to demolish the Wolfe Gallery—a space renovated just 13 years ago with a $2 million donation from Frederic and Mary Wolfe, two esteemed patrons who have since passed away. Such actions blatantly disregard donor intent and raise profound ethical and financial questions regarding TMA’s management.

Moreover, the repurposing of the Glass Pavilion is equally disturbing. Designed and funded specifically to house TMA’s world-renowned glass collection, plans now call for removing much of that collection to be integrated into the main museum. This decision not only undermines the Pavilion’s purpose but further endangers priceless works of art.

The lack of transparency surrounding these decisions is deeply disconcerting. The public was only informed of these drastic changes days ago with the sudden announcement of the Cloisters’ closure—a clear indication that museum leadership deliberately sought to avoid scrutiny.

I respectfully urge your office to investigate whether these actions align with TMA’s legal obligations regarding charitable gifts and responsible nonprofit governance. The pattern of secretive, reckless decision-making displayed here is eroding public trust in cultural institutions and endangering priceless works of art.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this critical matter.

see the homepage for a description of the Cloisters that they closed and are moving — https://artistsoftoledo.com/

Categories
Artists of Toledo

Libbey’s Nightmare

The Blade’s January 4, 2025 faulty news story by Lillian King begs for corrections.

A new vision: Looking back on TMA’s 2024 acquisitions
“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, 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, short of Spencer Stone’s 30 superlative photographs, 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 lost direction
the director ran off with the museum
Why is Adam Levine literally tearing apart the museum that we love, selling great art and not replacing it with new art as per the rules of Libbey Endowment, nor did he put the proceeds back in the Libbey Endowment (being accountable to the public), but kept it separate and private? He moved the museum further away from the founders, adding layers of bureaucracy. He’s 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 showing the museum’s stewardly 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.
Categories
Artists of Toledo

The Museum of Continuities: How a politically charged museum is doomed to fail

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:

NETWORKS     POWER    MYTHMAKING     INTERSECTIONALITY    ECONOMIC SYSTEMS    DISABILITY STUDIES       DREAMSCAPE    ECOSYSTEMS     ENVIRONMENT     MYTHOLOGY    GENTRIFICATION     INDUSTRY     ROMANCE     HEALTH    GLOBALISM    MEMORY & MEMORIAL     TECHNOLOGY     CHANGE    MATERIALS     CLIMATE     (IN)EQUALITY     MEDICINE    WAR     RESILIENCE    CHRONOLOGY    FAMILY     COMMUNITY     TOLEDO    FEMINISM    HUMANITIES    RACISM     COLONIALISM     FANTASY    AGRICULTURE    RACE     INTERIORS     CROSS-CULTURAL EXCHANGE     CONTINUITIES    TRAUMA    KINSHIP     POLITICS    BORDERS     CHILDHOOD    ENERGY    GENDER    HISTORY & HISTORIES    TIME    IDENTITY     MATERIALITY    RESISTANCE    SPIRITUALITY    NATIONS & NATIONALITY     

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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?

A question for another session.

Behold, The Dismantling of The Toledo Museum of Art

Categories
Artists of Toledo

Behold, The Dismantling of The Toledo Museum of Art

The art museum is renovating. Glass art will be interspersed amongst other artwork in the main building, arranged chronologically. They have already relocated, one year ago, the impressionist paintings to the Glass Pavilion. UPDATE: Feb. 7, 2025 — they are lending 57 of the impressionist and 20th century core art collection to New Zealand, and according to New Zealand, they say it’s because the museum is renovating! But they already had moved these paintings to the Glass Pavilion, built in 2006 — are they also renovating THAT building?

Why don’t they just build their own museum?

“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 canon. 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?

See, here, for detailed research on the Cloisters move.
Categories
Artists of Toledo

Before they sold off masterpieces prominently on display

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?

Categories
Artists of Toledo

TMA’s disgraceful national review

Wow! Read this: Toledo Museum: A Treasure Trove of the Best – But chasing the diversity, equity, and belonging unicorn, it might derail itself 
And this:  Toledo Is Great on Glass but Disses American History – Its glass collection is superbly presented, but American art is trashed as ‘white supremacist’

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.

Categories
Artists of Toledo

Who bought our Cezanne, The Glade?

It was the gift of Edward Drummond Libbey.

 A one-year anniversary look-back. 

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.

Museum News March 1943 – download PDF here

ADDED TO THE LIBBEY COLLECTION

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.”

Here is a little history from Sotheby’s website.
Paul Cézanne
1839 – 1906
Clairière (The Glade)

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.

