“Presented every two years, the Commonwealth Awards shine a spotlight on the extraordinary contributions the arts, humanities, and sciences make to education, economic growth and vitality, and quality of life in communities across Massachusetts. The Commonwealth Awards ceremony also presents an opportunity for the Massachusetts nonprofit cultural sector to gather, assert its value, and make the case for public investment in its work.
Past winners include leading artists, writers, and scholars such as Olympia Dukakis and David McCullough; world-renowned institutions like Jacob’s Pillow Dance Festival and the Peabody Essex Museum; and social innovators like the Cambridge Science Festival and the Barr Foundation.”
The city of Gloucester received a Commonwealth Award in 2015.
Spread The GMG Love By Sharing With These Buttons:
Berkshire Eagle just received the JFK Commonwealth Award. Berkshire Eagle 2019 arts coverage included the outstanding work by Larry Parnass on the Berkshire Museum deaccession story. Well done!
Stay tuned for the MCC announcement of the winner of the 13 finalists.
Spread The GMG Love By Sharing With These Buttons:
In 2017, the Berkshire Museum was sued multiple times because of the possible sales of 40 works of art at public auctions. The art has long left the building. The winning consignor, Sotheby’s auction house, received all property prior to the 2017 public announcement from museum leadership blowing its “New Vision” horn. The art remains on hold at Sotheby’s.
At high noon on March 20, 2018, in Courtroom 2 of the John Adams Courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts, Justice David Lowy presided over the ongoing Berkshire Museum deaccession litigation. Four attorneys, two for each side, were summoned before the Massachusetts Supreme Court to argue positions. Justice Lowy began the hearing by addressing the elephant in the room. He announced that because the Attorney General Office and the Berkshire Museum, former adversaries, petitioned the court together for necessary relief, he thought it was important to hear opposing views. Therefore, he invited amici to present their arguments, too.
Naturally, this hearing was welcome news for opponents of the museum’s plans to liquidate a priceless core collection in favor of a makeover, still reeling from their perception that the Attorney General abdicated mightily February 9, 2018. Trustees, who believe the museum is broke and will shutter any day if not for this new strategy, were disheartened but determined.
Justice Lowy made the stunning announcement upfront that restrictions do apply, and are a given. The Office of the Attorney General (AGO) and the Supreme Court agree about standing. The museum maintains it has the right to liquidate. The only way that any art can be sold is if the legal contracts pertaining to the Berkshire Museum’s charter and mission and provenance for the art are abandoned because the museum successfully conveys its pending demise. Then it gets a do-over. The legal term is cy pres (pronounced say, pray. I prefer pray stay!)
IF sold, Norman Rockwell’s Shuffleton’s Barbershop, which has crystal clear provenance, was estimated to fetch the highest price at auction. Inexplicably, the petition before the court boasted of a breezy compromise between the AGO and Berkshire Museum: an anonymous museum will purchase the painting for 1)an undisclosed price (I guarantee that it’s less than public auction), 2) promises a temporary display in Massachusetts, at the Norman Rockwell Museum, and 3)eventually feature it as part of the mystery museum’s permanent collection. Where is the museum? What is the sale price and terms? If its destiny is beyond a Massachusetts border, why isn’t the Commonwealth protecting its resources?*
*Which museum committed funds for Shuffleton Barbershop  and can afford to pounce and avoid driving up the price at auction? Perhaps Crystal Bridges Museum backed by Wal-Mart heiress, Alice Walton, could strike again. Norman Rockwell is already represented in its collection. Is it worth it to add another? The Lucas Museum of Narrative Art could be a contender. George Lucas boasts an impressive Rockwell collection, including ideal examples with cinematic connections or narratives, like the stunning study for charwomen (in movie theater). Is that enough representation to let it go were Berkshire Museum Rockwells cleared to sell?
The other works of art could be sold, or not. One doesn’t get the impression that the AGO was stepping in for the underdog. Leave it to Norman Rockwell to capture the attention of a busy world to illustrate a simple maxim: do the right thing. If legal manuevering is necessary, like crazy zoning variances for unfair construction, most collections will be at a disadvantage. It’s up to the Massachusetts Supreme Court to remedy this balderdash & betrayal else risk breaking the bank of non profits across the country.
Justice Lowy asked that the attorneys focus their arguments on selling with restrictions: “Is it necessary and impossible or impracticable for the Museum’s charitable mission to continue?” All parties stuck to this request, and to their filed briefs more or less. I tried to capture word for word the moments when Justice Lowy interrupted rote statements. Justice Lowy has made no decisions, yet. Eventually, he will decide whether to allow the parties’ petition, deny it, or reserve and report which means bringing the case back to the full court.
Proponents side or Opponents side?
Upon arrival, where to sit at the courtroom felt like where to sit at a wedding. The Berkshire Museum Trustees, Director Van Shields, and those in favor of the Berkshire Museum deaccession sale sat together on the left side of the courtroom. Opponents, numbering 2:1, sat in the center, off to the right, and spilled into the hall. With every available chair claimed some were left standing in the back.
Berkshire Museum Trustees March 20, 2018 at Massachusetts Supreme Court (front row far left Director Van Shields seated next to Trustees Chair Elizabeth McGraw)
Up first – Attorney Nicholas M. O’Donnell
of Sullivan & Worcester LLP law firm and Erika Todd on behalf of ‘Berkshire Museum Member Plaintiffs’: James Hatt, Kristin Hatt, and Elizabeth WeinbergÂ
O’Donnell excerpt- “Massachusetts stands alone, this decision puts Massachusetts alone …That this court, this petition, this hearing, may be the ONLY obstacle left to account for this action should be unimaginable. IF a conclusory report of operational deficits can support the liquidation for the sale…Make no mistake, I say the art market is watching–”
Justice Lowy cut in- “Maybe they are. I’ve certainly read your key points, Maybe not. Systemic issues that flow from this are not my focus…”
WWII poster, Loose Lips might Sink Ships Seymour R Goff (“essargee“) From 1934-43, milions of New Deal and Works Progress Administration (WPA) posters (original silkscreens, woodcuts and lithos) were created from nearly 35, 000 designs for various government agencies. All the poster divisions were transferred to the War Department by 1942. Seagram sponsored this one.
On Wednesday, November 1, 2017, there was a hearing in Berkshire Superior Court concerning efforts to block the upcoming Sotheby’s sale of Berkshire Museum art. Judge John Agostini presided over the hearing. Apparently the plaintiff cases were not enough; the Attorney General’s office filed an emergency motion DURING yesterday’s two hour hearing. There was a large audience. More than one observer felt that the courtroom scene looked like a Norman Rockwell painting. Judge Agostini said he will make his decision soon.
Here’s the conclusion from The Berkshire Eagle article by Larry Parnass (they’ll be getting awards for their coverage):
Trustees acted unreasonably, she said, by treating the art collection as “fungible.”
The term refers to a commodity that can be traded for something else, such as cash.
Instead, Aladro said, the board turned away from its “core legacy” as a museum and took steps that will sever its connection to cultural institutions it needs to hold future exhibitions. “You ask what the museum did wrong,” Keating said to the judge. “They violated their own written policies.”  Briefs filed in the case show that trustees voted to sign a contract with Sotheby’s weeks before removing provisions from policies that prohibited selling art in the way it intends. Keating also accused trustees of secrecy. “They knew there would be pushback. They didn’t want to face this.” He pointed to an email sent last May by the trustees president, Elizabeth McGraw, that asked fellow trustees to keep quiet. The subject line of the email read, “Loose lips sink ships.” “They didn’t want this ship sunk,” Keating said.Â
Good Morning Gloucester 