Exhibitions for 2025

I was curious what exhibitions we could expect from museums for the coming year. All the lists online, as is mine, are brief and subjective. To find them all one would need to research the museums town by town. Here are some of my choices.

For the contemporary world I did find that Amsterdam’s Stedelijk and Van Gogh Museums were planning an Anselm Kiefer (1945-) exhibition. The Stedelijk has been collecting his work since 1960 and Kiefer has said that van Gogh has been one of his great inspirations. The show is to be called “Sag mir, wo die Blumen sind” (“Tell me where the flowers are”), which will be exhibited in two parts in those museums. Here is Kiefer’s interpretation of “The Starry Night” (2019). (March 7–June 9)

I have written often about how art is a great vehicle for protest and shining a light on injustice. The Centre Pompidou in Paris is about to close for 5 years for renovations but before they do their last exhibition will celebrate Black artists who have worked in Paris between 1950 and 2000. Paris is one of the most ethnically diverse cities. Just think of all the great artists who have lived there. “Paris Noir” will offer a visual survey of how Black artists have challenged dominant narratives and reflected political shifts, from African independence to the fall of apartheid.” Here is “The Struggle” (1963) by Bob Thomson (1937-1966) lent by the Michael Rosenfeld Gallery. (March 19-June 30)

“Turner and Constable” and their great artistic rivalry will be at the Tate Britain in London. J.M.W. Turner (1775-1851) and John Constable (1776-1837) competed in the same genre of landscape painting and were an inspiration to many others. From the Tate’s Press Release, “vying for success through very different but equally bold approaches the scene was soon set for a heady rivalry. Turner painted blazing sunsets and sublime scenes from his travels, while Constable often returned to depictions of a handful of beloved places, striving for freshness and authenticity in his portrayal of nature. The art critics compared their paintings to a clash of ‘fire and water’”. (November 27, 2025 to April 12, 2026).

John Constable, “The White Horse, Frick Collection

“Myth and Marble” is a rare chance to see a selection from today’s greatest private collection of ancient Roman sculptures. The collection was formed in the 19th century by the Torlonia family from excavations on their lands in Italy and also by purchase of other collections. The show has been seen in Rome, Milan and Paris and is crossing the pond this year to be seen in March at the Art Institute of Chicago then at the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas, and the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts.

I have already written about Caspar David Friedrich: “The Soul of Nature” https://www.geraldstiebel.com/2023/12/caspar-david-friedrich.html

when it was in Germany. It has now arrived at New York’s Metropolitan Museum and is on until May 11.

For the first time in the U.S. there will be a solo exhibition of the work of the Dutch still-life artist Rachel Ruysch (1664-1750). Typically, she has been far less studied than her male counterparts of the period. The show “Rachel Ruysch: Nature into Art” will be at the Toledo Museum of Art which was the first American Institution to acquire a work by her, back in 1956! (April 12 -July 27)

If you have been reading my Missives for a while you already know about my interest in photography and the Native American world. The Heard Museum in Phoenix, Arizona, dedicated to Indian Art, has combined the two. It is presenting an exhibition called “Storyteller: The Photography of Jerry Jacka”. Last year Jacka’s (1934-2017) archive was donated to the Heard. Jacka, a widely published Anglo photographer born and raised in Arizona is known for his images of the Southwest and documentation of Native American culture . The Heard exhibition will show his portraits of Native artists paired with examples of their work. (February 7 – October 12, 2025)

I will end with a most unusual exhibition at the Copenhagen National Museum of Art. It will be the largest and most “comprehensive presentation of Michelangelo's sculptural work the world has seen in 150 years! It is called “Michelangelo Imperfect”. Why? Because the show consists of the museum’s collection of “historical casts of Michelangelo’s sculptures alongside brand-new reproductions, original drawings and sculptural models.” The Museum asserts “This way, you can experience the majority of all Michelangelo’s sculpture in one place.”

That obviously would not be possible with the originals. (March 29-August 31, 2025)

Reproduction Figure of Day, Giuliano Medici tomb

The Michelangelo exhibition presents a dilemma: the issue of illegitimacy of the reproduction as a substitute for the original vs. the opportunity of seeing the scope of an artist’s entire body of work - an idea worthy of further exploration ...

It’s Not Just Tariffs

Last week I wrote about how the Administration’s proposed tariffs would affect the art world, but there is more according to an article from February 6 on Artnet titled “A Running List of How the Trump Administration in Impacting the Arts”.

Trump has again disbanded the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities (PCAH). He did this during his first administration, and it was reinstated under Biden. This committee was introduced by Ronald Reagan in 1982. It worked with the White House, National Endowment for the Arts, the Humanities, Museums and Library Sciences and others. It had a positive impact in advising economic development public health, education and climate change among other matters.

