Cleveland Art Museum

The Cleveland Art Museum is slat­ed for a $258M ex­pan­sion in the com­ing year. I’m glad that they’ll have a chance to get more of their large col­lec­tion on dis­play, but I can’t help but think that $258M dol­lars [and the $8M chipped in by the state] could do a lot more good else­where. Yes, pri­vate donors can do­nate wher­ev­er the hell they want to, but what’ll it take to make ‘em do­nate to the eco­nom­ic de­vel­op­ment of the re­gion? Hopefully the $80M/​yr es­ti­mate will hold true by at­tract­ing more vis­i­tors to the area, and I’m glad to see that they say ad­mis­sion will still be free, but we’ll see what six years of con­struc­tion does to that tune. I wish they’d got­ten a Cleveland ar­chi­tect for the de­sign in­stead of Rafael Viñoly. A friend of mine al­so took ex­cep­tion to this:

Rafael Vi? [sic], the in­ter­na­tion­al­ly renowned ar­chi­tect who de­signed the project and a na­tive of Uruguay, called the ap­plause that fol­lowed the vote Monday “an al­most Latin lev­el of en­thu­si­asm. These peo­ple are re­al­ly hap­py.”

Apparently norteam­er­i­canos don’t get re­al­ly ex­cit­ed about stuff? Welcome to Cleveland, bub.

Hey, I’m grouchy to­day; I’m com­plain­ing about good things. I’m al­so ig­no­rant and not rich so I’m sure by to­mor­row I’ll have changed my mind some­what. I’m still glad it is hap­pen­ing. Shaddup Adam.

4 thoughts on “Cleveland Art Museum

  1. Evidently, the Cleveland MA has one of the largest en­dow­ments in the coun­try, par­tial­ly en­abling them to keep their ad­mis­sion free. I don’t see this chang­ing in the next six years. It’s some ridicu­lous­ly high mil­lion dol­lar num­ber or some­thing, and half of that en­dow­ment goes to­ward pur­chas­ing. The oth­er half is used for oth­er pur­pos­es. So they don’t need to make mon­ey. They al­so seem to pride them­selves on their free ad­mis­sion, tout­ing that they and the National Gallery of Art are the on­ly re­main­ing free ma­jor art mu­se­ums in the coun­try.

    With Cleveland be­ing this great big dead city like it is, it is nice to see at least SOMEthing in the city is revered enough to be de­vel­oped. Cleveland does have one of the fin­er art col­lec­tions in the coun­try (per­haps not as im­pres­sive as New York), so it is worth in­vest­ing in.

  2. Yea, I got­ta agree with your last sen­tence (the whole “shaddup” thing). Sure, the $$ *could* be used for oth­er civic de­vel­op­ments. But, to their own cred­its, the arts con­tin­ue to be a hard sell in Cleveland. We’re mak­ing im­prove­ments, but it still has a ways to go. So, to that end, I say “yeah!” for the Cleveland Museum of Art hav­ing the cash to be able to make these im­prove­ments and ex­pan­sions. I’ve been to a good # of art mu­se­ums and CMA con­tin­ues to be one of the best around (ob­vi­ous­ly, not as good as NYC, but that’s NYC), so I see their im­prove­ments as keep­ing up the lev­el of qual­i­ty they’ve had through the years. True, I feel their mod­ern art sec­tion to be lack­lus­ter and pret­ty bland, but here’s hop­ing they im­prove that with the funds. 

    I would much rather see this cash go the Museum rather than some­thing like an­oth­er go­daw­ful con­ven­tion cen­ter or, worse yet, a casi­no or some shit.

  3. Yeah, I don’t think a con­ven­tion cen­ter or casi­no would do any good ei­ther, but I se­ri­ous­ly doubt that ex­pand­ing the mu­se­um is go­ing to sup­ply $80M to this area. Even Legacy Village fell through on its much much low­er es­ti­mate

  4. That’s be­cause, while lega­cy vil­lage is nice to look at, I don’t know any­one who can af­ford half the crap they sell there.

Comments are closed.