It seems a win-win solution to a problem facing museum officials around the nation: a well-heeled patron not only agrees to put up most of the money to finance a major exhibition of new London artists, but the patron will allow a number of his works to be featured. As the head of the museum, what do you do?

In this case, the patron was the only winner, because his collection soared in value because of the exposure. The museum lost credibility, faced severe criticism from the public, political leaders and others within the art word, and now has as a legacy a new set of guidelines rolled out by the American Association of Museums (AAM) to avoid similar ethical problems in the future, the New York Times reports.

In this case, the organization was the Brooklyn Museum of Art, the exhibition was the notorious "Sensation" showing, and the patron was London-based millionaire art collector Charles Saatchi, the New York Times reports.

BMA drew so much negative publicity because of the perceived impropriety of showcasing the collection of just one person that the museum association went to great lengths to complete an ethics code (voluntary for now, but likely to be formally adopted) for art borrowed from private or corporate collections.

The museum's problems began even before "Sensation" opened -- a number of the institution's senior managers expressed alarm that one patron was allowed to determine most of the pieces used in the exhibit. Furthermore, museum director Arnold Lehman decided not to reveal Saatchi's financial contributions to stage the exhibit, the Times reports.

The new guidelines, approved by the AAM last month, promote full financial disclosure of all ties related to such exhibitions.

In the case of BMA and Saatchi, the art collector asked that his role remain anonymous, but the new standards would allow museum directors to overrule these requests in cases of real or perceived conflicts of interest, the newspaper reports.

The guidelines also discourage museums from giving away "curatorial integrity" by defaulting content decisions to patrons and outside parties that may benefit from displaying certain works.

While the standards are voluntary for now, the AAM likely will adopt them as part of their accreditation, meaning AAM museums that violate the standards could not only be kicked out of the organization, but also could lose government and foundation support, the Times reports.

Full text of the article is currently found at:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/arts/
080300museum-ethics.html