From the WSJ Opinion Archives

LEISURE & ARTS

He's Departing
At Last, but It
May Be Too Late

Guggenheim Museum Director Thomas Krens is out.

BY ERIC GIBSON
Thursday, September 22, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

So the high-wire act is finally over. Seventeen years after becoming director of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Thomas Krens is out, effective Oct. 1. His replacement is chief curator and longtime deputy director Lisa Dennison. Mr. Krens will keep his titles of chief executive and "chief artistic officer" of the eponymous foundation, but he has been bumped upstairs, stripped of day-to-day control of the museums that are the foundation's raison d'etre and main focus.

This departure is a genuine art world event, because of Mr. Krens's influence and buccaneering style. He has done more to redefine museum practice than anyone since Thomas Hoving was director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the 1960s and 1970s. Still, as with Mr. Hoving, the surprise isn't that his departure took place, but that it didn't happen sooner.

Mr. Krens's signature contribution was his conception of a global Guggenheim. Art museums have traditionally been self-contained institutions, but Mr. Krens envisioned a world-wide network of Guggenheim satellites. Hardly a year went by without him announcing a new project--in Salzburg, Austria; Bilbao, Spain; Las Vegas; Rio de Janeiro; Taichung, Taiwan; Singapore; and, most recently, Guadalajara, Mexico. Each boasted flashy architecture and some featured breathtaking settings--dug into living rock, located under water, perched on the edge of a cliff. Some of these projects, such as the Frank Gehry-designed Bilbao Guggenheim of 1997, came to fruition and have been successful. Others, like one of two in Las Vegas, opened and flopped. Still others didn't live much past the news conference.

Mr. Krens did succeed in putting his institution on the map in a way it had never quite been in the past. Yet amid all the pyrotechnics and hype there were the lingering questions: What is the Guggenheim about? Why does a museum with a permanent collection roughly the size of a university museum need all those buildings? How is the museum staying afloat financially--and can it much longer?

By the end, like the nutty uncle at the holiday table, Mr. Krens had become at best a distraction, at worst an embarrassment. It was impossible to do a story on him in which the negatives didn't outweigh the positives. Bilbao has been a success, but there were all those dubious and failed expansion schemes, the baldly commercial exhibitions and the neglect of the flagship Frank Lloyd Wright building on Fifth Avenue, now undergoing a belated renovation. When the director, not the institution, becomes the subject, the institution has a problem.

This January, board chairman and insurance executive Peter B. Lewis quit the board in protest over Mr. Krens's financial management ("The numbers presented were incomprehensible to me," he told David D'Arcy on this page in June.) While the media interpreted this as a victory for Mr. Krens, it now looks as if Mr. Krens won the battle but lost the war. Although Ms. Dennison will nominally report to him, it would be a surprise if she turns out to be a Krens clone. I think we can expect a more sober style and fewer Walter Mitty extravaganzas.

But while Mr. Krens may be going, his influence will live on. That's because there is hardly a museum director today who isn't doing--or wouldn't secretly love to do--the very things that Mr. Krens did. Here are three practices that Mr. Krens took to a new level--that others soon attained:

Architecture as the solution to a marketing, not a facilities, problem. The Guggenheim Bilbao became an instant tourist attraction when it opened in 1997, showing the power of architecture to "brand" an institution. Ever since, directors and their boards have embraced expansion with a vengeance, looking to iconic buildings to define their museums in the public mind and pull in visitors.

Deaccessioning. Once upon a time, museums sold art from their collections rarely and judiciously. Then Mr. Krens rewrote the rules when he sold important works by Kandinsky and Brancusi to buy a collection of 1960s Minimalist art. Today, institutions like the Museum of Modern Art and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art are following suit, strip mining their collections for important works by major artists to raise money for contemporary art purchases. In another era, they might have turned to their trustees for funds. But with board members tapped out on Bilbao-like expansion projects, there's only one other place to raise the necessary cash: the collection.

Art and commerce. Traditionally, museums have tried to draw a bright line between the two lest they compromise their scholarly independence in fact or appearance. Mr. Krens erased that line with his motorcycle show (1998) and the exhibition of Giorgio Armani clothing (2001)--the latter, just coincidentally, at the time of a $15 million donation by Armani Corp. So many museums have followed suit that it is now commonplace to see exhibitions on such subjects as "Star Wars," electric guitars, jewelry and fashion on calendars around the country.

We're living in the Krens Era. And it isn't going to end anytime soon.

Mr. Gibson is Leisure & Arts features editor of the Journal.