Former TMA director John Stanley, who serves on the art committee of the museum board of trustees, said he thought the deaccession was “a brilliant idea” when it was presented by Mr. Levine.  – The Blade, Controversy surrounds Toledo Museum of Art sale of three paintings by Jason Webber, May 16, 2022

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 put flowers on the graves of the Libbeys on Easter day this year, as required in the Florence Libbey endowment?
  • 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?

Categories
Artists of Toledo

Museum shrinking away from founders

Founders of our so-called "Eurocentric" museum in Egypt, in Africa
The Toledo 2-Mile Radius Museum of Art

It’s Edward Drummond Libbey’s birthday today – he was born on April 17, 1854. Some people care – like the alumni of the high school named after Mr. Libbey that was torn down in 2012 and never replaced, and the runners of the “Florence Scott Libbey 419 Race” in honor of Edward Drummond Libbey’s wife. As for the Toledo Museum of Art, they stopped putting flowers on his grave, letting his memorial look terrible one week ago on Easter Sunday, a day that the museum is required to decorate the grave with flowers, as stipulated by the Florence Scott Libbey Endowment. (see my last post, No flowers for the Libbeys the year.)

Adam Levine’s recent guest editorial in The Blade

After my guest editorial in The Blade on March 18, where I showed that the museum is moving away from the wishes of the Libbeys, Adam Levine countered with his own editorial on March 26, “Museum growing on mission set by founders,” where he grasped to make connections with the founders – as if words, regardless of deeds, would make it so.

I found a lot of inconsistencies in his editorial. Here they are.

Comments on Adam Levine’s March 26, 2023 editorial

First of all, it was George Stevens’ wife, Nina Spalding Stevens, who instituted the art classes. At least give her that much credit. Nina and George ran the museum together. Yes, a woman was a partner in running our museum, way back in 1903. Imagine that.

Secondly, the adult classes back then in the beginning and through at least the 1970’s and 1980’s were quite extensive, nothing like we have now, and to say that they are “as we still know them” is just not true.

The museum let the richness of the adult art classes slip away when the university took over by hiring their own faculty in the 1990’s when moving to the new Gehry building that is attached to the museum. The adult population now has to pay a ridiculous tuition and unfair activity fees to take the university art classes. It’s a great disservice to the community. Over in the museum basement in the old school, there’s not much going on.

This is not true, I went to the University of Toledo, Toledo Museum of Art School of Design in the early 1970’s and my art classes were university credits.

My sister went to the University of Toledo, Toledo Museum of Art School of Design in the 1960’s and her art classes were university credits.

Many artists on this website had art classes at the museum that were applied to their University of Toledo BA degree, going back to the 1940’s, maybe earlier, such as Carroll Simms, LeMaxie Glover, Edith Franklin (who had her credits for her art classes in the 1940’s and 1950’s applied toward her degree in 1987, when she turned 65 and wanted to get her degree so she could teach. All she had to do was pay the extra amount to the university, as adults could take adult art classes at the museum in the past without being a university student, and it was cheaper. University students pay university tuition.)

Except that Adam Levine has shrunk it.

Again, Adam Levine invokes our great museum’s reach when he has actually shrunk the museum’s focus from a community of over a half a million down to a community of 18,000 people all within a small 2-mile radius, forsaking the larger community that is 36.111 times that in head count, from a number which reflects the museum’s local reach in their own words, noted in their 5-year strategic plan – “its 650,000-person metropolitan statistical area.” (see below)

The Libbey Endowment Trust variance

In the summer of 2020, the museum filed a petition with the Lucas County Probate Court for a temporary variance on the Edward Drummond Libbey Endowment Trust to use less than the trust-stipulated 50% of the annual draw on the purchases of art, on account of the economic hardship of the pandemic. They were granted, for two years, ending July 1, 2022, the use of $150,000 per year to be taken from the art purchase fund to be used on “direct care costs of art” instead of on buying art. And I am guessing they did the same thing with the Florence Scott Libbey Endowment Trust, as well.

So it seems contradictory that the museum was able to increase their budget by 20% during the past three years – years that they were claiming hardship and diverting art-purchase funds. And during this time they also sold three of our famous paintings for $59 million, claiming to want to spend it on new art. All it’s been spent on so far is a new financial vehicle that’s making money for financial people.

