JimCunoGetty

Thanks. These are very complicated questions. Museums adhere to the rule of law. They acquire works of art only after extensive research into their ownership history and export status (if the proposed works are to be imported) and authenticity (ie., close, physical analysis of the object is crucial). Of course, it's not always possible to have every bit of evidence one might want. Then the museum has to weigh the risks of acquisition (for every acquisition come with some financial and/or reputation risk. If evidence comes to light that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the museum doesn't have clear title to a particular work or art, the museum must relinquish it to the appropriate authorities. This is what the Getty did a few years ago. Evidence came to light that wasn't known before hand and the works of art in question were turned over to Italian and Greek authorities. That was the right thing to have done.

But you ask another question, about the "morality" of museums having works of art in their collection that were acquired legally in the past but that some people think should (and for a variety of reasons) be returned to the political jurisdiction in which they were either made or found. The Rosetta Stone or Parthenon Marbles in the British Museum might be two such examples.

I think it is wrong and even dangerous to rewrite history. Those objects were acquired legally (so far as we know), they have been cared for and studied by the museum for hundreds of years, and millions and millions of people see and enjoy them every year. And they see them in the context of representative examples of all of (or by far most of) the world's diverse artistic cultures. Of course the museum should be willing to loan them (and as offered to) other museums around the world. But I don't see a legal or moral claim against the museum's ownership of them. (And we should be clear: the museum only holds them in trust for the British nation. The British nation owns the works in question.)

Thanks so much. Needless to say, I agree wholeheartedly with your first statement. The Getty is a beautiful, affordable place to visit. Its galleries and gardens reward every visitor.

The balance you mention is a delicate one. We have a responsibility to preserve works of art for public consumption long into the future. But the emphasis is on "public" consumption. Museums are not only for the professional. They throw open their doors for any- and everyone, regardless of experience or education. That's one of the most important things about museums. Unlike universities, they don't test people upon arrival or examine them on departure. They are open to everyone. Of course there are obstacles--some financial, some physical--but all things considered there are far fewer obstacles when seeking to attend a museum than almost any other kind of cultural or educational (even athletic or entertainment) institution. But there are times when the balance is tricky and so, for example, as light damages works of art on paper, they are not shown in museum galleries very often. I hope this answers your good questions.

Gosh. I haven't heard any reports of funny things happening in the basement. Usually it's dead, serious stuff down there: professionals working hard, studying and taking care of works of art. It's not that they are humorless, just professional. What often happens in the basement--and as the Getty is on a hill--and has many as three and four floors below ground--is that new people get lost trying to find their way around. To my knowledge we haven't lost anyone yet. But just in case, we have mandatory roll call every day at the end of the day. And if someone's missing, no one can go home until he or she is found! (Just kidding.)

A few questions came in via Facebook and over the weekend, so here are some responses:

Louise P. from Facebook asks: "What did you accomplish by gutting your education department?"

Many thanks. I wouldn't characterize our moves as a "gutting" of the Department. In a real way, it was a restructuring. Previously we had only paid museum educators in the galleries. Necessarily, they could only "touch" a few of our visitors. By changing to a larger corps of "volunteer" educators in the galleries we increased the number of students we could "touch" (and by far most of them are Title I students) from 39,000 students to more than 120,000. Previously only 33% of our students enjoyed guided tours of our galleries. Now almost 100% do. So, our restructuring expanding our ability to address the needs of our visiting students.

We still have more than 30 professionals working in the department, including five gallery instructors. And we have almost 100 docents working in the galleries of our two museums and on-site at the Getty Center. Our eductional program is more robust than ever!

Joelle B. from Facebook asks: "Who was the 20 millionth visitor?"

Gosh. I don't know. It was impossible to say because of they way they access our sites. But no doubt some happy, curious, Getty-loving visitor was that 20 millionth visitor and he or she left with his or her life enhanced for having visited us. I only wish I knew who that person was so I could thanks. That said, everyone came that day got a cookie and participated in a drawing for prizes. It was a great day. Did you come?

User iHazFail99 asks: "What was your number one goal, that you had to get done as soon as possible after becoming President?"

Two goals: hire an excellent museum director (and I did) and deepen the collaborative culture of the Getty Trust (and WE did).

User dcaspy7 asks: "What is the J. Paul Trust?"

The Trust was established in 1983 to meet Mr. Getty's charge (which he directed us to do in his will) to promote the diffusion of artistic and general knowledge. It comprises four Programs: a Museum (on two sites; the Getty Center and Getty Villa), a Research Institute (fabulous library and gathering place for resident and visiting scholars), a Conservation Institute (dedicated to conservation research and training), and a Foundation (sponsoring art historical and conservation work around the world). In this respect, the Getty Trust is across between a museum and a specialized university.

Josh K. from Facebook asks: "What is the most expensive/interesting thing in your vault?"

Impossible to say. All our priceless from our point of view.

Many thanks for these questions. Regarding you first one about the cut in jobs, that wasn't a costs cutting measure but a restructuring. Check out my answer above to a similar question.

As to executive pay increases, they appear larger than they actually were because of something called "retirement plan restoration payments" being made in December rather than January. This saved the Trust a lot of money in payroll taxes. In fact, executive salaries increased only between 3.25% and 3.75%. All Getty salaries, including executive compensation, are reviewed annually with comparable salaries at similar institutions. Executive compensation levels are measured against those at peer institutions are are reviewed by an independent consultant. We post our executive compensation and other financial information on our website in order to be open and transparent.

I hope this helps. Thanks again.