Thanks for the nice comments about the site.

Interesting idea to compare Eakin’s original cost for materials. I’m sure Eakins would be spinning in his grave like a dynamo if he could see some modern developments regarding his work and other issues (like the way art is taught today).

Art as a commodity is just an unfortunate fact of life, I agree that we can only hope its destructive tendencies are not too dominant.

I note elsewhere: “In 1878, three years after Eakins made the painting, some of Gross’ former students bought it for Jefferson Medical College. They paid $200. Soon it will be sold — for $68 million.”

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6622315

I can’t tell if Eakins got the $200 or a dealer/middleman.

It turns out a $200 investment 131 years ago at a mere 10.2 percent compounded annual interest gives you $68 million now. Astonishing isn’t it. In real dollars with inflation, the rate is much lower.

The painting looks to be mostly umbers, white and black. It would be interesting to know the 1875 price of Eakins’ materials (wood, nails, fabric, glue, pigment, oil, and so forth) for this 52 square foot painting. Could it be that Eakin himself took a loss on the painting? If someone whispered “$68 million for your Gross Clinic painting” over Eakins’ grave, I wonder if he might not come back to life.

As for those managing the inheritance of the unctuously wealthy, I suspect creating a non-profit “foundation” holding company for investment grade art objects, which also permit one to escape capital gains liabilities, is reason to expect new museum building in the hinterland to become a growth industry, as well as brokering the looting of the public treasuries of “growth” objects rather than growth stocks. I hope it’s less destructive for the US than Europe’s experience in the early 1940s.

I’m sorry you interpreted my comments that way. My vitriol is aimed directly at Walton, not at Arkansas. I’m not one of those East coast snobs who feels that culture can’t exist in the central states.

Though I’ve never been to Arkansas, I lived in Texas for a while, (and liked it very much) and I know that the museums in Houston and Dallas house some great works. Nor am I a snob regarding large museums; I am, in fact a great fan of small museums, and constantly extol the virtues of the one I grew up visiting in Delaware.

My comment about “…her artificial island of culture in Arkansas…”, refers to the fact that Walton is attempting to build a cultural edifice out of thin air, rather than allowing one to grow naturally out of years of careful collecting in the more traditional manner. The reference to Arkansas was just incidental information about where her little artifice is located.

Even the intention to build a museum out of nothing is not what I object to so much, because it is theoretically possible to do that without engaging in the kind of practices that Walton is using.

What I do object to, passionately, is the attitude of Walton, and other spoiled, privileged scions of wealthy families, who think they can “get me sum Kulture” (with a capital “K”) by using corporate raider tactics to strip other institutions of their works instead of devoting the time, energy and cultured study necessary to become a true collector. It’s the brute force application of her wealth (which I consider ill-earned because of Wal-mart’s reprehensible business practices) that I object to; not the location of her museum. So please don’t think I’m denigrating Arkansas or the midwest.

On the other hand, if you in any way, shape or form admire Alice Walton or other corporate raider style art vultures, or the predatory anti-small business practices of Wal-Mart, you can feel entirely justified in being as pissed off at me as you like.