Big-league lineup at Art Institute

  • Article by: MARY ABBE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: September 21, 2011 - 9:42 AM

Having assembled a roster of top-notch curators, the Minneapolis museum is swinging for the fences with a series of ambitious exhibits.

  • 13
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
DacotaSep. 20, 11 6:53 PM

Exhibit what you want, so long as it doesn't cost the taxpayer one thin dime.

mn_cameraSep. 20, 11 7:18 PM

Sure, dacota, because clearly, someone left you in charge. What is it with these people who want life to be an unremittingly gray, East-German-reminiscent dirge from cradle to grave?

eveblackSep. 20, 11 9:30 PM

World class art exhibitions like this here in the Twin Cities puts us in the top ten livable cities in the US. Culture informs, enlivens and expands, lack of it and you get a comment like the first one. This museum also gives free tours to veterans and to Alzheimer patients. I'd say it's a great community resource.

eberg1Sep. 21, 1112:49 AM

Hey dacota. Are you from North or South Dakota? Are there any museums there? Is there anything there, period?

eastsider45Sep. 21, 11 6:56 AM

How can we even think about spending taxpayer money on this when kids don't have enough textbooks in school and some kids are not getting a decent breakfast before they get on the bus? No taxpayer money for billionaire artists!

mn_cameraSep. 21, 11 8:06 AM

@ eastsider45: Do you actually KNOW any artists? I do, and none of them are billionaires. Most if not all of them, though, are good citizens who pay their taxes and participate in society. Schools would be a lot better off if legislators stopped worrying so much about non-artist billionaires and got their priorities straight. Schools or a new playroom for Zygi Wilf and his wealthy buddies - the choice is obvious.

ruphinaSep. 21, 11 8:47 AM

Dacota- it appears the only direct government money is from the Legacy sales tax we voted for specifically for this kind of purpose. Lots of hidden support, as most of the rest of the money comes under some sort of tax shelter, (foundations, corporate giving, private deductions, all of which lower tax revenue in some way), but better than funding performance artists who pee on stage. Bill G.

omgurdensSep. 21, 11 9:11 AM

Just when a story reminds me that there is still beauty in the world, I click and see some pretty depressing comments. I think that a segment of the population just doesn't know that there is (or could be)more to life than money.

bracystakeSep. 21, 11 9:46 AM

I'm already looking forward to seeing this exhibit. Sounds great! And for dacota and eastender, thanks to your ignorance I'll be sure to give a nice donation to the Institute of Art to help promote more top notch exhibits like this coming to Minneapolis.

truetalkSep. 21, 11 9:55 AM

Where in the story does it say anything about public funding? Some Legacy money may go to the MIA, but it was my understanding that it was meant to be spread around locally to smaller programs. The MIA has been around for a long time, and while the article makes it sound like an underdog, it is nationally known and many would say it rivals Chicago and other larger institutes for the quality and variety of its collections. My point is that, while I'm sure that running an art institute (especially one that doesn't charge admission- $10-$20 in Chi or NY) isn't cheap or easy, between corporate partnerships, memberships, special events, fundraisers, and 'blockbuster' shows like the Rembrandt one (there is such a thing as art-tourism), the MIA probably does okay without much government funding.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters