In anticipation of a trip to Chicago, I looked into ten paintings the Art Institute owns that I particularly wanted to see. Of these ten, FIVE are either “not currently on display” or in a gallery that’s “currently closed.”
We’re not talking about the dregs of the collection here: these are either major works or works by major artists.
So the question here is, what the hell are museums for if not to display artwork? I’m not saying every painting has to be displayed at all times — though maybe I am, kinda — but five out of ten sitting in a basement gathering dust? That can’t possibly be their mission.
Comics I Don't Understand 
Probably they just don’t have the space to display all the art they have at one time.
Then lend some of it out. Or don’t acquire so much more than you can possibly display. When half of a randomly-chosen list of ten important pieces of art are all unavailable at the same time, then they’re just hoarding.
I’ve been to museums all over the world, and I’ve never come across this level of unavailability.
Rather than guess or ask for our comments, why not contact the museum and ask them (politely)? It may be possible to arrange to see the paintings, and in fact they might be glad to arrange it (I’ve done this many times with documents in archives); regardless of the reasons whey these items aren’t currently on display, most museums recognize that their mission is to make them available.
Artifacts and galleries both need maintenance. Sometimes things aren’t available because they are, in fact, on loan. Many museums have more than they can display, and will loan things if other places request such a loan – but the institutions most likely to borrow such things often have too little space of their own.
Although it is frustrating sometimes, these public institutions put a lot of effort into maintaining their collections and making them available, often with great budgetary challenges. So rather than think that they’re “hiding” things, make some professional inquiries and learn the reasons, which may be quite good.
I’m pretty sure there are more major works of art than can be displayed in all the major museums of the world. So lending out or not acquiring in the first place wouldn’t solve things, it would just shuffle around which pieces aren’t viewable.
Winter, just today, I read about a painting in Tulsa’s museum. Not a Van Gogh, but definitely an A-list work. They’re so proud of it, Tulsans probably name their children after all.
How thrilled would a comparable museum be to be able to display one of the painting in AIC’s basement?
And see, what doesn’t make sense to me is… if there is such a glut of fine paintings that they can’t all be displayed, why are paintings only only experts have heard of selling for tens of millions of dollars? Are they essentially tulips?
Do you *know* that “not currently on display” does not include “lent out to another institution”? (If you don’t lend, you won’t get lent to when you’re mounting a special exhibition.
Don, if I contact the museum — and I will — I will receive a short boilerplate response. If I put the question in front of some of the sharpest people I know, I’ll get all manner of insightful responses.
Which would YOU do?
Here’s an article discussing the issue, saying that some institutions keep 5% or so only on public display.
https://qz.com/583354/why-is-so-much-of-the-worlds-great-art-in-storage/
Mark, “not currently on display” is what they say on their web page. I can only take them at their word, and I can’t imagine why they wouldn’t say “out on loan” if a painting were out on loan.
Here’s the UK’s National Gallery policy document on the issue, for fun. They keep stuff from the mid-13thC to 1900, with other institutions like Tate Modern doing more modern stuff.
Click to access display-policy-permanent-collection_2014.pdf
narmitaj, thanks for the article.
Maybe not entirely relevant, but… when I was at the National Gallery last year, there was some confusion among the staff as to the status of one of their most popular paintings. It wasn’t where the map said it should be, Somebody thought it had been put in storage. Nobody thought it had been misplaced, but it wasn’t showing up on their hand-held computers.
We’re talking about something that was 8 feet by 10 feet: not something three people should have to hunt down.
Is there a point to this story? Only, I guess, that it wasn’t beyond the realm of possibility that Paul Delaroche’s Execution of Lady Jane Grey might have been sent to a basement.
Wow… from the Quartz article link to their research spreadsheet (see below) I see that your Chicago place has 300,000 pieces of art, as against the National Gallery’s 2,300 or so! No wonder they have to hide a lot of it away. Even at a mind-boggling three hundred artworks a room they would need a thousand rooms to show it all!
The National Gallery in London is an impressive enough space commanding Trafalgar Square and with plenty in it to keep one busy.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1puf1rUguSWqU_t0JtmepfBPbZqUhF6c0IvhwbScVCMA/edit#gid=0
The National Gallery might have fewer works, but the quality is outstanding. When I was there, I had three hours to cover it. Can you imagine? “Sorry, Rembrandt, you don’t make the cut today.”
According to this link https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/paul-delaroche-the-execution-of-lady-jane-grey on the National Gallery’s website, the Lady Jane painting should be in room 45… you can click through further for a floorplan and a list of the other paintings in that room.
I wonder if this is still in error and the painting is still missing??
Museum administrating (is that a word?) is politicized now like academia. Administraters are SJW, and they’re more busy making political statements than displaying great works, which were probably created by white males. How about Basquiat’s airplanes?
“Curating,” maybe? Or is that something different? -Bill
Having more fine paintings than you can fit in museums doesn’t translate into having so many fine paintings that they’re cheap. For one thing only a select group of them sell for tens of millions of dollars. And at any point in time, only a tiny portion of them are on the market.
