Target Marketing

You will be automatically redirected to targetmarketingmag in 20 seconds.
Skip this advertisement.

Advertisement
Advertisement
 
 

Gawking at $135 Million in Nazi Loot

In the Museum World, Money Talks

November 2007 By Denny Hatch
7
Get the Flash Player to see this rotator.
 

In the News

Album documenting Nazi art loot donated to National Archives
(AXcess News) Washington—A leather-bound catalog—its 50 pages so fragile they crumble without delicate care—containing photographs of Nazi-looted art has found its way from the heir of an American soldier to the National Archives.
Identified as photo album No. 8, the catalog is one of an estimated 85 to 100 volumes documenting art pieces seized from churches, households and museums under Hitler’s World War II regime.
—James Baetke Scripps Howard Foundation Wire, November 11, 2007
Ronald Lauder’s passion is art. The younger son of cosmetics mogul Estée Lauder and worth $3.3 billion, Ronald Lauder bought an elegant Fifth Avenue mansion across the street from the Metropolitan Museum of Art and turned it into the Neue Gallery dedicated to German and Austrian art.

In June 2006 he privately acquired one of the most extraordinary pictures in the world—a 1907 portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer, wife of a wealthy Viennese industrialist, painted by Austrian master Gustav Klimt.

It had been looted by the Nazis during World War II and, when repatriated, wound up in a museum in Vienna. The Austrian government fought hard to keep it, but after decades of litigation—including an intervention by the United States Supreme Court—the portrait was ordered returned to the Bloch-Bauer heirs by an Austrian court.

The price Lauder paid was $135 million, at the time the highest price ever paid for a picture in America.

Last week I went on a bus tour to New York to see this painting. I spent 45 minutes with Mme. Bloch-Bauer. I am still reeling.

Art and Money
Ronald Lauder’s Neue Gallery was humming last Thursday—swarms of people and an hour wait in its Viennese café.

Klimt was a great draftsman and his drawings—although faint and made more so by dim lighting—were spectacular. But it was the centerpiece—the $135 million Bloch-Bauer portrait—that brought us all in the door. Lots of people mean entrance fees, audio guide rentals and cash registers humming in the gift shop and the restaurant. Crowds also generate the interest of prospective donors who want to see their names carved in marble in a hugely popular venue rather than a seldom-visited gallery in the boonies.

Money talks.

Backgrounder on High-Priced Art
At the Parke-Bernet Auction Galleries in Manhattan on the evening of November 15, 1961, it took just four minutes for James J. Rorimer, director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, to buy Rembrandt’s 1653 painting “Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer.” The price paid: an unheard of $2.3 million—the record at the time for any painting sold at a public or private sale. The art world was agog.

I went to see it immediately. It was hung in the main entrance hall at the time, and it was clear that the Met had itself a treasure.

Six years later, the Met bought Monet’s “Terrace at Sainte-Adresse” for $1.4 million. Again, the art world was convulsed. Intrigued and dubious, I went to see it the day it went on display. My instant reaction: this was the most beautiful and evocative painting I had ever seen.

Takeaway Points to Consider:

* In the world of fine arts, painters can do what they want.

* In marketing and advertising, never allow a designer to overpower your ad or mailing.

* ”Use pictures only to attract those who may profit you; use them only when they form a better-selling argument than the same amount of space set in type.”
—Claude Hopkins

* ”It’s copy that sells, not design. But it’s the design that sells the copy. It makes no difference how persuasive, how benefit-oriented, or how well-written the copy is if it isn’t read. It’s the designer’s job to present the copy in a way that will overcome skepticism, buy schedules, and people’s dislike of what they perceive to be ‘junk’.”
—Ed Elliott

* ”It is important to remember that in direct mail the word is king. Copy is the architect of the sale. Design and art are strongly supportive interior designers that often set up the sale. Because lookers are shoppers while readers are buyers, if you can firmly engage your prospects—and keep them engaged—through reading, you’re on your way to a sale.
—Malcolm Decker

Web Sites Related to Today's Edition:

Neue Gallery
www.neuegalerie.org

Gustav Klimt
http://www.expo-klimt.com/

If your family had art stolen by the Nazis. . .
http://tinyurl.com/2pk4as

Guidelines for Museums on Looted Nazi Art
http://tinyurl.com/32taqj

“Rescuing da Vinci” by Robert M. Edsel, History of Nazi Art Loot and Its Recovery
http://tinyurl.com/2n3k63

“The Lost Museum: The Nazi Conspiracy to Steal the World’s Greatest Works of Art” by Hector Feliciano
http://tinyurl.com/2947le

“The Train,” Burt Lancaster, Paul Scofield and Jeanne Moreau, Directed by John Frankenheimer
http://tinyurl.com/yqzswg
 

