Should Detroit Sell Its High-Value Art Collection to Pay for Its Bankruptcy? Only If it Cares About its Finances – or Art

I’ve got a new column up
at The Daily Beast, in which I argue that Detroit should the
collection at the Detroit Art Insitute (DIA) for up to an estimated
$866 million. Not only would such a move make a serious dent in
Motown’s debt problem, it would also allow the art to be sent to
places where it might actually be seen.

Here’s a snippet:

What sort of message would it send to current and future
residents—not to mention current and future bondholders—if Detroit
refuses to put everything on the table? You can’t eat the DIA’s
“Still
Life With Fruit, Vegatables, and Dead Game,” no matter how
well-rendered, and for most of the past 80 years, the city has been
subsidizing not just the day-to-day running of the museum but also
its acquisitions. Such spendthrift priorities are one small reason
why the burg is in such bad shape to begin with (and also why the
city has relatively clear title to the artworks under
consideration).

Building a future around a
slogan like Detroit: Come for the Bankruptcy but Stay
for the
Bruegel is no way to resurrect a city
whose population
peaked back in 1950. As urban theorist Joel
Kotkin has put it, “We
get it wrong. We think the cultural amenities drives the prosperity
[in cities], when it’s really the prosperity that drives the
cultural amenities.” Artifacts from past periods of
wealth—especially publicly funded museums, sports
stadiums, orchestras,
and the like—are luxury goods that never pay for themselves, either
directly or indirectly. Detroit can rebuild its municipally owned
art collection if and when it can afford to cover expenses related
to activities beyond the core functions of government. Until then,
let the bidding begin!

Read the whole thing.