January 30, 2009, 12:39 PM ET

The Sack of Rose

Rose Art Museum (Photo at The Boston Globe’s site)

In my last post, I blogged on Brandeis University’s shocking decision to close its renowned Rose Art Museum and sell off the entire collection. By shutting down the museum, Brandeis found a way to get around those pesky AAM (American Association of Museums) deaccessioning rules. Now President Jehuda Reinharz is saying the university might not sell off all of the art after all — only some of it.

In an email (posted on Tyler Green’s Modern Art Notes) sent by the president’s office to those questioning the Brandeis decision, Reinharz said, “I would like to reiterate the point that has been made in public releases from the University, specifically that Brandeis is not lessening its commitment to the creative and visual arts. The Rose will be transitioned into a fine-arts teaching center with studio space and an exhibition gallery, expanded facilities of which the University has a long-term need and which directly benefit our students.”

I realize art people aren’t brain surgeons, but really, do we need our intelligence insulted quite so directly? Of course Brandeis is lessening its commitment to the creative and visual arts. As to turning the Rose into a “teaching center with studio space and an exhibition gallery” — jeez. Talk about a sop. We’re supposed to equate undergraduate studio art activity (which I’m all for, mind you) with a special place dedicated to preserving, protecting, treasuring and exhibiting a renowned collection of modern and contemporary art?

Brandeis also seems to have no qualms about insulting the intelligence — not to mention generosity — of the many people who, over the years, entrusted ad infinitum the University with their valuable works of art. I have yet to read anywhere that the administration has offered even a hint of an apology directly addressed to them. The museum was also built on the generosity of donors, and was run at least in part on the same thing. Does Brandeis really have such contempt for loyalty?

Brandeis is unlikely to change its mind at this point. In fact, as far as the university is concerned, the worst part of the messy business of shutting down the Rose is now over. In a few weeks, the protests — by arts organizations, museum directors and curators, bloggers, artists, art writers, students and alumni — will have quieted to a whimper. Figuring out what to do with the spoils can begin in earnest. As Michael Rush, the director of the Rose, put it, “The Rose is over.”

So, looking to the future. What will Brandeis do with the part of the art collection Reinharz says they might not end up selling? Hmmm. Store it in the basement of the new engineering building they’re lusting after,which, almost certainly lacking climate control, will result in mildew that will spread like kudzu across the backs of the paintings? Distribute it to faculty and staff so they can decorate their offices? Proudly hang it in the Business School as testimony to how profitably Brandeis was able to rape and pillage the culture on its own campus?

When push comes to shove, Brandeis doesn’t give a rat’s tail about art, no matter what oily statements it offers to the contrary.

NOTE: Should any readers of this post have more optimism than this blogger, and want to get involved, visit this Web site.