The Art Newspaper

Who owns museum-commissioned works?

Should museums recoup their production costs by taking a position that they have a stake in the work?

By Brett Littman | From issue 197, December 2008
Published online 17 Dec 08 (opinion)

I read with great interest the article published in November 2008 in The Art Newspaper (p62) about the dealer Emmanuel Perrotin’s new business venture, Artists’ Dreams. According to Mr Perrotin, the primary goal of Artists’ Dreams will be to create a private investment pool to finance the production of large-scale works by his and other dealers’ artists for commercial and museum exhibitions. An elaborate sliding scale has been established to calculate the percentage of profit a gallery will make in relationship to the investors based on the length of time it takes to sell the work—the shorter the sales time, the better the gallery does; the longer the sales time, the better the investor does.

Perrotin’s Artists’ Dreams, although a purely commercial project, directly addresses one of the most complicated and thorny issues in the museum world today. Who owns a work of art that is produced, developed and partially or fully paid for by an institution? At the end of the exhibition, should the work be given to the artist with no strings attached to sell later in a commercial gallery? Should galleries be able to “invest” in these works and at the end of the exhibition back out of their investment and profit without paying back the institutions? Or should museums expect their production costs to be recouped by taking a contractual position that they have an ownership stake in the work?

I am a member of an ad hoc group, the Contemporary Art Museum Directors’ Association (CAMD). At our recent meeting in Baltimore, this issue of who owns museum-commissioned work came up many times. There was no clear consensus about what criteria should be put into place to deal with the “ownership” problem. Several institutions in the group primarily support the production of new works of art. At the end of the artist’s residency or exhibition at these institutions, the ownership reverts to the artist and he is allowed to do whatever he likes with his work. However, for the vast majority of non-collecting institutions in CAMD whose missions are not focused on supporting new artistic production, these commissions result in the creation of works of art with commercial value that they may or may not have an ownership stake in.

Of course, many museums have good contractual policies for these types of projects that clearly outline their rights. Some institutions require the artist or dealer to reimburse their investment in the production of the work when it is sold. One big problem with this method is, however, that most small museums have difficulty tracking the works’ sale, and it is often difficult to collect the payment especially if the work has taken a long time to find its way to market. If the artist or dealer has also provided funding, it becomes almost impossible to find an equitable percentage split between the partners.

At The Drawing Center in New York, we are not often involved in these types of projects or situations. However, for our current exhibition “Just Like an Ant Walking on the Edge of the Visible” (until 5 February 2009) with the graphic design duo M/M (Paris), we did help to produce a set of 41 stools (shown here) for the installation—which is very different from asking an artist to create new drawings. The overall production budget for this project was relatively high for us. To make the project work, M/M (Paris) graciously invested in the project and helped to secure two major sponsors. The Drawing Center also raised money for the production through a private foundation and through our patron group.

But in the course of the negotiations for the exhibition, I capitulated and said that The Drawing Center would not in the future ask for remuneration for our “stake” in the stools, although we had made a proportional staff and monetary investment in the project. It seemed the fair thing to do in this case, as well as being the expedient way to move the project forward. When our exhibition closes, the stools will travel to another museum and then will probably end up consigned to one of M/M’s commercial galleries. I cannot predict the eventual retail price of the full installation, but what I am sure of is that someone will most likely profit from this collaboration down the line, and it will not be The Drawing Center.

The writer is executive director of The Drawing Center, New York

Comments