Toledo's art history and history in the making

Tag: Mary Wolfe

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 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 here for a description of the Cloisters that they closed and are moving — The Crumbling of the Cloisters

Categories
Artists of Toledo

The Crumbling of the Cloisters

Poets Bob Philips, Nick Muska and Joel Lipman at a poetry reading at the Cloisters, Toledo Museum of Art, 1979 and a reshoot in 2015.

What’s happening to the museum? Core collection getting sent off while slated for being in a show at the Glass Pavilion and the Cloisters getting dismantled — a total shock and all at once!

pages from Toledo Museum of Art Masterworks, published in 2009

On January 30, 2025 the museum announced on Facebook that it would be closing the Cloisters on February 2, until 2027. You had to dig into the comments to find out that they plan to dismantle it and move it three galleries over to the location of the Wolfe Gallery, that they would tear apart after they just built it 13 years ago with a $2 million donation from Mary and Fritz Wolfe, who have since passed away.

The Cloisters at the Toledo Museum of Art was a gift of Edward Drummond Libbey.

Although it underwent an expensive and extensive restoration and renovation three years ago, now the museum plans to move it a few galleries over. It is now closed until sometime in 2027.

Relocating the Cloisters requires careful planning, engineering expertise, conservation efforts, and logistical coordination. It will be a massive undertaking with risks to the artifacts’ preservation and historical integrity. It will cost millions of dollars.

WHY and WHAT FOR?

The Cloisters gallery was carefully assembled to recreate the feeling of a medieval monastery using authentic architectural elements, including the columns, capitals, and arches. These pieces were salvaged from European sites and brought to Toledo, where they were integrated into a new, custom-designed space.

The columns, capitals, and arches were sourced from various medieval sites in Europe. Dating from the 12th to 15th century, two different rows of columns representing the Romanesque era came from Languedoc-Roussillon in southern France near the Pyrenees. One from the Benedictine monastery of Saint-Pons-de-Thomieres, and another from the monastic priority of Espira-de-l’Agley. Another came from the late Middle Ages, the Gothic style from the cloister of Notre-Dame-de-Pontaut, a Cistercian monastery in southwestern France.

Ninety five years ago, the Toledo Museum of Art’s curators created a floor plan and structural layout that would allow the columns to be displayed in an authentic-looking cloister setting. The arrangement richly evokes a medieval monastery cloister, where arcaded walkways surrounded an open courtyard.

Since the columns were not originally designed for this space, engineers reinforced them with modern supports. Some columns may have been cut, restored, or modified to fit the proportions of the museum. The stone elements were mounted on modern bases to provide stability.

Each column was positioned carefully to align with the capitals and arches above. The museum likely used mortar and hidden steel reinforcements to secure them while maintaining an authentic historical appearance.

The surrounding stonework and flooring were designed to blend with the medieval elements, enhancing the historic ambiance. Lighting and display techniques were added to highlight the carvings and textures of the ancient stone.

The wishing well, a central feature of the Cloisters, was also a salvaged artifact. In medieval cloisters, wells were essential for water collection and often had religious or symbolic significance. It was installed as a focal point, inviting visitors to interact with the space in a contemplative way.

What the move will be like

Moving the Cloisters at the Toledo Museum of Art would be a complex and delicate process due to the historical, structural, and logistical challenges involved.

The columns, capitals, and arches are centuries old and made of fragile stone, which may have cracks or weaknesses from age. Disassembling them could risk damage or breakage, especially since they were modified and reinforced when installed in the museum. The hidden supports and reinforcements that stabilize the structure may make removal difficult without causing unintended damage.

The solution to that is to conduct a structural assessment using 3D scanning and imaging technology, carefully documenting how the pieces were assembled before dismantling. They need expert stone conservators to ensure safe handling.

The columns and arches are made of heavy stone, which requires specialized lifting equipment and precise handling. Moving them intact would need custom crating and heavy-duty transport methods.

They will need to use cranes, forklifts, and specially designed supports for moving and reinforce fragile parts with protective padding and structural braces.

Each column, arch, and capital fits together in a specific way. If pieces are lost or damaged, it could compromise the historical accuracy of the reassembled cloister. The original mortar and reinforcement materials may not be reusable, requiring careful restoration.

They will need to create a detailed reconstruction map of how each piece fits together, label each piece precisely before removal, and consult architectural historians to ensure the authenticity of the reconstruction.

Changes in temperature, humidity, and lighting at a new location could accelerate the degradation of the stone. Moving might expose the artifacts to vibrations, pollutants, or handling-related damage. They will need to maintain climate-controlled storage and moving conditions.