5-year plan said so

Also, this contradicts the statement in The Blade on March 9, 2021, reporting that the 5-year plan calls for decreasing the percentage the museum draws annually from the Libbey endowment —

The plan calls for financial changes that include increasing the budget from about $18 million to $20 million, and decreasing the percentage the museum draws annually from an endowment that founder Edward Drummond Libbey established for the museum upon his death in 1925.

over budget already, and it’s only been 2 years

Also, the increase in the budget two years ago was about 12%, but now he is saying the budget has increased by 20% — 8% more than the 5-year plan called for.

the remote control of the museum

Why do we have curators who live outside of Toledo? Adam Levine hired a consulting curator, Lanisa Kitchiner, for the museum’s African collection. Although the museum doesn’t mention it in their press release, she is the Chief of the African and Middle Eastern Division at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C., with an educational background in literature, African studies and politics, not art history.

Why did the museum hire a curator of ancient art, Carlos Picon, the director of the Colnaghi art gallery in New York, who is an ancient art dealer? Isn’t that a conflict of interest? 

What is going on that the Toledo Museum of Art is hiring people from out of town who do not live in Toledo, or even in Ohio, to run our museum remotely?

Why “rebrand” the museum?

Adam Levine started a brand-new department, Brand Strategy, to redefine our museum, hiring Gary Gonya, who lives in Colorado, as the director of the department. First, Adam Levine painted our museum as being somehow elitist if not downright white supremacist, (see, Blade article, June 2021) when it had always been a progressive, democratic museum for all of the people.

“Art museums…Elite. Erudite…but for many, the word ‘inaccessible’ must also be included on that list.”

“…their auras of excellence can deter the average citizen from feeling they are places to frequent, enjoy, and learn from without having a gold-embossed degree in one’s back pocket.”

“the art museum really is looked at as a place for the people on the river…”

“Mayor Kapszukiewicz said there historically has been a sense that the art museum was a place for the Florence Libbeys of the world. Mrs. Libbey was a patron of art married to Edward Drummond Libbey, the owner of Libbey Glass Co. and the art museum’s president from 1901–1925.”

Then Gary Gonya came in and said, “We will develop an inclusive brand voice and experience that inspires all people and awakens their connection to the deep human story we all share.” Art Matters, Winter/Spring 2022

Now Adam Levine harks back to the museum’s founders, claiming ownership of the museum’s progressive, democratic history.

It’s as if what they have done by discriminating against most of the people in the Toledo metropolitan area in favor of people who live in a small geographic area, and by selling our best paintings, isn’t actually a big break from the founding principles instead.

A new Communications Manager, a department which is now overseen by Brand Strategy, was hired at the museum who was living in Lansing Michigan. She appeared on TV saying that Toledoans want to see themselves on the walls. She wrote and edited a belated quarterly Art Matters Magazine in September 2022, and then after just a few months of museum employment, she left. There has not been another Art Matters Magazine since then.

TMA was greater when the budget was half as much

Even though they have added the Branding Department, a Chief People Officer and a Director of Belonging and Community Engagement and fully staffed these new departments, and even though they spend $3.6 million more this year than they did three years ago, the museum has not managed to continue the things that has made it great.

The School of Design made the museum great. The great Saturday Children’s Class program that was coordinated with the Board of Eduction to provide about 2,500 public school children (parochial school children too) with an extensive, full-school-year program of art classes is what made the museum great. Free at first, then nearly free.

The adult art class culture and community that the museum used to have made the museum great.

The annual Toledo Area Artists Exhibition that brought together the region’s art community, that celebrated their creativity and made everyone feel part of it and welcome made the museum great.

Selling our valuable and historic art

It is so ironic that while expanding budgets and commandeering endowment fund art allocations for other uses, that Adam Levine took away perhaps the most important thing that made our museum great.

Adam Levine sold three of our world-class famous historical French Impressionist paintings that we had in our collection for a very long time. These paintings were a substantial part of the museum’s small but strong collection of French Impressionism. These paintings meant so much to our community, and people came from near and far to see them. They were very accessible. Cezanne is considered the father of modern painting.

The museum’s great art made our museum great.

Invoking Libbey to pass off a lie

Adam Levine took our Cezanne, The Glade, right off the wall and sold it for $41.7 million. He lied to us about the reason why he was doing that, saying that the painting was mediocre and Libbey would have wanted us to get rid of it, and that the museum never meant to have two examples of any one artist.

He embarrassed us to world by promising our other Cezanne to the Art Institute of Chicago’s Cezanne Exhibition taking place concurrently, which is documented full page in the show’s catalog as being in the show. Instead he sold our other Cezanne, The Glade, right off the wall, just two days after the opening of the important Cezanne Exhibition at the Art Institute of Chicago.