A meeting of the PCAH with a rare visit from the President

The members of Presidential committees receive no compensation. The only cost to the government is member expenses of travel to meetings and lodging. I served on two presidential committees under Presidents Reagan and Clinton. The former was a committee that advised the IRS on art matters. Expert advice was wanted as to whether works of art were being undervalued for estates or overvalued for donation purposes.

Rather than a cost to the government, the advice of the IRS art panel saved money. As evidence of the “vast” cost savings that shutting down the Arts & Humanities committee will bring, look at its budget of a mere $334,947, most of which would be for the administrators.

Trump may believe that he knows better how to advise the arts and humanities communities ... or does he just want to do away with any advocacy for the arts?

If you think I exaggerate, The Los Angeles Times of February 10 reported “shock waves through the world of arts and culture” when he announced that he intends to appoint himself as Chairman of the Kennedy Center! As I have learned while editing this Missive, after firing several members of the board, he has been “elected” Chairman!

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) has become a cudgel. Whatever someone in the new administration doesn’t like can be done away with based on this concept of equality and fairness being bad. It is, of course, most potent against the arts which by its nature includes many minorities. The Smithsonian immediately knuckled under and closed its office of diversity. The administration’s order also encourages employees to report any DEI related activities, just as in any totalitarian country. From the movie “After Yang” ...

The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) is an independent agency that provides grants to artists, cultural organizations, universities, and more. The NEA's mission is to promote the arts and strengthen communities' creative capacity. It is now in the process of changing its rules so as not to give funds to arts organizations that practice DEI. The impact is great as the arts provide an important vehicle for addressing social issues. Will this, de facto, end up censoring theater and film? How will this affect obtaining visas for performing artists from abroad?

The White House has ordered a freeze on billions of dollars of Federal Grants. That would be devastating to the arts organizations that depend on grants including NEA grants. Small organizations are concerned as to whether they can survive. I know it is making arts organizations in Santa Fe very nervous. The federal funding freeze is being challenged in the courts, but the administration has taken the position that the Executive branch is more powerful than the Judicial, and hence can ignore the courts.

Donations are often made to what people feel are the most important causes. Medicine has understandably been the leading beneficiary, but even in that light the arts are important for mental health. They have been around since man could express her/himself and have had some form of public support in every culture.

Allow me to conclude from a paragraph in that Los Angeles Times article commenting on the damage being done by the President’s Executive Orders:

“As a tool for dissent the arts are unrivaled.” Perhaps this is what the current administration fears. The paragraph continues that the arts “also build empathy, encourage creative problem-solving and build strong communities. None of these values appear to currently have a place in Washington”.

Tariffs: It’s More than Avocados!

I don’t believe in being like a petulant child and spitting in the face of a friend in order to get my way. I was brought up differently and feel that we are living in a crazy world with an unstable President. Now there is a plan to impose tarrifs on friends and foe alike. I am not an economist but there is one world I am knowlegable about, and that is the art world. Restrictions on creativity at any level only suffocates it.

Many products that come into the U.S. have duties, a tax automatically placed on them. Specific items might have tariffs. Until now no original works of art or antiques over 100 years old have had either in the U.S. Needless to say the art world is suddenly very nervous.

A few weeks ago, we read in our local paper, The New Mexican, that the price of avocados, which come from Mexico, would go up if tariffs were imposed and as a result guacamole, a staple in this part of the world, would become much more expensive… as I am writing I see we will have a one month reprieve. Which reminds me of the Yiddish expression, “ess, ess mein kindt” (eat, eat my child)! It is a bad joke in a way, but I had not thought before of how it would affect the art world.

I must admit I never thought of this issue until I read an article on Artnet by Margaret Carrigan. She wrote that “Edouard Gouin, who runs the art shipping and logistics firm, Convelio, said that these tariffs would ‘unduly affect’ the art industry by dramatically raising the cost of doing business.” He continues, “when it comes to art shipping tariffs could have ‘Brexit-like implications’ for U.S. trade ... shipping costs, which have soared since the pandemic would climb even further. There would be more red tape, more bureaucracy”. “U.S. Collectors who buy works abroad may be less inclined to bring them back and send them to freeports instead.” Free Ports are designated areas in a country that are supposed to help economic development but where no taxes or tariffs are paid until the goods are taken out. Some collectors will keep even more of their most valuable art there in the belief that it will appreciate in value, and you won’t find them in any exhibitions here.