The cost will be well into the millions.
  1. Pre-Move Planning & Conservation ($100,000 – $500,000)
    • Structural analysis and 3D scanning.
    • Conservation assessment and documentation.
    • Expert consulting fees (architects, historians, and conservators).
  2. Dismantling & Packing ($500,000 – $2 Million)
    • Careful removal of stone columns, arches, and decorative elements.
    • Custom crating and reinforcement for transport.
    • Specialized labor (stone masons, engineers, museum professionals).
  3. Transportation & Insurance ($250,000 – $1 Million)
    • Secure climate-controlled shipping.
    • Heavy machinery for lifting and transport.
    • Insurance coverage for high-value historic artifacts.
  4. Site Preparation & Reconstruction ($1 Million – $5 Million)
    • Preparing the new site (foundation, structural supports).
    • Reassembling pieces using conservation-appropriate materials.
    • Custom lighting, climate control, and visitor accessibility adjustments.
  5. Contingency & Unexpected Costs ($500,000 – $1 Million)
    • Unforeseen damage or repairs.
    • Additional permits, legal fees, or repatriation claims.
    • Extended project timeline costs.

Total Estimated Cost: $2.5 Million – $10 Million+

WHY?

WHAT FOR?

read more about the dismantling of the Toledo Museum of Art here:

Behold, The Dismantling of The Toledo Museum of Art

February 6, 2025 update BREAKING NEWS from New Zealand  —
TMA lending 57 artworks to Auckland Art Gallery. My letter sent to Ohio Attorney General Charitable Law Section urging an investigation:

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

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

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

Mary Wolfe: Artist, Art Historian, Art Collector, and Honored Patron of the Arts. (1931—2014)

Mary Wolfe and art: “This is what I imagine heaven will be like.”
 
Mary Wolfe died last Thursday. At 82, she still seemed to be in her prime. What a magnificent woman. She was extraordinarily bright, both in her intellect and aura. She will keep shining through the many gifts she and her husband, Frederic (Fritz), have bestowed upon the community.
 
She was an art history teacher at Bowling Green State University from 1968 to 1976. She always opened her house to students and artists, said her student Kathy Sobb, an accomplished New York City graphic designer. She then became the exhibitions director of the BGSU McFall Center Gallery through the mid-eighties. Relevant to this website, artistsoftoledo.com, Mary Wolfe showed the work of glass art pioneer Dominick Labino. She also put on the largest exhibition of Edmund H. Osthaus ever assembled. Osthaus (1858—1928), famous for his dog paintings and branding of the Du Pont Powder Company (see my blog post, Edmund H. Osthaus and my giant Pierre Project), was one of the founding artists of the Toledo Museum of Art.
 
The couple donated $1 million to Wilberforce University for a new administration building in 1993. (Another artistsoftoledo connection: one of the few known paintings by Frederick Douglass Allen and one that I have been trying to track down was of the 1934 president of Wilberforce.)
 
Mary Wolfe is well-known for the very generous contribution she and Fritz made that started the Wolfe Center for the Arts at BGSU. We can also thank the Wolfes for interesting architecture of the building, since they encouraged BGSU to hire the architecture firm, Snohetta, of Norway. The Wolfe Center opened in December 2011. Six months later, at the Toledo Museum of Art, the Wolfe Gallery for Contemporary Art opened, thanks to the Wolfes’ $2 million donation to the Museum for the renovation of the old glass gallery behind the Egyptian gallery that had not been used for 15 years. 
 
For interesting accounts of the many roles she played throughout her life, see these two tributes to Mary Wolfe that were published shortly after her death by The Blade and Bowling Green State University.
 
I love the quote that was in the earlier, Blade breaking news report, taken from a 2011 Blade interview in regard to her art patronage. Mary Wolfe said, “It’s made life so much more interesting and wonderful for us. It gives you a great feeling.” How lovely to know this, how the Wolfes felt about art collecting and their kind act of supporting the arts, since what they have given us has truly made the lives of an entire community much more wonderful and interesting and gives us a great feeling.
 
I am grateful to have known her. She and Fritz came to my daughter, Anna Friemoth’s opening at the Paula Brown Gallery last year and bought her work. It means so much, since I know they have such exquisite and discerning taste in art.
 
Two years ago, my husband and I were invited to a small studio tour of Austrian LED light artist Erwin Redl, currently living in Bowling Green, with Mary & Fritz Wolfe and two of their three daughters and a mutual friend. Erwin Redl’s studio is in a huge warehouse, divided into several rooms. Erwin creates conceptual light installations for international museums. The experience of the work in each room of his studio tour became progressively grander and more energetic.  It was pretty special to be experiencing this tour with the Wolfes and I could see that Mary Wolfe was inspired. Later, her daughter Lisa told me that her mother was absolutely taken by the installations, and especially the last room, that had streams of red lights and blue lights speeding rhythmically from wall to wall close to the ceiling. Mary remarked about the last room, “This is what I imagine heaven will be like!”
 
I was just getting ready to send Mary Wolfe a card for my upcoming show, Artists of Toledo at the Paula Brown Gallery, that opens November 13. I printed some snapshots from that night at Erwin’s, together with a note. I had them out on my table waiting to find the right sized envelope when I read the Blade report that she died. I had just been with Lisa two days before at Bowling Green State University and later I sat in the theatre in the Wolfe Art Center for a scholarly talk on animal vision. It was a celebrated event and the audience included many VIPs but Mary Wolfe wasn’t there as I thought she might have been. She had a stroke that evening and died the next day, surrounded by loved ones.
 
Our prayers go out to Mary’s family, her many friends, and to our entire community. We lost someone pretty wonderful. We will always remember her because she brought so much art to life.