Saturday, September 26, 2020

Rotting Flowers and VARA

From Donn Zaretsky and Ed Winkelman comes good news for artists. After the dismal MASS MoCA decision, the artist Chapman Kelley has won a dispute with the Chicago Park District in federal court, in a case that bears on what can be classified as a work of art under the law.

Read the rest of this entry »


MASS MoCA Will Not Exhibit Büchel’s Artwork

After Christoph Büchel decided late yesterday to appeal Judge Ponsor’s decision to allow MASS MoCA to remove the yellow tarps and exhibit his art project, Training Ground for Democracy, without his consent, MASS MoCA decided today against removing the tarps and exhibiting it.

Read the rest of this entry »


Judge Rules MASS MoCA Can Exhibit Büchel’s Art Without His Consent

On Friday, September 21, federal judge Michael A. Ponsor ruled that the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art has the right to display Christoph Büchel’s unfinished art project without the artist’s consent.

This is a death-blow to contemporary artists, national and international alike. On its face, it gives a granting and/or commissioning institution the power to exhibit an artist’s art work without her/his permission unless there is a written agreement to the contrary. Theoretically, the judge’s decision eviscerates an artist’s power to dictate when the artist’s project is in a state where the artist feels comfortable and willing to put it out for public exposure. In effect, Judge Ponsor has now allowed museums and cultural institutions—and perhaps any institution—the ultimate say in what is and isn’t art. Tell that to Duchamp.

What MASS MoCA and its director, Joe Thompson, should realize, is that although they have been granted the legal right to show Büchel’s artwork, this doesn’t necessarily mean that they should. According to MASS MoCA, they will come to a decision as to whether or not to continue exhibiting Buchel’s work by this coming Tuesday. Even if they come to their senses and not continue to exhibit Büchel’s work, the damage has been done. Unless appealed, the ruling now gives visual artists much less protection under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), making this federal law much more useless than before.

On a side note, it is interesting to note the lack of support for Büchel from other artists. It is perhaps the nature of the current artworld beast, or the primary law of economics once again: supply vs. demand. When the supply of artists is at an all time high, artists are much less tempted to protest or organize for fear of being black-balled or denied a low-probability opportunity to exhibit at MASS MoCA. One can only wonder if the judge’s decision would have differed had there been more of an outcry from individual artists and not just Ed Winkleman, Robert Storr and Roberta Smith.

If there is anything remotely beneficial that came out of this mess, its MASS MoCA’s blog, which was begun this past July, and seemingly to counteract the negative press they were receiving from blogs, newspapers, and journals alike. However, although they try–in typical for-profit corporate fashion–to soften the negative impact of their blows upon artists, the blog seems to be misleading the public–specifically questions 5 and 8.

According to the court documents submitted, there was no written agreement between Büchel and MASS MoCA. Therefore, and to clarify any misunderstandings and misrepresentations, CLANCCO has asked MASS MoCA to provide us, and to their constituency in their blog, with a copy of the agreement between Büchel and the Museum. Additionally, their claim that their lawsuit against Büchel will not have any negative consequences on legal protection for visual artists and their artworks is ridiculous to say the least. In summation, MASS MoCA has in effect NOT narrowed the legal decision to apply solely to Büchel, but rather guaranteed that all artists are now subject to have their artistic ideas exhibited and shown to the public in any state of completion and at any time by setting the legal and binding precedent that “VARA does not address the display of unfinished work or the display of materials assembled for use in a work of art.”

UPDATE: As of Tuesday, September 25th, MASS MoCA has not accepted our request to make the agreement public, nor have they posted our request and made it public on their blog.


Erasure, Indifference, Willful Ignorance: Ken Burns and PBS

According to his bio,

Ken Burns is an award-winning documentary filmmaker and a premiere historian of U.S. American history. According to historian Stephen Ambrose,“More Americans get their history from Ken Burns than any other source.”

Burns’ new documentary film, The War, to be shown on PBS in September of 2007, and recently screened at the Cannes Film Festival, documents the Second World War from a U.S. American perspective through the eyes, memories, and recollections of a few “American” WWII veterans and civilians.

Read the rest of this entry »


Roberta Smith: “MASS MoCA A Depressing Spectacle”

As is well known by now Roberta Smith, art critic for the New York Times, weighed in on the MASS MoCA v. Christoph Buchel lawsuit in last week’s New York Times “Arts and Leisure” Section. A quick update: Smith believes that MASS MoCA and Joe Thompson stepped way out of line when they disregarded Buchel’s request that his work not be installed and shown without his permission. In effect, Smith summarized Thompson’s grandstanding as such: “When a museum behaves badly, it’s never pretty. But few examples top the depressing spectacle at the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art.” Our guess–Thompson is looking for a new job!


McMullen Museum of Art Claims Fair Use of Pollock Images

Donn Zaretsky and Steven Levitt reported yesterday that The Pollock Krasner Foundation in New York, whose mission is to safeguard the legacy of Jackson Pollock and his wife, Lee Krasner, refused six months ago to allow the McMullen Museum of Art at Boston College to reproduce authentic Pollocks alongside the newly discovered works.

But the exhibition’s catalog — released only last Saturday afternoon — reproduced a handful of authentic Pollocks against the foundation’s wishes. “We were shocked to find that the museum had published copyrighted images in their catalog,” Ronald Spencer, attorney for the foundation, said Thursday.

Read the rest of this entry »


“I think it’s still art and still belongs to Buchel” —MASS MoCA Curator

Read the rest of this entry »


Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law,, and Art & Law are trademarks owned by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento. The views expressed on this site are those of Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento and of the artists and writers who submit to They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to treated as confidential.

Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.

Switch to our mobile site