Making sense of art and design industries

by wkandinsky

Comment on ‘Art and commerce – hostile worlds’ by Neonbluelights on 4th of September 2019.

In light of current events regarding the deal between the National Museum and the Fredriksen sisters, Neonbluelights has written a post where she discusses a conflict of interest.

The text is based on an article from NRK referencing e-mails from ICOM, which can be considered reliable sources on this matter. Neonbluelights shows her ability to correlate real cases with relevant theories, such as Viviana Zelizer’s concept of “Hostile Worlds”.

Without elaborating she gives a brief description of the case and the National Museum’s role in society, which can give any reader not familiar with the case an understanding of the conflict.

She asks important questions like “why would the museum display and add more value to art that belongs to already wealthy people?”.

As I understand it she is concerned about whether the long-term influence of wealthy speculators can undermine the traditional role of the museum’s experts, and contribute to an environment of nepotism within the museum.

It is clear throughout the text that she is highly sceptical to this collaboration. She makes valid arguments stating that we should be more critical regarding these kinds of sponsorships and gifts, especially as they can contribute to dictating what is displayed. Finally she concludes that “the museum should not just be a place for private collectors to display their art to increase the value and gain from it”.

Although I fully agree with her, I can’t help but search for counterarguments in the text. In a time where private collectors have budgets for art that surpass those of public museums, non-profit organizations such as the National Museum are dependent on borrowing valuable artworks worthwhile seeing by the public.

I would therefore like to ask the question: Should the museum ignore the Fredriksen’s capitalization in order to provide valuable art for society?

It might be true that the museum will be left empty handed after the end of the deal. It also undoubtedly adds value to the Fredriksen’s private collection. But the benefit is that we get to experience art we otherwise wouldn’t, whilst also adding value to our own lives.

https://designindustries.art.blog/2019/09/04/art-and-commerce-hostile-worlds/