Art F City
by Art Fag City on June 14, 2010 · 9 comments
Populism Hasn't Boosted Brooklyn Museum's Attendance – NYTimes.com
No surprises here.
This article frustrates me to no end. While I agree that there’s DEFINITELY room for debate about Brooklyn’s choice of exhibitions (as is true with any large institution), this article is essentially reporting one bar chart. Yes, attendance dropped massively last year, but that has more to do with them struggling to stay alive. But the two years prior had an impressive increase, the goal of tripling attendance was never going to be reached. Corrected headline: “Museum doesn’t reach ridiculous goal and barely stays alive during enormous financial catastrophe. Trustees get grumpy and Robert Storr complains”. Go back to writing your annual article about the new web “site” ICANHAZCHEEZBURGER, NYTimes.
It’s valid to criticize the Brooklyn Museum’s exhibition choices, yes, but WOW the New York Times repeatedly writes insulting unbalanced pieces about them. It’s hard to trust their criticism.
I think the article actually makes some very valid points. I simply can’t see how Arnold Lehman can say “We donâ€™t start with the fact that it could draw a lot of people,” and then justify the museum giving a solo show to the winner of Bravo’s Work of Art reality show.
David above just responds to the headline while Ese makes some vague claims about “unbalance,” but neither is actually engaging with the important issues raised in the piece.
Previous post: Fresh Links!
Next post: Fresh Links!
Advertise on AFC with Nectar Ads