mass moca wins

An email from Martin last night alerted me to the news that Mass MoCA had won its lawsuit against Christoph Büchel and could open the Training Ground for Democracy exhibition subject to a few conditions (it should be announced as unfinished and an artist's statement should be display, perhaps some others.)  The New York Times has a story, as does the Boston Globe, and the museum has its own statement.  I'm sure there's commentary around the blogs (and will be more), but Martin deserves particular mention as he seems to have been in the courtroom for the decision.  He also has an earlier post leading up to the hearing in which he notes that Mass MoCA now has a blog and they've posted a Q and A regarding the case (Culturegrrl offers her comments on it.)  That post is dated Sept. 18; I recall having stumbled on the blog a while back and not finding any Büchel-related content (or any of substance I can recall), otherwise I would have linked to it earlier.  I wonder why they waited so long to take this step--doing so earlier might have helped the pr fight.

Anyway, I had more-or-less decided some time back that I wasn't going to post on this subject anymore, in no small measure because all the hits from the IP address of Mass MoCA's law firm were creeping me out.  That said, I feel obliged to comment in light of the museum's victory given that I wrote a good deal that was critical of its position.  I don't have time to do so in full right now, and haven't absorbed all of the information at the links above, so here's a few quick thoughts with a follow-up to come.  Keep in mind that I'm no lawyer and am relying on imperfect knowledge of the facts.  First, the judge seems to have decided that VARA didn't apply since it doesn't specifically mentioned unfinished works, and since it didn't govern the case he decided the case pragmatically.  That VARA shouldn't control matters seems to be debatable, given that it does specifically invoke the "distortion, mutilation, or other modification of the work."  It seems to me at least arguable that a work remaining unfinished according to an existing design that then was displayed against the will of the artist could fall into the category of a distorted or modified work.  But obviously he didn't see it that way.

I definitely agree with the judge's remarks, as reported by Martin, that the dispute was "ill-suited to the courtroom" and that he wished the parties would come to an understanding.  That's been my feeling since the beginning, though it seems a little late for it to happen now.  The judge evidently also raised the issue of collaboration.  This has always been a difficult point for me, as the reality is, these sorts of projects are in practical terms generally highly collaborative, as the judge noted, with an institution's staff, curators,  exhibition designers, etc., often playing notable roles in helping to shape and bring to life a new work.  It's not unlike the production of a new play: a writer may come in with a script, but as the company works on moving it to the stage, it gets fleshed out and changed in a number of different ways.  The analogy's not perfect, of course (an installation isn't a performance), and more importantly at the end of the day, the play's author and the installation's artist are the ones with the copyright and who have their names listed as the creators.  If all had gone as planned, I don't think Mass MoCA would have been credited as a collaborating artist.  It was to be Büchel's exhibition, and one can argue it should have been considered as such.

But in the end, this is the sort of murky area that made the case ill-suited for a legal fight.  I did think that VARA was likely to apply, and would therefore bar the museum from displaying the work, but hey--I never said I was writing a law blog.  The judge evidently decided to err on the side of making the work public, and I am impressed by how affected he seems to have been by it.  It certainly makes me want to see it, which to tell the truth, I hadn't much before.  I should also note that there may be an appeal.  All that aside, though,  the question that I'll leave you with for now is, what did Mass MoCA gain and was it worth it?  They can display the work, at least until it's time for the next exhibition, and surely feel a measure of vindication.  How far does that vindication take them?  What have the costs been and how long will they last?  And what next for Büchel?  All that will have to wait, as the world calls me now.