The Canadian art world is all a-flutter over the news - apparently agreed as long ago as last June but only lately brought to the public consciousness by Christie's New York's recent promotional blitz - that the National Gallery of Canada is to sell off a Marc Chagall oil painting and a few other "ancient artifacts" in order to purchase (and thereby keep in Canada) an unknown work, described rather mysteriously as a "national treasure".
Well, it turns out that the unknown work is almost certainly Jérôme entendant les trompetes du jugement dernier by the 18th Century French painter Jacques-Louis David, which has been owned by the parish of Notre-Dame de Québec since 1938 (and has been in Quebec since the late 19th century), and which is currently on view at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (MMFA). It seems that the parish is currently in dire need of money to renovate two old churches, and plans to sell the painting to fund it.
Now, whether the David work is any more of a "national treasure" than Chagall's 1929 La Tour Eiffel - which originally cost the gallery $16,000, and is expected to sell for $8 to $11 million or even more; the David painting is valued at around the same ball-park figure - is an open question. Most people seem pretty sure which painting they would prefer to have hanging on their walls - the bright, fun Chagall, or the gloomy, depressing David - but that is not the point here. The National Gallery say they have another "better" Chagall anyway, which is why this one has spent so long languishing in the gallery's dungeons/archives. The plan is certainly contentious, though: the head of the Canadian branch of the International Association of Art Critics has called it an act of "monumental stupidity", although the eight art history PhDs who advised the gallery were apparently unanimous in recommending its sale.
However, now it comes out that the David painting is actually in no danger of leaving the country after all. According to Nathalie Bondil, the director of MMFA, "It would not be sold abroad, it's protected heritage", and anyway the MMFA and Quebec City's Musée de la Civilisation are teaming up to buy the painting without the National Gallery's help! It sounds like some people are not talking to each other.
UPDATE
The National Gallery still insists that it intends to sell the Chagall in order to buy the David, even though all of the above has now come out in public, and there is no longer any need to do so. It has become bizarre and embarrassing.
There is also a lot of claptrap being talked about the issue, from both sides.
A spokesperson for the Musée de la civilisation claims, "It's part of the cultural and social fabric of Quebec City and of Quebec ... This painting speaks to us as much, if not more, of Quebec civilization as of European fine arts." Claptrap. It's a French painting with absolutely no Canadian connection other than a financial one.
The director of the National Gallery, for his part, blusters, "It's going to Ottawa, for heaven's sake. I don't really understand what the big deal is." Claptrap. The big deal is up to $10 million of public money, and the fact that he is the one making a relatively small deal into a big one.
I can just see Ottawa and Quebec bidding against each other for the David painting in a bidding war. God, the cut and thrust of the art world! Ridiculous!
UPDATE UPDATE
After weeks of controversy and outrage, the National Gallery has finally agreed not to sell the Chagall, apparently worried about "its international reputation and its standing in the arts community" (a bit late for that).
Now, maybe they might even consider exhibiting the painting, or at least letting sone other gallery exhibit it. It seems ridiculous that a well-known work by a top-flight painter is languishing in an archive basement somewhere.
UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE
Adding insult to unjury in some ways, an anonymous donor, rumoured to be BC realtor and arts sponsor Michael Audain, has agreed to cover the National Gallery's substantial but undisclosed fines for cancelling the Christie's Chagall auction.
The National Gallery is calling the donation "philanthropy at its best", but what is really happening is that someone is effectively covering up the Gallery's, and in particular its director's, errors. No new art has been created or displayed as a result of the big money that is changing hands. Just think what a multitude of other arts organizations could have done with that kind of money.
No comments:
Post a Comment