Art of Steal

The “Art of Steal” is a 2009 documentary that sought to expose the biggest art heist of the 21st century. The documentary delves into a scandalous plan to move the Barnes Foundation’s $25 billion collections of post-impressionist and modernist art from its original location in Philadelphia suburbs to a new downtown gallery contrary to the will of the Founder. This essay gives an analysis of the documentary through three of its leadership phases under Barnes, Glanton, and Watson.  

Barnes was responsible for setting the foundation into action. He had made his fortune in the pharmaceuticals and spent it on collections of art. This included dozens of art by Matisse, Cezanne, and Renoir. Barnes was a visionary leader, collecting the greatest art works in the history of the world when the American art establishment considered this art as unappealing to the audience and of little value. The art is disapproved and denounced by art critics. However, with his access to resources, he goes ahead and accumulates great works of art. Though his collection is out of passion, they accumulate to high values over time. Barnes is in conflict with other museums whom he views as having less appreciation for this art. He also detested the idea of a private collection for home but instead wanted his collection to form a school. The Barnes collection remained closed from the public. His will also communicates his vision of wanting the collection to remain an educational institution, and that is should never be sold or loaned. 

Glanton’s reign at the Barnes Foundation was characterized by limited resources. When he was first appointed to head the institution, he came up with a plan to raise money. However, to do so, it required some art collections to be sold to raise sufficient cash to cover for the restoration. Attempts to raise money produced a fierce tug of war pitting Mr. Glanton and the trustees against Barnes loyalists who maintained the institution should stay exactly as it had been. When things did no go as planned, Glanton fired the whole Art Advisory Board. The thirst for power and fame is also evident in Glanton’s reign. He becomes a hero and went against Barnes wishes to exhibit his collection at the Philadelphia Museum. Though it did raise money for the art museum, the subsequent parties and confrontation with neighbors turned. The ensuing case litigation against the residents around the museum also cost the museum some financial strain. 

Watson’s reign was characterized by coercion and mistakes that went against Barnes’s wishes. His negotiation with Pew for funds to save the museum was surrounded by mistakes that saw the foundation moved. During the negotiation, he sidelined Lincoln University and cut a deal with Pew. His reign betrayed Barnes, and the Philadelphia establishment had access to his collection of art. The decision by Watson to move the museum was also informed by the cash strapped status of the institution. Moreover, increased visits to the museum would not have been possible at its current location.

Overall, the leadership by Barnes stands out for the sole reason that the founders had access to resources. However, Glanton and Watson’s reign were characterized by poor decision, power struggles, and self-interest. Additionally, the rules laid out by Barnes’ will, such as restriction on loaning and sale of art, also aided in adding to their woes. 

WE’VE HAD A GOOD SUCCESS RATE ON THIS ASSIGNMENT. PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH PapersSpot AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT

References

Argott, D. (2015, June 23). Greatest Art Movie Ever “Art of the Steal” (2009). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opOczQeFIb4