Spring Break
COMMENTARY: Rose descision took great courage
by Ethan Mermelstein
Rose Reactions | 2/3/09
Posted online at 2:36 AM EST on 2/3/09
Ignoring the deplorable closed-door situation in which the decision was made and the public relations embarrassments incurred because of it, I'd go as far as to say that the closing of the Rose Art Museum is a courageous statement of Brandeis' priorities. As Prof. Mick Watson (PSYC) said in an e-mail to the Justice, "Brandeis University may go under if we do nothing, but it won't go under because we will do something"; I believe this statement captures our school's dire economic situation and the grave importance of the many decisions that are and will be made here.
Depending upon who is doing the calculating, the number of beautiful things located on this campus probably doesn't require all 10 fingers to count. The Rose belongs on all such tallies. It is a point of pride for this University. Its extensive and renowned collection was amassed in a remarkably short period of time. The feeling of returning to one's dorm after having just viewed paintings by Robert Rauschenberg, Pablo Picasso and Roy Lichtenstein is like no other. It is because all of this will be put on sale that I feel comfortable saying that everything will be OK here.
By deciding to sell the Rose's art, Brandeis is stating that its primary concern is maintaining the school's standing as a premiere liberal arts and research University. It is saying that it is willing to temporarily risk bad press in order to protect what truly makes the school great. It is clear that inaction would likely ensure Brandeis' demise. Perhaps less apparent is the need for some radical change (or multi-million dollar donation-Brandeis lottery ticket fund, anyone?), but just turn to the front pages of this paper for that wake-up call.
When considering Brandeis' operating expenses, "total faculty and staff salaries and benefits" takes the largest chunk of the pie. By deciding to sell the Rose before laying off more faculty, the school is making a strong statement about its values.
Prof. John Lisman (BIOL) and Natasha Lisman '68 further explained the faculty issue. "These are hard financial times for all universities, but the strongest have announced that they will continue to hire," she said. "They point out that being able to hire at a time when most universities have hiring freezes will allow them to attract the best and the brightest to their university. Brandeis is not now in this group. Indeed, if something is not done about our financial situation we will not only stop hiring but also systematically shrink the faculty. The sale of the Rose collection may change that and allow Brandeis to join the top universities in getting the best talent."
Depending upon who is doing the calculating, the number of beautiful things located on this campus probably doesn't require all 10 fingers to count. The Rose belongs on all such tallies. It is a point of pride for this University. Its extensive and renowned collection was amassed in a remarkably short period of time. The feeling of returning to one's dorm after having just viewed paintings by Robert Rauschenberg, Pablo Picasso and Roy Lichtenstein is like no other. It is because all of this will be put on sale that I feel comfortable saying that everything will be OK here.
By deciding to sell the Rose's art, Brandeis is stating that its primary concern is maintaining the school's standing as a premiere liberal arts and research University. It is saying that it is willing to temporarily risk bad press in order to protect what truly makes the school great. It is clear that inaction would likely ensure Brandeis' demise. Perhaps less apparent is the need for some radical change (or multi-million dollar donation-Brandeis lottery ticket fund, anyone?), but just turn to the front pages of this paper for that wake-up call.
When considering Brandeis' operating expenses, "total faculty and staff salaries and benefits" takes the largest chunk of the pie. By deciding to sell the Rose before laying off more faculty, the school is making a strong statement about its values.
Prof. John Lisman (BIOL) and Natasha Lisman '68 further explained the faculty issue. "These are hard financial times for all universities, but the strongest have announced that they will continue to hire," she said. "They point out that being able to hire at a time when most universities have hiring freezes will allow them to attract the best and the brightest to their university. Brandeis is not now in this group. Indeed, if something is not done about our financial situation we will not only stop hiring but also systematically shrink the faculty. The sale of the Rose collection may change that and allow Brandeis to join the top universities in getting the best talent."
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
kchernick
Karen Chernick
posted 2/03/09 @ 12:52 PM EST
Ethan,
It is indeed regrettable that your narrow view of the Rose is to consider it a family heirloom. Brandeis' statement, which you repeated, that the "primary concern of the university is to maintain the school's standing as a premiere liberal arts and research university," is challenged by the very decision that they are defending. (Continued…)
Dennis J Solomon
posted 2/05/09 @ 12:58 AM EST
Sixty years ago my parents participated in their quiet way in the fund raising to establish Brandeis - and it has always been held as a beacon of liberal Zionism - the very views that Justice Brandeis held. (Continued…)
King Solomon
posted 2/05/09 @ 7:18 AM EST
The compromise: the Rose stays open and keeps its dedicated endowment, while up to 50% of its collection (on a valuation basis) is sold. Proceeds are then distributed between the University and the Rose. (Continued…)
Post a Comment