Just wondering why the art acquisition numbers indicate that a lot more art was bought during that time? I saw a work with the number 2022.92. That would indicate it was the 92nd work bought in 2022. And he states here that they acquired only 75 works over 2 years. Did they buy and sell works to flip them, perhaps? Funny thought but with all the weirdness going on at the museum, I wouldn’t put it past them.

TMA has never not explored world art

The Toledo Museum of Art has always explored art of the entire world, it doesn’t need to raise budgets and hire more employees to do so. What the museum needs are art curators who are connoisseurs, not statistical survey satisfiers.

Unimpressive shows and few of them

I counted only five shows in 2022, and they were unimpressive. Two shows in the past two years were showing the restoration of artwork. The second show like this, in the fall of 2022, was used as a fundraiser to raise money for the restoration of certain pieces, which is funny because the restoration of art is what the Libbey variance of 2020 was about (“direct care of art”) – the museum received extra money for this use, yet there they are trying to get the public to pay for the restoration of the glass dress that represents the Libbeys themselves. The variance diverting Libbey’s money for the restoration of art was not even used to care for Libbey’s deeply important and meaningful legacy.

The shape of things to come

The coming show about extinct birds, Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg – Machine Auguries: Toledo is running an extra-long time for a show at a museum that claims to be working on bringing in repeat visitors – seven long months – from April 29 to Nov. 26. The show is not sponsored by the Libbey Endowment Fund. Instead, it’s sponsored by 8 different sponsors, including corporations, donors, foundations and the Ohio Arts Council: “Presenting sponsors Susan and Tom Palmer, Season sponsor ProMedica, Platinum sponsors Taylor Cadillac, the Rita B. Kern Foundation, and The Trumbull Family and Silver sponsor Dana Charitable Foundation. Additional support provided by the Ohio Arts Council and the Boeschenstein Family Foundation.” All those corporate sponsors, and still, the museum is charging $10 for non-members to see it.

Nearest neighbors being left out? a big lie

First of all, the museum is free and the doors are open. We can thank Edward Drummond Libbey and Florence Scott Libbey for that. The museum has always welcomed everyone, since Day 1.

The museum’s 2021 5-year strategic plan puts TMA’s reach at 650,000 people for the Toledo Metropolitan area. Over the decade, they report having about 380,000 visitors per year.

The 2-mile radius is 12.57 square miles and the Toledo Metropolitan area is 240 square miles. So therefore, the 2-mile radius of the museum is only 5.24% of the museum’s Toledo Metropolitan area. 8% of the museum’s attendance from the 2-mile radius neighborhood is a lot more than 5.24%, and 14% is way more. So how have the “nearest neighbors” been left out?

“An active approach to community outreach not only increases the level of offsite programming, but in so doing, it allows TMA employees to create personal relationships and invite program participants individually to visit the Museum,” the plan reads. The Blade, March 9, 2021, Museum outlines 5-year plan of growth

All this effort the museum has recently made to hire more people (raising the museum’s budget by $3.6 million with public and private grants) to befriend and make personal relationships with a select area of their total reach, and to hand-hold these neighborhood people to get more to come to the museum, and to pass out free memberships (good for free parking and special shows) at the expense of all other visitors who are not members to which they raised the parking fee by 45%, has made the statistics grow to 14% for the visitors being from the 2-mile radius – a large percentage compared to the overall population of the museum’s reach – but are they accounting for less people coming from other areas? Is reducing the attendance of the other areas part of the plan too? Because they are absolutely leaving everyone else out.

A siphon and a funnel

It’s like a siphon of most of the former efforts the museum made for the entire community being funneled into one place – the 2-mile radius.

Closing museum on a Friday to dismantle the Great Gallery for a private party for themselves and the 2-mile radius

The museum was closed on a Friday in October 2021 to put on a private concert with John Legend that was supposedly for the kids in their outreach program but ended up being a private party for adults. Using the Great Gallery, where most of the Old Master paintings are displayed including the Peter Paul Rubens, they removed the paintings from the gallery walls, risking damage to the museum’s most valuable collection, and replaced them with contemporary paintings by black artists. Information was initially released that it would be for the neighborhood kids they are doing outreach for. However, it was reported in the Sojourners Truth newspaper after the concert that only 40 children attended, who came from the seven different “communities” within the 2-mile radius of the museum. Along with 400 adults who had a party for themselves. Printing a full-page photo of their private concert in the 2021 annual report, the museum asserted that the museum would be doing more private functions like this in the future.

Not very Libbey-like

Why would the museum close its doors to the public on a busy day to have a private party with the neighborhood? Why does the museum feel that the people from the neighborhood can’t relate to the great collection that the museum presently has? Isn’t that a supreme insult to people of the neighborhood? Or is it all just a smokescreen to sell off our great paintings?

