Selling Chagall to buy David seems unwise
Re History vs. taste in the art world, April 17 Selling the Marc Chagall to pay for the JacquesLouis David is unwise and probably not necessary. If the National Gallery of Canada won’t use its entire acquisitions budget to buy the David, what about instalment payments? Or a loan to cover the full price, secured on the Chagall? The loan could cover paying the costs of withdrawing the Chagall from sale, as well. And be repaid from next year’s acquisition budget.
Collaborating with Quebec museums is the best idea of all. British national museums already club together to buy important works and keep them in the country.
Deaccessioning is now routine, especially in American museums. When the Metropolitan Museum in New York sold art to buy a great Velasquez, it sold off modern art. But the Met knew the art it sold would be replaced in due course.
The NGC is not a big American museum. It can’t afford to buy a new Chagall this fine. And after it sells this, potential donors will be wary of donating art to the NGC. Deaccessioning the Chagall will cost the NGC more in the long run than the sale itself will fetch. Anne Thackray, art historian, Toronto I have a question for Murray Whyte. Why is the David painting considered much more significant than the Chagall? I have studied art history and have done two recent internet searches on Jacques-Louis. There is no mention of the Saint Jérome painting, which makes me think it’s not very significant in David’s oeuvre.
Does the fact it’s been in Canada since 1817 make it a significant Canadian painting? How long has the Chagall been in Canada?
I expect, over the long term, that the Chagall would draw more visitors than an 18th-century religious painting. I can understand its significance to the Catholic Church in Quebec, as well as to the province. I like the idea of three museums owning the David painting. But wouldn’t that also be a idea for the Chagall painting? Isabel Ward, Toronto The National Gallery of Canada is selling one French painting in order to purchase another. Murray Whyte thinks this has something to do with Canadian paintings, but he doesn’t explain why. Obviously the best way to support Canadian painting would be to spend the money on Canadian paintings. No? Aaron Sidney Wright, Palo Alto, Calif.