A Tale of Two Museums 3

Museums as ‘Happenings’

During the second half of the 20th century, several museums were built whose architecture could be considered striking, but the museum as a ‘happening’ really started with the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain. Although I have never been to Bilbao, I have seen photos of Frank Gehry’s design (1997) and it really looks somewhat like a Spanish galleon in full sail. But that is not all. This Museum has become the talk of the art and architecture world and thousands of visitors have gone to see it. Before Guggenheim, Bilbao was not able to compete for tourists with Barcelona, Cordoba, Granada, Madrid, Sevilla, Toledo and Valencia, but now finds itself, to some extent at least, on the circuit.

There are many-middle aged Torontonians alive who can remember a time when a person who dared to sell a bottle of milk on a Sunday was subject to arrest. In fact, the city was known in some quarters jokingly as ‘Toronto the Good.’ On a recent visit, I was surprised that two large and well-known Toronto museums – the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) and the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) – were being re-built simultaneously by two of the most radical architects around, Frank Gehry (see above) and Daniel Liebeskind who designed the memorial to those killed in the 2001 terrorist attack on New York City. For those not familiar with Toronto, the ROM, a venerable natural history museum that has a distinctive Neo-Romanesque architecture, is very strong on artifacts, and design and culture of ancient and non-European civilizations. It is a landmark in the University of Toronto neighborhood being bounded on two sides by attractive major avenues and by parkland on the other two. Neither from the pamphlet which one can pick up from the Museum nor from the ROM web site can one tell whether Liebeskind will leave the façades on the streets intact, but in any event, he will construct a large glass addition in the back that is crystalline in shape. I don’t know how else to describe it since I have never seen anything like it. The project is called ‘Renaissance ROM.’ A new roof top restaurant, a music court and 35 “new, refurbished and reconceived galleries” are to be included.

The situation at the AGO is quite different. This Museum faces on Dundas Avenue across from low-rise late 19th century houses, which, although they are a legitimate part of Toronto’s history, are otherwise undistinguished. The Museum itself has undergone several enlargements and improvements, but no one will claim that it has charm or that its ‘face’ on the Avenue will be missed. But behind the Museum and close to it is the Grange a substantial and very attractive historic building set in a private park. Like the ROM, AGO has a big fund-raising drive and is not shy about its plans. It claims that the transformed AGO will be a preeminent museum and an international tourism destination. Some of the specific claims are that viewing space will be increased by 40%, a new 450-foot sculpture gallery will be added and the views of the City and Grange Park greatly improved. Gehry will of course preserve the Grange, but he has some very fancy ideas about circular stairways and a very large ‘eyeshade’ running the length of the façade. Since I am not good at reading plans, I had to concentrate my attention on the model and came away with a neutral reaction. The Globe & Mail ran an article on January 31, 2004, entitled “Deconstructing the AGO” by Sarah Milroy who interviewed four leading Toronto architects. All their comments were respectful and I gathered from some of them that the budget is very tight and that one of the strengths of the design is a unifying vision of the interior of the place that has always seemed to me to be ‘meandering.’

Is the trend of museums as Happenings a good or bad thing? In the case of the Bilbao museum, it would be foolish to badmouth a building that has done wonders for the economy of a city. However, in general, I believe museums have two primary purposes: a curatorial one to preserve works of art and make them accessible to the public; and an educational one to reach out to schoolchildren and adults, enriching their lives with art. In fact, many museums had (and some still do) their own schools of art and design. Pleasant surroundings as well as adequate technical ones obviously help achieve the primary purposes. And since architecture is part of art, it is sad when museum buildings are cold, drab, pedestrian or confusing. But it is not desirable that visitors come principally to see the buildings. There is also the problem of the North American ‘Bricks and Mortar’ syndrome: “If a donor can be found, throw up a building, the good Lord will provide for maintenance, staff salaries and scholarships.” To many donors the most significant purposes of a university or cultural institution are not ‘sexy,’ only buildings are.

A future column will deal with two modern museums that don’t hog the limelight and which are greatly enjoyed by visitors. And, much later, we’ll take an inside look at the transformation of the AGO and the ROM.

April 2004