Art-making experiences for seniors in the 2-mile radius only
siphoning $9,998 per art-making session

The Toledo Museum of Art just received a grant to give art lessons/art experiences to senior citizens in senior centers. See story in M-Living here: Toledo museum program takes art to older adults

The grant, for $119,916, from Michelson Philanthropy, “a pioneer in creative aging,” will be used to give a 6-session art program at two senior centers serving seniors in the special “2-mile radius” this summer, summer of 2023. That works out to be $9,993 for each art-making session.

There are many seniors all over the city of Toledo, many of them who have never been to the Toledo Museum of Art as well, and to isolate a small section of Toledo to pour $119,916 into 2 senior centers for just 12 art making sessions this summer is divisive, strange, and unbelievable. Toledo has 14 or so Senior Centers, and most of them are out of luck. Many people in their communities are feeling unwanted, isolated, lonely, poor and miserable. Survivors of the pandemic, but for what. To emerge into a world that literally doesn’t want them anymore.

we made you but now we decided to eliminate you

The museum made note in their 5-year strategic plan that they have way too many older educated white women. They don’t like us anymore, so I guess we have to sit the rest of our lifetime out.

How could the museum have known, when we were little children, educated at the museum’s Saturday classes and also having college classes at the Toledo Museum of Art School of Design, that we would stay so interested in art when we would grow up – that we would enjoy going to the museum so much that it would make the Twenty-first Century museum director’s socio-economic and racially profiled and ageist statistics explode his mind? There are some people that don’t fit in to their new branding – also called, discrimination.

Adam Levine’s solution is to cut us out, just like he got rid of the French Impressionist paintings that skewed their art collection so male and so white.

Over the past decade the Museum has received, on average, 380,000 visits per year, which as a percentage of its 650,000-person metropolitan statistical area ranks it among the top five most visited art museums per capita, according to annual statistics from the Association of Art Museum Directors.

Though TMA can claim a history of executing on quality and community, this Museum, like so many others, has implemented its strategies in ways that have not been equally inclusive or equally accessible. Though TMA is known across the world for its outstanding collection, that collection reflects a Eurocentric view of the world. Likewise, the demographic attributes of those 380,000 annual visitors skew Caucasian, female, older, affluent, and highly educated. – TMA Strategic Plan 2021

Exactly WHAT strategies have not been inclusive or accessible? Our museum is NOT “like so many others.” Our museum has been collecting diverse art from the very beginning. For example the Henry Ossawa Tanner painting purchased in 1913, for just one example.

Nothing has ever stopped the museum from making diverse purchases. They have been buying quite a lot of non-European-type-non-white-male art for the past several decades. in fact, I made a survey of art acquired by the museum from 2017 to 2022, and it lines up pretty closely to U.S. Census statistics of nationality and race. See my survey here: The Artists of Toledo Report.

Are they going for full collection-wide parity? Are they not going to collect art by white men altogether?

Money and politics

Could it be that they are using the outreach program to politically organize the 2-mile area, using the neighborhood as a pet anthropological experiment?

Will their radicalism in our meek Midwest town that lets them do anything win them the fame they so desperately seek?

expanding? or pushing us over the edge?

The museum is leaving everyone else out. The museum has always been about art, but now it seems they have traded art for money and politics. Lots of grant money for the taking. They are doing focused outreach in this 2-mile radius area, which is what the Arts Commission had always done in the past.

The museum should be a museum. Let the arts commission be the arts commission.

Adam Levine is the steward of our museum, it is not his to remake. 

People come to the museum. It has art. It has education. It has a beautiful marble pillared building. It is a place for personal contemplation. It is not a place to be bullied. It is not a place to be beaten over the head with politics.

People who run the museum first and foremost must care for the art for future generations. They shouldn’t be selling it off. They shouldn’t be trying to make themselves famous at the expense of Toledoans. It’s ridiculous that they claim to want to remake our museum to set an example for all other museums to follow. As if to let them recreate our museum for the sake of their own notoriety among other museums would make us proud. Our museum was a great example for other museums from the beginning, but it never set out to make fame its priority. The art and the people of Toledo were always the museum’s priority, and should be now.

Our museum always used to welcome everyone and was fair to everyone. Our museum served everyone. Our museum never had to do surveys on the race or gender or income level of their visitors. Our museum never discriminated against people based on their zip code, but they love doing that now.

What George Stevens said in 1903

What would our founders think?

What do you think?