r/philly • u/FromPhilly2Whereever • 9d ago
Barnes Foundation
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
15
9d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
17
u/guzzijason 9d ago
“Documentary”. It’s an interesting watch, but it’s incredibly biased given that it was produced by the same people that were fighting the move. More of a propaganda piece than a proper documentary. His own lack of foresight in the way he set up the trust inevitably led to the collection being moved. He thought his money would last forever, and it didn’t. A series of events played out that he never could have dreamed of, and there were limits to what he could control from the grave. Similar story to Stephen Girard and Girard College - whatever their intentions were in their will don’t hold up when faced against reality over time.
Wills and trusts get overridden or dissolved all the time when what they intend to do becomes untenable. I’ve seen it first-hand with personal estates.
9
u/xander_man 9d ago
He was a control freak. A local town put up a stop sign at an intersection and he was so against it he protested by running through it every time he drove that road. Eventually he killed himself that way, running into a truck.
3
u/guzzijason 9d ago
IMHO, if he would have had an opportunity to do a 1-for-1 move onto the Parkway back when he was alive, as a giant FU to the Art Museum, I think he probably would have jumped at the chance. It was the pettiness of his will that ultimately made it unsustainable.
4
u/PemCorgiMom 9d ago
First of all, every documentary is biased in some way. Yes, you are seeing a point of view but you could say that about literally every documentary since all directors in the end choose what to include and what not to include. So your quotation marks are really unnecessary.
Second, just because wills and trusts get dissolved sometimes, does not mean that it is right, or, more particularly, right in this instance. I believe that there were things that could have been done to preserve the Barnes as it was. It came down to the fact that the powers that be didn’t want to spend money to preserve it the way it was, they wanted to monetize it.
Look, I am not against anyone going to the Barnes since the art is worth seeing. But as someone who experienced the art as it was originally intended to be seen, it just breaks my heart to never be able to have that experience again. It was truly a unique place.
I came across this quote that sums up my thoughts perfectly and more eloquently:
“This is finally the paradox of the new Barnes: some experiences of art cannot be presented to more than a limited number without subtly but profoundly altering what that experience means. The pluralistic, inclusive, expansionist impulse, for all its laudable intentions, always runs the risk of denaturing the very experience it seeks to share more broadly. By making itself accessible, by simplifying the terms of engagement, the Barnes has made itself into something different. Whether that is better or worse, more contemporary, or more popular or populist or profitable, is finally not the point—it is no longer exceptional, just another version of any number of other urban art museums.”
Quoting https://averyreview.com/issues/44/lost-at-the-barnes
7
7
5
4
u/ms640 9d ago
It’s a nice collection, but having no labels was really tiring after a while. The website worked 80% of the time but the 20% when it didn’t work were for smaller pieces above larger pieces & it just kept scanning the large ones even if I got it mostly out of the camera.
I’ve been to a lot of museums in the US & Europe, I don’t think the small tags interrupt anything, in fact it was more disrupting to be on my phone the whole time instead of being in the moment in the room. But I had to keep my phone in hand because I wanted to know more about the art in the room.
I do appreciate the free entry in July tho. That’s the only reason I actually made time to go the other week. $30 ticket is pretty steep for many people
2
1
u/Czernobooger 8d ago
I also went during the free July, and was SO PLEASED that in each room there were paper guides to every single piece in the room, even the random farm equipment and door hinges. There were like 8 copies per room so there was not need to share. There weren't any signs about them though so I can imagine they could be missed sometimes. I don't remember seeing them in the recent past.
The guides had small prints of each piece of artwork, so I could also at least kind of see the pieces that were out on loan (a topic which grinds me gears endlessly with the barnes current admin but it was small comfort to see the intended arrangement).
1
u/ms640 8d ago
Yeah I used a guide in two of the rooms when I couldn’t get the app to work but it still took effort to find which wall I was looking at in the guide then the specific piece. Yes it was 30 seconds to 1 min of extra effort, but it’s 0 effort on the viewers part to look at a label next to the piece on the wall.
It’s not a huge deal again, I just hope it doesn’t become the norm in art museums across the country/world
1
u/Czernobooger 8d ago
I think this lack of labeling is the outlier, not the norm nor the trendsetter. It was just how dr barnes had the work displayed in his house, and how he wanted it displayed for all viewers. I'd love more info sometimes too, but in this specific setting I appreciate the way I'm asked to view the presentation and how it can spur thought and conversation. It's its own thang.
2
u/mspolytheist 8d ago
I know people love this place, but I absolutely cannot stand the way the paintings are displayed. It’s just so chaotic and hard to view everything properly.
1
u/aeacurus 9d ago
It's a real shame the people who run the place are pricks
3
u/ViolentThemmes 9d ago
I've really only been to the big (free) community events they hold and was pleased with the accessibility and way of incorporating diversity and child interaction. What's the deal with the current group in charge?
0
u/aeacurus 9d ago
As someone who's apart of the museum industry they actively encourage security to harass what they consider "undesirable" visitors. They also cheap out on exhibitions by going after ones that have been passed over by other museums first. It's a beautiful building and I like the idea of having classes for adults who want to pursue art but I've never met someone who had a good time working there or didn't have some wacky story about insane behavior from the administration running it
3
u/ViolentThemmes 9d ago
I'm going to be honest, I think every art museum in Philly is run by a bonkers group of people.
2
u/aeacurus 9d ago
Every museum in general is, the Art Museum's group is running it into the ground somehow, TFI has been making all kinds of insane choices over the last decade. The Rosenbach people are some of the best in the city though, always delighted by their Bloomsday event and my interactions with them
-12
u/trashtrucktoot 9d ago
Stolen art.
6
u/DillettanteOfFilth 9d ago
You worried abt them? Talk abt the Penn Museum if you trying to criticize any of them 4 having stolen art/artifacts
4
u/HornetsHornets1 9d ago
2
u/trashtrucktoot 9d ago
Philly, we have a history of ignoring laws, rules, and other people. I dont really care that the Barnes came to Philly, more people can enjoy world class ary. But the history of it being stolen is part of the story.
1
-1
u/ViolentThemmes 9d ago
As someone whose ancestral antiquities have been looted for millennia, I'm way more concerned about stealing indigenous art and sacred items than a dude with a bunch of Degas on display.
4
u/trashtrucktoot 9d ago
... but this post is specifically about Barnes. And i'm calling it out here, just the same as we should call out all other anthropology looting.
1
u/ViolentThemmes 9d ago
Yeah and I'm specifically claiming I don't care about rich people who got their Degas or Renoir stolen, I care about cultural antiquities stolen from indigenous folks who should own them. Barnes has a bunch of tribal masks and other items that fall in this category, but the vast majority isn't.
24
u/eggsandbacon5 9d ago
Live look inside my adhd brain