Could you give us your list? I’m just curious as to what you wanted to see, and which were not available.
Check the mission statement… is their primary purpose to display or make art available, or is the primary purpose preservation? Putting art on display exposes it to risks… damage due to exposure to light and air, and, well, unruly patrons and thieves… that might run counter to the goal of preserving it.
Plus, of course, the museum “regulars” will get bored of coming to the museum to see the same works they came to see last week, last month, whenever… they want to see something new and exciting.
It’s not unlike the old practice of Disney… they put a movie into wide release, sell anybody and everybody a copy… then set it aside. They used this strategy successfully back in the days when they had actual movies in actual theaters, again in the days of video cassettes, and again in the days of DVD. This means that fans celebrate when “their” movies are available again, thus building hype (and a habit of people coming back to see what’s “new”, even if they’ve seen it before.)
One time my brother came to Chicago on business (more or less) and stayed in a smaller Michigan Avenue hotel. I caught up with him in the afternoon, and instead of meeting at his hotel or a restaurant, we arranged to meet here:
This was slightly before everybody began to rely on cellphones, so it looked like were going to do some inconvenient scrambling when I didn’t find this painting at its usual gallery!
However, it was just temporarily moved to another spot, not lost in the purgatory of “Not on display.”
One of my two faves at the Art Institute: Picasso’s Guernica is the other.
Also, the CIA is a teaching art museum; perhaps some of the work is being used in that manner.
Andréa, I’ll try to recreate the list tomorrow. I’m pretty sure Archibald Motley is one of the artists I struck out on, which I thought odd since he’s a local and he TRAINED at the Institute.
narmitaj, I really have no idea why nobody seemed to know where Jane was — the whole thing didn’t really make sense to me — but we did run her to ground and the painting was magnificent.
Andréa, isn’t Guernica back in Spain?
Coming in as a would-be scientist, Bill’s experience sounds way normal.
In the science collections, maybe 1% is on display at any given time, and much of the rest will never be displayed at all.
I saw it in the late 60’s or early 70’s, when I lived in Wisconsin and would often go to Chicago, only 90 minutes south of me. I believe it was returned to Spain once Franco died.
I saw Guernica in the Prado in 1980, so it’s been in Spain for a long time.
On top of all the things already pointed out, paintings are also taken down for cleaning/restoration. All those people walking by and breathing at the paintings can cause a lot of problems. Another reason might be that a scholar is currently studying the painting.
10 September 1981
Chicago does of course have another major Picasso, the big outdoor sculpture at Daley Plaza. This is a few blocks away from ARTIC, but they do have a model or “maquette” of it — I don’t know if it’s on display.
Another popular Picasso holding there is the blue period guitarist — I think the poster of this is (or at least used to be) one of the staples of the museum store. Along with the Rainy Day, of course.
Andréa, in partial answer to your question, my “won’t see at AIC” list includes anything by Archibald Motley and Adolph Manzel (two favorites). Peter de Lory’s Nighthawks (if they ever took down Hopper’s, there would probably be riots), and some obscure piece called American Gothic.
I wasn’t making note of everything not available, only the gallery number of what was.
For the record I was surprised they owned any Manzel at all, which made it particularly frustrating when I read “Yeah, we have some of his paintings… but you can’t see them!
An interesting and somewhat enlilghtening conversation. I’ve only visited the Institute once, in the late 70s. What struck me at that time was how poor the presentations of the art were. Monets stacked on top of each other. One of the great Hoppers covered with glass in a low ceilinged room with lighting that made it impossible to avoid glare when looking at the painting. As a Washingtonian, I’m used to seeing great paintings with great presentations. (One exception: The National Gallery of Art had Dali’s The Last Supper stuck in a corner of the reception area for years.)
I went to the Louvre once and their “not on display” list probably puts Chicago’s to shame. Although they jam the place full of as much art as they can fit on the walls. I looked at a spot that was all but blocked by an open door and there was a Renoir hanging there.
BBBB, I do not know what these people re thinking sometimes: few years ago there was a major exhibit at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, and the paining that was the “face” of the exhibit, the one they featured in all the publicity, was tucked into an alcove where none but the most intrepid explorers would stumble upon it.
(It also turned out to be the about the size of an index card; “You know, you look a lot bigger in your photos.”)
padraig, I suppose AIC’s list isn’t any worse than most; the difference being they were hiding away the stuff I specifically wanted to see on my first (and very possibly last) trip to Chicago.
I just hope the Cubs game isn’t rained out…
I well remember when the Picasso debuted on Daley Plaza (which, because Richard J. Daley was still mayor, was called something else at the time) . . . what a scandal! What an outcry!! What a guessing game to decide what it was!!! (An Afghan Hound was always my choice; no surprise there.)
This discussion has brought back so many wonderful memories of my times in Chicago; I remember Old Town when hippiedom first came to be a popular marketing tool; the original Second City, by Piper’s Alley; Pizzeria Uno and Pizzeria Due (in Piper’s Alley); and of course, WFMT, which was the radio station of choice for my parents. WLS and WCFL were played on my radio, tho.
