Clash of the (Cultural) Titans

When you say "real estate" in Vancouver, two names that come immediately to mind (especially for those of us in the visual arts) are Michael Audain and Bob Rennie. Michael Audain is CEO of Polygon Homes; his firm builds (and sells) homes. Bob Rennie is Executive Director of Rennie Marketing Systems; he is the pre-eminent marketer of real estate. Both these men are leaving an incredible visual art legacy in Vancouver.

Michael Audain, according to a March 9, 2009 profile in Vancouver Magazine, had by that date, donated almost $17 million to visual arts institutions in Canada; roughly $6.5 of those millions was to the VAG. He is currently chair of the Relocation Committee of the Vancouver Art Gallery (VAG). He is wholeheartedly committed to relocating the VAG to a city-owned block on the north side of Georgia Street, immediately east of the Queen Elizabeth Theatre. He will, undoubtedly, be adding to his philanthropic legacy if the redevelopment of the Gallery goes ahead.

Mr. Rennie, on the other hand, disapproves of stewardship at the VAG. He is quoted in an April 2008 Vancouver Magazine article as having "absolutely no respect" for VAG Director, Kathleen Bartels. He quit the VAG board of directors over their "Lee Iacocca" style of management. So, instead of supporting the redevelopment of the VAG, Mr. Rennie has invested over $10 million in a building in Vancouver’s Chinatown that he has converted into an art gallery as home for his collection of the works of over 170 artists.

These are two smart, rich, powerful men who love visual art and who have fundamentally opposing views on the wisdom of relocating the Vancouver Art Gallery for the second time in less than 30 years. They are men who have earned our respect through thoughtful and generous community leadership; as corporate leaders, they exemplify ideal community values. Their divergent perspectives must be considered as this community contemplates the enormous financial challenge of relocating the Vancouver Art Gallery for the second time.

The VAG has been offered $50 million by the province conditional upon moving to a site near the city's Plaza of Nations. The VAG has rejected that site. To those of us on the outside of the decision, it would seem risky that the VAG is banking on securing the downtown site from the City which has other well-known capital cultural objectives to fulfill–a mid-sized concert hall in particular.

Perhaps the guarantee of $50 million in cash is being bet against a prize of even greater value achieved through a zoning concession negotiated through the city’s community benefit amenities program. This scenario would see the art gallery located within a large-scale development and the developer building the new gallery (in whole or in part) in exchange for beneficial zoning concessions. Who knows? What we do know, is that VAG Director, Kathleen Bartels, has stated a desire to work with an internationally renowned architect. Personally, I find that desire to be very exciting. Iconic architecture, however, is probably the most expensive form of display space a gallery can create.

Like you, all I know about the VAG plan is what I have read in the media. The reports I have seen highlight a need for more exhibition space as the principle justification for the move. I wish there could be a more specific curatorial objective such as a desire to create a (large) dedicated permanent exhibition space for contemporary BC artists–every gallery and museum wants more exhibition space. I think a more specific curatorial motivation for the move might have kept Mr. Rennie onside.

But perhaps the greatest concern that came to my mind as I considered the pros and cons of relocating the VAG is operational financing. The VAG is currently operating with more debt than it has for a very long time. Cost-cutting measures have been accepted with regret by unionized staff and curatorial budgets have been shrinking recently. The current fiscal situation may have begun with the "Massive Change" exhibition mounted and circulated to great expense by the gallery in 2006.

If the VAG faces operational challenges now, what will happen with a larger gallery? How will the gallery pay significantly increased operational costs during a time when provincial cultural funding is at an all time low? Certainly there will be increased operational revenues, but that can often come from "super-sizing" the programming with blockbuster exhibitions that increase admission statistics, revenues and admission fees.

My view of the VAG relocation proposal was worsening the more I considered it. Then, one wonderful unseasonably warm Spring day, I went for a walk around the False Creek seawall and I was struck by the very bland gray/green palette of aluminum and glass that dominated the view of the downtown Vancouver landscape. Perhaps the beauty of our ocean, mountains and arboreal sculptures has muted our architectural voice. I don’t know why, but our landscape is completely lacking in diversity. The VAG move seems to me to lack a strong business case. My practical mind has concerns but my senseless passionate heart hopes that some landmark architectural celebration could take shape in downtown Vancouver.
I heard Mr. Audain ask for two years to raise enough money to ensure the relocation. If anyone can do this, he can. And if he can’t, the community wins anyway because Mr. Rennie’s new gallery has added valuable and curatorially credible exhibition space to Vancouver’s landscape.

Further Reading.
Michael Audain: http://www.vanmag.com/News_and_Features/Inside_Vancouver/The_Philanthropist
Bob Rennie: http://www.vanmag.com/Real_Estate/Feature_Stories/The_Secret_Passion_of_...