The NYT's Kate Taylor reports that "the financial picture has grown so bleak at the American Folk Art Museum that its trustees are considering whether to shut it down." They've been talking about donating their collection to the Smithsonian Institution, possibly in conjunction with the Brooklyn Museum.
Of course, because of the deaccessioning taboo, one possibility they can't consider is a sale of a portion of the collection to the Smithsonian, possibly in conjunction with the Brooklyn Museum.
But why not? I have no idea if the Smithsonian would have any interest in such a sale, or whether it would solve the Folk Art Museum's financial problems. But, if it could, would we really prefer a world in which the Folk Art Museum loses its entire collection and shuts its doors to one in which it sells a portion of the collection and stays alive?
Is that what passes for "ethical" thinking in the museum world these days?