According to today’s forecast, anything outdoors will be SNOWED out; 12-15″ of the heavy white stuff.
Rainy Day = La Place de l’Europe, by Gustave Caillebotte.. Ironically, I have an umbrella with this printed on it. Even more ironically, I never use it ’cause I’m afraid I’ll forget it some place.
Me again – my apologia for being so talkative on this subject; I’m an art history major AND I miss the Chicago of late 1960’s and early 1970’s. Yes, I know Richard J. was a tyrant and politically incorrect, but I sure enjoyed ‘his’ city for many years.
I thought American Gothic as at the National Gallery in DC. I could have sworn I saw it there a few years ago when I went.
I could also be incredibly confused and suffering from a Mengele Effect.
Mandela Effect?
There’s a bug in the recent comments section that I’ve seen several times now. I’ve refreshed the page a bunch of times, but still can’t see Bill’s 11:00 am comment in the recent comments list. Based on past experience, I predict that immediately after submitting this comment, I will see both Bill’s comment, and mine, in the list.
Prediction verified.
Cross another one off the list, sort of: AIC owns American Gothic, which they rarely lend out. But it’s going to be gone during the time I’m there.
…on loan to New York’s Whitney Museum, where we’re members.
The upside is, if you ever leave it somewhere, it’ll be easy to identify.
Andréa, that’s certainly nothing to apologize for here.
Which is why, Andréa, we’re going at the end of April.
My impression is that Chicago isn’t anywhere you’d want to be in the summer or in the winter.
Here it is in October in Chicago:
Geez, this thread is moving fast!
Hmm, Science may be worse than Art in terms of the ratio of items on display to total number of items in the collection. The Natural History Museum in London might be a winner, or anyway in the top division: they have 80 million specimens altogether! Some are no doubt tiny mosquitoes, but one I heard about today on a podcast (BBC Radio 4 In Our Time episode about Cephalopods) is a 9-metre juvenile giant squid preserved in alcohol. Plus they have a blue whale skeleton in the “entrance” hall (so-called because it leaves small children entranced. Ho ho).
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/collections.html (and http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09pjgrn for the In Our Time ep)
Okay, that worked out: one of the galleries I was most concerned about (Archibald Motley) is scheduled to re-open… tomorrow.
Maybe the curator’s ears were burning.
CIDU BILL: On Thanksgiving, I left a plain ol’ ordinary umbrella at a restaurant; it was still there the next day. THIS one, I’m sure would NOT be given to management for the lost & found box; it’s a beauty!
Being on Lake Michigan, Chicago weather is unpredictable, any time of year. April will be windy and chilly; may even have snow. Ninety miles north, we often did. Which is why I moved to Florida . . . better heat than cold.
Andréa Thst’s another way to look at it. I was figuring nobody could pick up your umbrella and claim deniability.
I should ask my wife whether she wants one when we’re there (I’m not an umbrella guy)
Andréa, I guess we’ll check the forecast the night before we leave, pack accordingly, and hope they’re somewhat accurate.
Speaking of Cubs, here are two songs/videos to watch . . . Steve Goodman sings both:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xBxZGQ1dJk & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xBxZGQ1dJk
We’ve gone to museums and the entire museum was closed when we got there! One of them down in Raleigh, NC was closed on Mondays – nice of them to not have that in the information. One day we will get back down there. Luckily it was a overnight stop along the way between Kings Mountain, SC and Williamsburg, VA.
“We’ve gone to museums and the entire museum was closed when we got there!”
OK. Let me tell you a story. My family took a trip that included a day in Disneyland when I was 5 or 6. For this story, you have to understand that I was very short. So what I remembered mostly about my trip to Disneyland was “you must be at least this tall to go on this fun ride” (and here you imagine me holding one hand about six inches over the top of my head.) One that was of particular interest to me was the Matterhorn bobsleds. I didn’t get to go on the Matterhorn bobsleds, and no, another trip through “It’s a Small World” won’t salve that wound. The only other thing I remember is being thoroughly terrified by the haunted mansion, but not in the “boy, that sure was a fun ride!” way.
So, fast forward to adulthood. We decided that, after getting married in Oregon, my new wife and I would honeymoon in southern California, including a visit to Disneyland. I made clear that the very first thing that had to happen was a ride on the Matterhorn bobsleds. We had plenty of time to tour the entire park, our hotel was right there and we didn’t have any other place we needed to be. But I layered this artificial urgency over the top of the trip. So, we were there for the rope drop, shot down main street to the Matterhorn, and, as you’ve probably guessed by now, the Matterhorn bobsleds were closed and half disassembled for renovations.
I’ve still never been on them.
It wasn’t all bad… we went in early January. It was a bone-chillingly cold (for native Angelenos) 70 degrees out, so the line for Splash Mountain was effectively nil. It takes some time to make your way back up to the top from the debark point, but we could basically walk from the bottom of the ride up to the top and get into the next boat. So, whereas I’ve never been on the Matterhorn bobsleds, I’ve been on Splash Mountain about 50 times.
I also still use this joke:
I went to Disneyland on my honeymoon. Fantasyland… pfft. They weren’t even CLOSE.