Alex Lachmann about Russian art

[LCR]

Gusev absolutely right that the need for a legislative framework conducive to the circulation of works of art.
This is - mandatory but not sufficient condition for the development of museum collections of contemporary art and the art market in general, without which the creation of the add-impossible.

I would like to continue the theme of relations between muzyami and collectors /sponsors, which says Mr. Lachmann (see full text of his interview, posted on this strong first-class website).
The signs of the arrogant attitude of museums to private collectors to observe and to me. But the attitude of some private collectors who believe that by agreeing to finance the kind of exhibition to present the work or pay for publication of the catalog, they bought the museum with pluck, too, not fiction, it was quite unprecedented.

Digression: I personally, for example, one such "collector-sponsor, said that all solve * only * money, which can hold an exhibition of any artist in any museum, to which I replied that it will ultimately rights - if he wants to organize an exhibition at the Pompidou Center X, then indeed, for this you must first buy the Pompidou Center

Interestingly, for example, will develop the whole story with the reconstruction of the Pushkin Museum - not so long ago I put on the forum link to the article, which talks about the need to attract private funds to it, and then casually mentions that "sponsor" will have room for her office inside the museum quarter - let's see how events will unfold ...

First of all, it is necessary to clarify that such sponsoring. Worldwide, this allocation of funds for some of the cultural (or even not very cultural) activities, in which the sponsor does not expect to recover these funds, so even with the revenues without. Enterprises, and sometimes individuals come to this in search of a positive "halo" around his name, but the basis is sponsoring an opportunity spent the money deducted from their taxes - hence, the phenomenon of sponsoring implies an effective system of collection taxes. In Russia it is absolutely not true: a "sponsor" agrees to fund the museum exhibition and catalog, and then he tries to make other private collectors could not provide at this exhibition of work from their collections, and then later decides that it would disburse only play items from his collection, other "sponsor" is holding an exhibition of the artist, and then receives nearly tenfold the value of their labor costs by this artist - the examples are many and quite unambiguous. That is why the cautious attitude of museums, which are trying to exert all possible pressure is justified.

Thus, we return to the absolute necessity to adapt the way Russia's taxation, so it is possible to develop a real market of art. That would have immediately increased the number of buyers of works of art, would have led to the emergence of nasoyaschih sponsors and thus would enable museums build their collections of modern art - in short, would have improved the situation.