Subject: Exhibition and transport of Seurat painting
The following appeared on Museum-l and is reproduced here without the knowledge or consent of the author. Date: 23 Feb 95 Sender: Museum discussion list <museum-l [at] unmvma__bitnet> From: justabuz <butane [at] cpcn__com> Subject: Seurat Les Poseuses risked in Barnes show at Phila. This posting addresses the facts behind the decision of the Philadelphia Museum of Art and the Barnes Foundation trustees to endanger the rare and fragile Seurat painting, The Models for inclusion in the exhibit at the Museum of Art. In 1992, politically motivated trustees, eager to turn the Barnes Foundation's school into a full-time museum, petitioned the court to allow a tour of paintings that violated the Foundation's Indenture of Trust. Bowing to political pressure, the court ultimately accepted the Trustees' highly publicized bid. However, testimony in the hearings, ignored by the local media, revealed the fragile state of several works including The Models, that the Barnes Trustees and their Museum sponsors insisted on touring. Supporters of the Foundation's art education program presented testimony by the Foundations' former painting conservator Wendy Samet. Samet was familiar with the fragility of certain works and opposed their traveling under any circumstances. However, she was dismissed by Foundation President Richard Glanton shortly before the tour-plan was made public. Glanton claimed she was dismissed because "the Foundation [could] obtain expert service at no cost from the National Gallery." The National Gallery's director later denied its involvement in any conservation treatment such as Samet performed. The American Institute for Conservation's president, Paul Himmelstein, called Samet "highly qualified" in an Inquirer article published shortly after her firing. Samet was asked under oath,, June 9, 1992 "Why do you have the opinion that [Seurat's Models] should not be allowed to tour no matter what conservation is performed?" She replied: "Because when I was up on scaffolding looking at it closely, I noticed that it had a long history of flaking. The painting has been lined. It has been treated in the past. Because of the materials and the way they were applied by Mr. Seurat, they are not well bound to the canvas. And there's a history of chronic flaking of the paint, chronic loss of paint, which although you can address it locally setting down each flake as it's loose, its whole construction makes it insecure and makes that type of flaking likely. I would recommend that it go to one spot [during the closing of the Foundation's galleries], preferably with as little travel and crating and jostling as possible." The 1991 National Gallery of Art publication Art in Transit, includes a handbook "describing procedures that will enable packers, registrars, curators, and conservators to effectively use the results of the research of specialists in the field." The handbook advises caution when considering loan of glue lined paintings such as The Models "Since glue and paste lining adhesives are very susceptible to dimensional changes with relative humidity variations." It further recommends "The painting should not have a history of chronic instability in the support or paint layer such as recurring paint flaking. Such chronic problems indicate an unstable structure that is more responsive to environmental changes making the painting more vulnerable and increases the loan risks." A February 1993 report by the National Gallery's Ross Merrill confirms Samet's observations. "Flaking has occurred... insecure paint was found along the edges." However Merrill recommended that the work "in its present state is secure for travel." Ignoring Samet's testimony, and relying on Merrill's the Court approved The Models' travel to Washington, Paris, Tokyo and Philadelphia. In January of 1994, Merrill inspected the Barnes works in Tokyo. He then recommended against The Models being allowed to travel to two new venues added by the Barnes trustees after his original assessment. Merrill's specious argument insisted that the painting suffered no damage, but that the additional venues would create "undue risk" Common sense would dictate that either the work had been weakened since it left the Barnes Foundation, or it was too weak to start, as foretold by Wendy Samet two years earlier. With this questionable conservation history in mind, the judge who allowed the tour ordered the Seurat "returned to The Barnes Foundation at the close of the exhibition in Tokyo." However, the Barnes trustees and the Museum of Art quietly added the Seurat to the Philadelphia exhibition list and included it on the cover of the catalog. With some last minute legal wrangling, the kind which the powerful have always been able to pull off, the Seurat was allowed in the current show. Clearly, the safety of the painting should have come before catalog sales and ticket promotions, but this is not a polite topic for the media, most of whom are now feeding off the Museum's "planned marketing budget of $247,000." For further information write: Barnes Watch, Post Office Box 49 Broomall, PA 19008. *** Conservation DistList Instance 8:68 Distributed: Saturday, February 25, 1995 Message Id: cdl-8-68-002 ***Received on Friday, 24 February, 1995