Category: visual

“In light of the emerging power struggle that will determine how much of the grand designs for ground zero get built, any effort to assess the finalists may come off like an exercise in aesthetic hairsplitting. But as the redevelopment officials who sponsored the competition vie with real estate developers and others who remain intent on overstuffing the 16-acre site with commercial space, such an analysis becomes essential, if only because it reminds us what this exercise is all about.”

An American citizen claims that a Pissarro painting in a Spanish museum was stolen from his family by the Nazis. “But despite a persistent claim to the Pissarro painting, the Spanish authorities say that the museum is the legal owner and that any claim should be made in the courts, a response that has drawn criticism from American lawyers familiar with the claim. ‘The reaction of the Spanish government is quite astonishing. Why should a government that already has a law relating to the return of Holocaust property refuse to have a discussion on the issue’?”

To convince collectors of important Picasso and Matisse art to loan their work for a show, curators started playing cards with them. “The object of the game? To create sparks for a three-city show in which the two artists would face off on the gallery walls. Collectors got to shuffle the deck, juxtaposing the cards in various ways. But the game always ended the same way: the collectors were asked to part with their card, their art, for a year. It worked.”

Even when you’re spending $225 million for an “extension” of a museum, there are trade-offs. Will the Cleveland Museum get its money’s worth? “For me, the answer at this point is a resounding yes. Rafael Vinoly’s design, which would cost $225 million to build, is undergirded by a precise, diamond- hard logic that mar ries dramatic physical changes with a new vi sion about the muse um’s potential. The key is whether Vinoly can follow through with details big and small that will make all the difference in the final product. This is no minor question.”

Last December New York Times architecture critic Herbert Muschamp wrote of Daniel Libeskind’s plan for the World Trade Center site that “If you are looking for the marvelous, here’s where you will find it. Daniel Libeskind’s project attains a perfect balance between aggression and desire. It will provoke many viewers to exclaim that yes, this design is actually better than what was there before.” Then this past Friday he wrote that “It [Libeskind’s idea] is an astonishingly tasteless idea. It has produced a predictably kitsch result.” Architectrue watchers are wondering what happened, and some are angry…

So which of the two competing finalists to design a replacement for the World Trade Center do people like? Hmmmmn…one poll says neither (by a wide margin).

A painting thought to be anonymous, but revealed to have been by Van Gogh has sold for $500,000. A Japanese auction company was “planning to auction off the small portrait of a peasant woman for between 10,000 and 20,000 yen ($83 to $167) after struggling to establish the identity of the artist. But a last-minute fax from the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam confirmed that the picture was an early work by the Dutch impressionist master.”

An unemployed actor had himself sealed up in a box and mailed to the Tate Museum. He said he had “turned himself into living art to explore the way that artists are seen as objects.” A number of people from the Tate came out and applauded as the box was opened.

The French waiter who stole millions of dollars worth of art over six years has been sentenced to four years in prison for the thefts by a Swiss court. Why did he take the art? “He believed he was one of the very few people sensitive enough to appreciate the true beauty of works of art.”

The competition between the two remaining design proposals for the World Trade Center site is also a contest between who gets to decide the shape of the project. “Two views of what comes next are now contending, pitting Roland W. Betts, a director of the development corporation with strong personal ties to the White House, against Charles A. Gargano, the state’s top economic development official, some Port Authority of New York and New Jersey executives, developers and others.”