Tuesday, July 03, 2012

Apparently it's a thing now to deny that financial problems led to the Barnes move (UPDATED)

For example.  Apparently the Friends of the Barnes have filed yet another petition to reopen the case on these grounds.

I thought it was always clear that the Barnes was in financial trouble.  The New York Times story announcing the proposed move, back in 2002, began:  "The financially beleaguered Barnes Foundation filed court papers today asking for permission to move ...."

John Anderson's Art Held Hostage, on p. 218: "Relatively small though the numbers were, the Barnes was, nevertheless, broke."

Most importantly, Judge Ott's 2004 opinion held that the Barnes "was on the brink of financial collapse."

So:  financially beleaguered, broke, on the brink of financial collapse ... but not yet technically bankrupt so stop the presses.  Or something.

UPDATE:  Lee Rosenbaum ("second to none in [her] strong belief that the Barnes should have remained in Merion"):  "[S]uggesting that the Barnes was not fiscally moribund at the time of the court hearings is as much a distortion of history as recent claims that founder Albert Barnes would have been pleased with the new Philadelphia facility."