Companies Mentioned:
7

COMMENTS

Click here to leave a comment...
Comment *
Most Recent Comments:
Wash Phillips - Posted on November 13, 2007
Yes, it's a huge extravagance, especially when so many are threatened, dying, suffering.
But, my God, the Klimt (and those on the virtual museum are so stunning, so in command of the viewer (most of us, anyway, Tim) and as abstract as the Pollock, for that matter, but able to engage even electronically. This is art with a genuine capital A!
The only commonality with direct mail (as someone pointed out) is that humans must be drawn to it for either to be successful. But with Art, what's the closer?
Peter Rosenwald - Posted on November 13, 2007
Great piece, again!
And Tim's comment is not at all unique.
In my 17 years writing about the arts for the WSJ, the question I was most often asked about ballet, music and the plastic arts was: "what does it mean?"
That's no doubt the result of too many didactic art professors. Don't worry too much about what it "means". My advice when you approach any work of art; just let it talk to you and let your emotions take over. You can always look up views of what it means.
But only you can feel that unique bond with the artist. If the work touches you, that's all that matters. Each of us feels it differently and that's one of the great things about art. That's its real value, regardless of what someone "paid" for it.
Larry Kaufman - Posted on November 13, 2007
You missed an important takeaway point. What do Klimt, Monet, or Lauder's $135 million have to do with successful direct response marketing (which is essentially why most of us read you)? The answer is that you are multi-dimensional (who knew?) with multiple interests, and so, since I clicked through to the full article, am I, and doubtless so are many other readers. Take home points -- different strokes for different folks, don't underestimate your audience, and don't be afraid to expand other people's understanding of your personal brand.
John Friesen - Posted on November 13, 2007
Thanks for a wonderful read! I'm 99% sure you're aware of it, but in the off chance you aren't, Joseph Heller wrote a brilliant book called "Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer" after seeing the same-named painting.
Bernie Malonson - Posted on November 13, 2007
Similar to direct response advertising (which appeals to an audience of one) so does great art.

We are each a target market for a piece and it either appeals to us or it does not.

The same claim can be made for Nascar vs. the New York Philharmonic, or Danielle Steele vs. Tolstoy.

In all mediums, we are entering a one on one dialogue with the person(s) we desire a response from.
Rainer - Posted on November 13, 2007
I've never been much of an art person but these paintings, even through a computer screen, evoke some kind of an emotional response somewhere deep inside. You can see the craftsmanship and genius right through my monitor. I can only imagine what would happen if I stood right in front of them. Maybe it's time to slow down and 'smell the roses.'
Tim - Posted on November 13, 2007
It could be a Manet, Monet, Mona Lisa or a Paint By Number piece for all I care. It is my opinion, that most of the common blokes out there in the world have little understanding?and almost total disbelief why there is any interest in art that appears to be so static in nature...simply hanging on the walls of a museum.
Sure, you can call me unsophisticated and uneducated... I even flunked Art History in college. However, throw in some intrigue like art theft and Nazi Germany...Write a novel about the DaVinci Code?talk about price tags of $135 MILLION dollars?mention sperm on a dress (you weren?t talking about Monica Lewinsky, right?) ?and you have my attention!!
All of this may be nothing more than marketing hype and part of the overall business plan of museum directors from across the country. Nonetheless, I am intrigued by it all. Money does talk. But more importantly, I blame my Art History professor for not bringing to light the true value of these masterpieces! Shame on him?
Click here to view archived comments...
Archived Comments:
Wash Phillips - Posted on November 13, 2007
Yes, it's a huge extravagance, especially when so many are threatened, dying, suffering.
But, my God, the Klimt (and those on the virtual museum are so stunning, so in command of the viewer (most of us, anyway, Tim) and as abstract as the Pollock, for that matter, but able to engage even electronically. This is art with a genuine capital A!
The only commonality with direct mail (as someone pointed out) is that humans must be drawn to it for either to be successful. But with Art, what's the closer?
Peter Rosenwald - Posted on November 13, 2007
Great piece, again!
And Tim's comment is not at all unique.
In my 17 years writing about the arts for the WSJ, the question I was most often asked about ballet, music and the plastic arts was: "what does it mean?"
That's no doubt the result of too many didactic art professors. Don't worry too much about what it "means". My advice when you approach any work of art; just let it talk to you and let your emotions take over. You can always look up views of what it means.
But only you can feel that unique bond with the artist. If the work touches you, that's all that matters. Each of us feels it differently and that's one of the great things about art. That's its real value, regardless of what someone "paid" for it.
Larry Kaufman - Posted on November 13, 2007
You missed an important takeaway point. What do Klimt, Monet, or Lauder's $135 million have to do with successful direct response marketing (which is essentially why most of us read you)? The answer is that you are multi-dimensional (who knew?) with multiple interests, and so, since I clicked through to the full article, am I, and doubtless so are many other readers. Take home points -- different strokes for different folks, don't underestimate your audience, and don't be afraid to expand other people's understanding of your personal brand.
John Friesen - Posted on November 13, 2007
Thanks for a wonderful read! I'm 99% sure you're aware of it, but in the off chance you aren't, Joseph Heller wrote a brilliant book called "Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer" after seeing the same-named painting.
Bernie Malonson - Posted on November 13, 2007
Similar to direct response advertising (which appeals to an audience of one) so does great art.

We are each a target market for a piece and it either appeals to us or it does not.

The same claim can be made for Nascar vs. the New York Philharmonic, or Danielle Steele vs. Tolstoy.

In all mediums, we are entering a one on one dialogue with the person(s) we desire a response from.
Rainer - Posted on November 13, 2007
I've never been much of an art person but these paintings, even through a computer screen, evoke some kind of an emotional response somewhere deep inside. You can see the craftsmanship and genius right through my monitor. I can only imagine what would happen if I stood right in front of them. Maybe it's time to slow down and 'smell the roses.'
Tim - Posted on November 13, 2007
It could be a Manet, Monet, Mona Lisa or a Paint By Number piece for all I care. It is my opinion, that most of the common blokes out there in the world have little understanding?and almost total disbelief why there is any interest in art that appears to be so static in nature...simply hanging on the walls of a museum.
Sure, you can call me unsophisticated and uneducated... I even flunked Art History in college. However, throw in some intrigue like art theft and Nazi Germany...Write a novel about the DaVinci Code?talk about price tags of $135 MILLION dollars?mention sperm on a dress (you weren?t talking about Monica Lewinsky, right?) ?and you have my attention!!
All of this may be nothing more than marketing hype and part of the overall business plan of museum directors from across the country. Nonetheless, I am intrigued by it all. Money does talk. But more importantly, I blame my Art History professor for not bringing to light the true value of these masterpieces! Shame on him?