Is the DIA Collection DOA?

The looming liquidation of priceless works from the Detroit Institute of Arts' collection as part of the city's bankruptcy plight has been delayed for a few weeks (at least), though it still seems likely that such a sale will occur and denude the institution of irreplaceable works by Bruegel, Van Gogh and Matisse. The DIA is likely to mount a legal challenge to the sale, and should be expected to if it's not to scrap its mission to maintain a nationally-ranked collection of art in the public trust. But the definition of "public trust" surely will be at the heart of any such legal battle, as will the controversial practice of monetizing museum collections in the context of such democratic ownership. 

Bruegel's Wedding Dance at the DIA (for now...)

The DIA's case resonates on some levels with the Albright-Knox Art Gallery's deaccessioning of a few years ago - the main differences being that the Gallery's effort was not driven by municipal bankruptcy, but by a proactive and strategic impetus to improve its collection. With the Albright-Knox, it was a case of collection building, with the DIA, it's a collection being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  

Still, the Gallery's move generated a surprising degree of public debate, much of it hinging on the same issues of the public trust that come to the fore today in Detroit. At the time, I felt compelled to jump into the fray and add my two cents to those of Carl Dennis, Bruce Jackson and others in the Artvoice forum.

Three works deaccessioned from the Albright-Knox collection (New York Times)

Given what's at stake in the DIA case, I hope there's at least as much healthy debate as there was in Buffalo, and the current stay of execution will allow more time for cases to be made on both sides.