Nitin Bhayana: A tale of two museums

BUSINESS CLASS/ The NGMA must realise that selling works is not neccesarily a bad thing

Should a museum own too many works by a single artist? Should it own too many masterpieces? Unlike India, most museums in the West do not think so.

The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York, is leading the way in the West in de-accessioning works of masters such as Picasso, Modigliani and Bacon in recent years to raise resources for its operations, for future purchases and in weeding out works that might not fit into its core philosophy.

Selling, or rather upgrading, is a phenomenon not uncommon with museums the world over. But should such a model be adopted for our cash-starved National Gallery of Modern Art (NGMA) and other regional museums, which could really do with the money?

A comparison between the MoMA, undoubtedly one of the finest contemporary art museums, and the NGMA, our very own sleepy institution, reveals some interesting facts. The MoMA has a total collection of 3,500 works while the NGMA has over 14,000.

Although the MoMA displays about one tenth of its collection at any point, it makes certain that its works are rotated regularly, lent the world over and seen regularly in various social and curatorial contexts.

The NGMA, on the other hand, has probably never been able to show more than 1,000 works since its inception. In fact, of this vast number of works, more than 4,000 works are of a single artist "" Nandalal Bose.

Museums, the world over, have a core collection upon which they continue to build.

They court art collectors, dealers and curators who become integral partners in the museum's development and help donate, research or garner funds for the museum. The MoMA has vast endowments and gifts from corporations and high net worth individuals such as the Rockefellers whose various family members have bequeathed works to the institution.

The NGMA, on the other hand, has never built any relationships of such nature with the art community. It has no policy for accepting donations from private individuals so it continues to purchase average works of artists randomly with the Rs 40 lakh it gets from the ministry.

The MoMA, on the other hand, has in its disposal $43 million in acquisition funds and $15 million in acquisition endowments, of which it can spend five per cent annually on art purchases.

The NGMA should learn a thing or two from the MoMA and de-accession works it finds it can easily do without. The MoMA has sold some 370 works in its history, or over 10 per cent of its collection!

It has pocketed a whopping $79.7 million from art sales over the last five years alone. Why is it not feasible for the NGMA to sell, say 50 Nandalal Bose's each year and acquire important works it has not been able to since the 1960s?

The fact is that Rs 40 lakh today doesn't even buy you an important Tyeb Mehta. If the NGMA does not do something about its acquisition budget, it will end up like the fine arts museum in Chandigarh whose budget of Rs 60,000 has not changed since its inception. To acquire an Arpana Caur, it had to wait for three years!

The NGMA needs to understand that selling is not necessarily a bad thing. If the MoMA can sell works of masters that any museum or collector would consider a treasure, why can't the NGMA do the same and give the public a collection that is more 'Modern'.

Although such a thing might be tough to implement initially, chances are that soon it will become an accepted norm over time.