Paul Schimmel on Selling Murakami

Photo by Leonard Nimoy

MOCA chief curator Paul Schimmel

©2002 Takashi Murakami/Kaikai Kiki Co., Ltd. All Rights Reserved. Courtesy Galerie Emmanuel Perrotin

Takashi Murakami, "Tan Tan Bo Puking - a.k.a. Gero Tan" (2002)

Takashi Murakami Dasha, Gaga, and Gago Party for MOCA Crazy for Koons A Showdown for Doig at Christie’s In the Right Circles Murakami's Geisai Fair Moves from Miami to Taiwan Blum & Poe Times Four Pop Life: A Material Whirl

Send a letter to the Editor

Save to Del.icio.us Digg this

I’m not sure, but I’ve heard five or six thousand. The Frankfurt Museum of Modern Art, who’s taking the show, bought a whole set.

Has MOCA bought any?

No, but if Takashi would like to donate one, I would gracefully accept it.

So, MOCA has obviously been criticized for bringing this boutique into the exhibition space ...

Have we? No really, seriously. Have we been criticized? Read me a good one. Everything I’ve read, people have sort of backed off of it.

There was a criticism about how the announcement was made—you know, Tyler [Greene] felt chagrined, understandably so since he was on top of it that the L.A. Times was going to get the scoop. But hey, I guess that’s the fast lane between blogs and newspapers.

I have certainly heard [some criticism] off the record, but most of the stuff has been either curiously positive or sort of like, What does this mean? Which is a good question, I suppose.

Tyler says it “dances around—or over—the line between ethical behavior and bald commercialism.”

I would say, “Is he talking about the show or about Takashi Murakami?”

You know, the experience of participating in Takashi’s art through purchases is something he laid out very clearly. He drew this out on a piece of paper a couple of years ago; I have it on my wall. It started with audience, and then it said exhibition, shop, and memory. He said you take something home with you that is the memory of the exhibition.

He’s right. You can see how for some people the possession of an object triggers a richer experience. And associates it with another time.

But that’s not unique. Isn't that what museum shops are for?

It’s just that instead of a card or a book, which we sell all the time, Takashi offers collections of hundreds or dozens of objects. One is representative of something and one is the object itself.

What’s the financial arrangement for the boutique?

There is none.

It all goes to Vuitton?

I hope not. I think Takashi’s going to get a big hunk of it, don’t you?

Are you seeing a hunk?

No. We have no financial interest. We did not put any money into it, we get nothing. They have to operate it and provide the product during the run of the exhibition. They staffed it, they built it, and they created a new line, which is only available there. People have to pay an entrance fee to get in, so I guess that’s a direct benefit.

You don’t see rent or anything?

Nothing. They did give us a considerable gift to underwrite the gala, which they were the sponsor of. But they were not a corporate sponsor for the exhibition, nor did we ask them to be.

Is the shop going with the show to the other venues?

The Kaikai Kiki archive room is traveling as part of the show, and the invitation is on the table [to take the boutique], but obviously it is something for each institution to decide. It’s important though that it remain part of the exhibition, meaning within the body of the exhibition, or not associated with it at all.

So I guess you can relax a bit now that the show’s open.

Doing big shows is a great deal of fun, but once the show opens, you are no longer walking the dog, the dog walks you.