 Current Customs Forms

The threatened tariffs are not just on Mexico but on Canada and China as well. Think of the artists who have markets in the States and the effect this will have on galleries and collectors. I am not speaking of the artists that bring huge prices but the lesser known who live, like most, from small amounts they can make through galleries and at art fairs. Will the galleries even bother to go through the trouble and paperwork added to the import of this material.

Every summer Santa Fe hosts an Indian Market, the most important of the Native American fairs of note in the country. In fact, when we started collecting Native American Art friends on the Hopi Reservation told us that if we wanted to collect Indian art we had to go to Indian Market in Santa Fe. Although the Market was founded in 1922 for tribes of the Southwest it has broadened its scope over the years to include indigenous artists from other parts of the United States, and recently reached across the border. Natassja Santistevan proudly wrote last summer in an article for TABLE New Mexico about “a cohort of passionate artists from Northen Canada” coming as “2024 Santa Fe Indian Market Makes History with Canadian Artists”. She called it “a celebration of Northern Canadian indigenous culture”. The new tariff would mean more than additional paperwork prices of the art sold would be 25% more expensive. Far less Canadian art would be sold and why would these artist bother to come. This does not mean that Native Americans would sell more it would mean that there would not be an expanded attraction to draw new visitors.

Georgina Adam in an article in Apollo Magazine writes that tariffs on China at 10% will be added to the 7.5% tariff that already exists. She also points out that the President has also threatened tariffs on Europe. Add that to the commissions you already paid to the auction houses on that continent. Galleries are usually small operations and they already must cope with customs forms and certificates of authenticity. Much of this can be done by a customs broker but the paperwork starts at the gallery.

In an article in Art News, Harrison Jacobs writes on the nervousness on the part of galleries in Mexico. In the past Mexican dealers have come to the U.S. fairs with their art under temporary admission. This means that duties and taxes apply only to what has been sold and are paid by either the seller or the buyer. So far there are no new regulations, but no one knows what to expect.

At this writing Mexico and Canada have decided to “keep the peace” though Canadians do not understand what the president wants. China, however, has shown in a mild way what could come if our Pesident persists, i.e .it has threatened Google which already does little business in China but what if they went after Apple?!

As we already know from the stock market no one thrives under a curtain of uncertainty.

The Anxiety of Acquisition

I received an email from a friend recently saying, “I hesitate to send this because you will probably say, ‘What a pilgrim this kid is!" it came with a lovely image of a watercolor he was interested in signed by the Dutch artist Aert Shouman (1710-1792) and titled “An Ocelot from Surinam”.

Why is this person concerned that I think him a Pilgrim? Why do we worry about what others think of what we collect? We all keep objects that belonged to those close to us or buy souvenirs on our travels and we do not worry what others think, so why this sensitivity when it comes to what we collect as art.

I might worry that I spent too much on a purchase but not what other people will think of it. My wife and I used to collect photograpy and European Art Nouveau but when we “discovered” the southwest of the United States we also discovered Native American Art and started collecting in that area. Our friends and colleagues of old may not have understood this new interest but we collected what we liked, not necessarily what they liked.

I was saddened to read in an Artnet survey that among the most common reasons for collecting art that 49% of currently active collectors believe it is an asset that they expect to gain value over time. That may turn out to be the case if you acquire works by the few artists who have already gained international recognition, or will in the future, and their work continues to have merit in the eyes of the world. I can only think of a handful of works of art we have collected by Native Americans that will even keep the value that we paid for them, no matter how the artists are currently recognized with awards at Indian Markets.

Do we fear being judged? Do we want to belong to a certain social circle? It seems we want validation of our choices. A couple of weeks ago I wrote a Missive called “Gone Too Far” illustrating a number of works of art that were considered bad or unacceptable in their time, and today are considered masterpieces. There were individuals who were willing to collect this “bad” art, that by circumstance, came to become acceptable and, by that fluke of fate, also gained in value. I doubt that is why they made the purchase in the first place.

Marcel Duchamp Fountain, 1950

I know someone who collects museum-worthy art. One of the well-known artists he collects paints pictures that are definitely R-rated, and some may go so far as to say they are X-rated. Friends and guests in their home may be surprised but they accept it because the artist is considered “important”. So why worry if you acquire R or X-rated material by an unknown artist if you believe it has artistic merit.

People come to art in different ways. Studying and observing a great deal of art in museums, at dealers and at auction can train your eye, make you a more knowledgeable collector, and give you more pleasure in what you have collected, but no one should be able to tell you what you like or don’t like.

Everyone will define art differently, but I think we can agree that art is something created to grab our interest or hit us on an emotional level strongly enough that we want to live with it. If you pick a life partner, that is no one else’s business and you don’t inspect who others have chosen before making your decision…I hope. So don’t worry about what others think of the art you collect.