Münchner predatory art affair continues to come to a head: Bavarian State Painting Collections under pressure

Papers directed to the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” suggest that there has been great dissatisfaction with the procedure for provenance research for a long time. The multi -page memorandum of the two deputies to the general director, which was written in 2022, has obviously never been sent; The document never reached him, said a spokeswoman.

The Munich affair began with a punctured picture list of the state paintings, on which 200 red -marked works were marked – a label that stands in the other practice of the nationwide “MuseumPlus” tool for predatory art, but is only considered a suspected reference in Bavaria. Even if the list has turned out to be outdated and the German Center has signaled cultural loss losses that the Munich form is permissible, there is still an increased need of clarification for 97 works.

What remains is the obviously justified concern of the descendants of Jewish collectors that they were not sufficiently informed about research results that contact was omitted and possible returns were delayed. All of this that the public museums have actually committed to the “Washington principles”.

Departures of the Jewish collectors are concerned

The Memorandum, which the “SZ” is now leaking, confirms the insufficient conditions at the Bavarian State Painting Collections: Since a so -called first check five years ago, a sixth would have been examined in more detail from a total of 6,000 works, but was not prioritization. Instead of preferring the problematic cases, exhibited works, art historically significant, lighter ones were preferred.

For the heirs, the suspicion is confirmed again that the state paintings with their previous restitution will switch publicly to side locations. In addition, the two representatives of the general director criticize the publication form of the research results in the letter, which even causes irritation among employees.

The biggest problem, however, is the lack of personnel: for hundreds of works only a “lady”, as Minister of Culture Markus Blume described the responsible provenance researcher before the state parliament. Your one and a half -headed team is now to be increased by two places. In addition, Blume promised the establishment of a task force to intensify provenance research at the state paintings.

So is the general director the culprit? Markus Blume insinuated with his flaming speech before the state parliament, with which he tried to free himself from any responsibility. However, the painting collections are subordinate to him as a minister. He decides on restitution and whether controversial cases come before the advisory commission, he provides funds and staff. It is at most to be held to have taken over the structures from his two officials.

It is not convincing to reject the mistakes and apologize in a volte. It is already speculated that Blume has thus recommended itself for the office of the next Minister of Culture. That may be astonishing – but isn’t culture senator Joe Chialo also applies as a promising candidate with his questionable radical deletes in Berlin culture?