Wednesday, October 7, 2015

The Rembrandt purchase dominated by economic capital


This September the Dutch government bought two Rembrandt pieces, paintings from a famous Dutch painter. The paintings can be seen as Dutch heritage and the purchase was a huge gain for the Netherlands, especially for the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam where the paintings will be displayed. However the purchase is financed with the cultural fund that is also used for other musea in the country. While on the one hand this purchase is a gain for the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the other musea are disadvantaged because there is less money available for their purchases.

According to Bourdieu, the field of cultural production can be divided into a small scale restricted production field and a large scale production field. In Benson’s article (1990) it is explained that the restricted areas in arts are characterized by cultural capital and the large scale areas are characterized by economic capital. The small restricted areas are mostly dominated by economic capital. This distinction is made visual in Figure 1.

I think this theory is applicable to the case of the Rembrandt purchase. The political field in this case can be seen as the field of power, because they had the power over the cultural fund and therefore had the most economic capital. In other words, I think the political field dominated the field of cultural production with economic capital. As a result the smaller restricted areas of cultural production (other musea in the country) are disadvantaged. What do you think? Do you agree with me? 




Figure 1



- Elsa Govaarts -

4 comments:

  1. I think this is a very nice example of explaining Bourdieu and putting his theory into practice! However, the figure is not visible :(

    - Florian ter Voert -

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree that this would not be in the advantage of other musea. However, the deal has changed a bit. It has become a joint purchase by the Netherlands and France. This way instead of 160 million euros, the state has to pay 80 million euros. When it was decided that France would co-own the paintings, the Rijksmuseum opted out of helping the financing of the paintings. This has left the option open for the paintings not only being exhibited in the Louvre and the Rijksmuseum, but also touring through the Netherlands and be shown in other musea. This way the other musea would also take advantage of this purchase. The Rembrandt association is not happy with the new joint ownership though. They would have contributed to the buy when the paintings would go to the Netherlands, but now it will also go to France they have also retracted their offer. So there are clearly power struggles present in this situation, where the state is looking at financial reasons, the Rijksmuseum is looking at 'exhibition rights' and the Rembrandt association is looking at reclaiming Dutch cultural heritage. This makes this a very complicated situation, where the state will eventually have the highest vote. However, the minister of Finance is still holding on to the idea that the Rijksmuseum has to contribute to. For now I did not find what the latest conditions and agreements are, so the current situation might have changed already. But all I know, the paintings are not solely Dutch property.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was just about to say that they shared the paintings with France. It is a deal that the Rijksmuseum and the Louvre will share the paintings over time. By doing this the cultural capital is growing for the museums but it is also an extension of their networks.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi there! I uploaded the image again so now it should be displayed properly. I agree that the power struggle between small scale and large scale area has changed according to the new situation. But indeed there is still a power struggle going on between the political field and the cultural field..

    ReplyDelete