Devansh — Peel Journal

Friend’s of the MET

By - Devansh Shah

The project critically examines the intricate dynamics of power within The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, focusing on the institution's acquisition practices and the hierarchical structure underpinning its collection. It seeks to expose how The MET, under the guise of benevolent gifts and donations, has often disregarded the provenance of artifacts, thereby exerting institutional control and shaping cultural narratives through strategic appropriation.

This investigation delves into the manipulative tactics employed by The MET, including the selective procurement, categorization, and exhibition of artifacts and paintings. It scrutinizes the role of "The Friends of the MET", a group emblematic of the museum's complex hierarchy, revealing the intricate connections between donors, dealers, and the museum's administration. This network operates within a framework where artifacts are not merely pieces of art but tools wielded to construct and enforce a certain worldview.

The project situates its thematic exploration against the backdrop of the United States' quest for independence and the subsequent establishment of national identity through cultural institutions. In this context, The MET emerges not only as a repository of art but as a pivotal player in the cultural and aesthetic standardization that sought to homogenize a diverse citizenry. The project aims to dismantle the paradoxical narrative perpetuated by the museum's acquisition manifesto, which ostensibly utilizes artifacts to champion themes of power and cultural sophistication while simultaneously appropriating the historical narrative of these objects.

“Framed Friends”
Act I Scene I (01:35)

The ‘oxymoron’ narrative is the grounds for the whole scene. Thomas Hoving, who some consider the Leader of the metropolitan museums collecting era speaks of the museum being a collection different from the ones in Europe. He describes the MET as wholly American, far different from the colonial collections belonging to a royal family, like those in The Louvre or the British Museum, but rather a collection for the people.

Expanding upon this narrative, the MET's grand strategy of acquisition often intersected with controversial practices, such as the procurement of artifacts that were, in many cases, tantamount to cultural plunder. The museum's extensive collection, a testament to its global reach and influence, was not without its ethical quandaries. The "black book" of Thomas Hoving didn't just represent a network of art dealers but also hinted at a more clandestine world of art acquisition, where the lines between legal procurement and illicit appropriation were frequently blurred.

Artifacts housed within the MET's walls are not merely objects of aesthetic admiration but also bearers of rich cultural heritage and history. However, the journey of these artifacts, from their countries of origin to the display cases of the MET, is often shadowed by narratives of exploitation and cultural theft. Countries rich in heritage but vulnerable due to various socio-political factors became fertile grounds for such activities, where priceless artifacts were extracted under dubious circumstances. This complex web of acquisition, involving art dealers, intermediaries, and sometimes even smugglers, raises profound questions about the morality of art collection.

It's a narrative that prompts a reevaluation of the ethics of museum collections, challenging institutions to confront their pasts and consider the legacy of their acquisitions, not just in terms of cultural enrichment but also in the context of cultural restitution and moral responsibility. Countries such as Nepal, Cambodia, Italy, India, Egypt, and others, especially from the Western world, were often the focus of this expansive cultural acquisition, a process that, while adding to the MET's prestige, also raises critical discussions about cultural appropriation and the ethics of art collection.

“Family Tree”
Act I Scene II (02:35)

Founded in 1870 by a coalition of influential white men, The MET was presented as an institution aimed at the cultural upliftment and education of the populace. This noble façade, articulated by Joseph Choate on the opening night, belied a more complex reality. The museum's acquisition of 174 European paintings and a vast array of artifacts from across the globe was facilitated not only through institutional efforts but also through the contributions of affluent individuals.

These patrons were often motivated by the prospects of tax concessions and enhanced social standing within the elite circles of the art world.

“Global Transitions”
Act II Scene I (03:00)

The story transitions into a flashback, revealing a clandestine rivalry among the MET Museum, the Louvre, and the British Museum. The competition centers around who possesses the most extensive network and influence among art dealers, smugglers, and looters.

A recurring theme is their tactic of feigning ignorance, captured in the frequently used phrase "Play Dumb," whenever their dubious activities are exposed.

“The Gala”
Act 2 Scene II (3:30)
Consequently, The MET's collection came to represent not just an assemblage of art but a carefully curated manifestation of history, culture, taste, and morality. It effectively established a new metric for social stratification based on wealth and cultural capital, supplanting traditional hereditary hierarchies.

Bibliography
- Art Crime Prof. (n.d.). Read Me. Retrieved 05/15/23, from https://www.artcrimeprof.com/read-me
- Kaylan, M. (2009, December 22). Thomas Hoving, Museum Visionary. Forbes.