The Taubman Museum of Art: what do you think?
The one-year anniversary of the opening of the Taubman Museum of Art comes around this Sunday (although the museum won’t officially celebrate until Nov. 20, with the unveiling of an exhibit of 35 etchings by Rembrandt — I’ll have many more details on that shortly.)
I’m curious to hear from thoughts from anyone and everyone about the Taubman. Have you been to visit? If so, what did you like? What didn’t you like? If not, why not? What do you think the Taubman’s done well? What do you think the museum could do better? What about the architecture — do you still think it’s “The Wreck of the Flying Nun,” or has it won you over? An inquiring mind wants to know.
November 2, 2009 - 1:05 PM
Wasn’t there a plan for an Imax Theater in there….
I still think it is the ugliest piece of architecture that I have ever seen. Looks like pile of scrap metal threw up in downtown.
Regarding the IMAX theater, at one time there was a plan to include one in the museum, but at the time IMAX theaters were losing money, so the plan was nixed. (In fact, IMAX reported its first profitable quarter in three years back in August.)
Went for a visit on opening day and found that the art museum, which looks as large as a major museum, did not have nearly enough on display. The walls should be packed with art! Some of the specialty rooms only had 4 or 5 main displays in each and the food area takes up a lot of the space, which seems a pity given that the museum is within walking distance of the market. Hopefully things are better now that they took down the big archtect display in one of the main rooms.
I wonder if the museum could give visitors access to the roof? It must be a beautiful view up there.
i think its the ugliest building that wasted tax payers money on.. It was just a waste of money
I like the look of building with the patina sections creating a two-tone effect. Most of the original concept art showed it all in silver, which made it seem both busy and bland at the same time. On the other hand, I’ve talked to friends who had exactly the opposite reaction; they liked it in silver but hate the brown patina.
I think its an interesting building. One weekend came to town with a friend to visit the museum. After we spent half the day trying to find somewhere downtown to eat that was open on the weekend, we got to the museum about 3:30 to find out that it closes at 5. Maybe will check it out another weekend? The gift shop was interesting but a bit pricey.
I’ve never lived in a city where the art museum didn’t have a free day at least a few times a month. Disappointing, really since admission is so steep and the works of art so few.
I like the structure and architecture. When driving through downtown, tourists ask what it is versus having another brick building that looks like another restaurant or shop. If you look at other cities with museums, the structures stand out from the environment. If Roanoke wants tourists to help the economy (and we need it with the local manufacturing and other job closings), Roanoke should be more open-minded to change. I would like to see the city grow instead of dying off…
I like the museum very much. I would like to see free days for many who can’t afford the steep admission price. I would like to see more modern art and sculpture. It looks like the museum has been a big boost to downtown despite these rough times. I would like the see the next Art Festival on the Market to involve the museum more. I am glad also that Roanoke did not build just another brick building!
It would be interesting to find why with a 3 story stucture only the second is gallery. Space could definitely use a usuage reevalution. Compared to similiarly sized structures, the lack of exhibition space is a major drawback. As for the permanent collection, its alright, the ‘purse’ area is extrmely constrive.
Whomever came up with “the wreck of the flying nun” should get the keys to the city.
The best part of the museum is the exterior of the building which we find interesting and quirky. What was on display inside during our visit was disappointing. We would not recommend the museum to someone visiting the area.
The Taubman Museum is an eye sore for an old southern town. Its architecture does not fit in with the rest of the surrounding buildings. Why this design was chosen is a complete mystery to most of the community. It certainly is visionary but lacks the ability to flow smoothly in with the rest of the downtown decor. I agree that the cost of admission versus the number of items on display simply are not worth it. Even students are not recipients of enough of a discount to make the trip to the museum with a class. More special events such as local reviews or exhibits should be held more frequently if the museum wants to draw in more customers. I personally can not get it to visiting the museum because I can not get past the ugliness of the architecture right in the middle of town.
Very little taxpayer money was used to build the museum. In fact of the $66 million cost, probably less than $2 million of taxpayer money was spent.
I agree with other comments about the structure. It doesn’t fit downtown. I still think it looks like something from another planet left their garbage right in the middle of town. I have not been to the museum since I didn’t think it was the right thing to do to build it in the first place; I am certainly not going to support it now.
@16
FWIW, they lost my support when they changed the name.
My main problem with the Taubman is the cost. Even le Louvre has one day a month where you can go in for free and enjoy what it has on display. The Taubman has very little on display, and in between exhibits it has next to nothing. Considering the fact they change ALL of their exhibits at once if you happen to not be on a newsletter telling you about exhibit changes you’ll spend the admission prices and see next-to-nothing. I’ve gone in several times, only to be told after I paid my admission “Oh you should have come yesterday, we actually had exhibits then”.
When I wrote a letter to the Director… I got no reply.
Not a very good boost in the art scene of Roanoke if you ask me.
What was the name supposed to be?
I think the entire point of it is that it doesn’t “fit”. The last thing Roanoke needs downtown is another brick building. It adds some interest, it catches the eye, and it gives those driving through on their way to NC and back something to grab their attention.
They might still be ironing out a few housekeeping kinks, but any city unsatisfied with being an atrophying backwater needs the occasional shot of innovative thought and architecture. I hope people support the museum.
It’s a beautiful building, inside and out, but the architecture far outshines the quality and quantity of the art inside. They really need to work on improving their permanent collection. I agree that the admission price is too high, but I think people would feel it was a better value if they got to view more, and better, art for their money. Even the number and variety of the temporary exhibits could be improved. There has been a major display of impressionist art at the museum in Winchester for the past few months. The curator of the Taubman was quoted in the paper as saying they didn’t pursue this exhibit because anyone who wanted to see it could just drive to Winchester… a ridiculous comment. Someone should tell him that we can all take the train to Washington for $29 each way, go to the National Gallery, and see an infinitely better display of modern art for free. No need to go to the Taubman at all.
I also question the hiring of a curator who was responsible for a painting being lost at the museum where he previously worked. Couldn’t they have found anyone better than that?
On the plus side, the gift shop and cafe are both excellent.
With the advent of the computer, we now can design various objects in very imaginative ways. Just look at how cars have changed over the past 10 years–they look wild compared to the ones in the past. So why not buildings as well? Who in their right mind would drive to Roanoke’s downtown to go to a building that is a plain square brick? We now have people coming out of town to visit and spend their money in a variety of places in the city (hotels, eateries, shops, etc). The cost of visiting the museum is in line with other attractions in the region–check for yourself if you question that one. If your able to join as a member, you can visit as many times as you wish and participate in many of the wonderful programs that are presented there. This building is now on the cover of many magazines that show how Roanoke has moved way beyond a sleepy old town. Celebrate it folks!
agree with several other posters regarding the collections. i’ve tried to move past my (negative) opinion on the architecture, however i can’t get past the collections (or lack there of.) i was extremely disappointed on my visit to discover how few works of art are actually on display. there is such a waste of space in that building.
I still think it is the ugliest building in the Roanoke Valley.
I was thinking about visiting one day soon with the 4 kids but now that we are going to be hit with new and extreme taxes and more government induced financial burdens because of Obamacare and “Cap and Tax”, I will have to allocate our funds in a more prudent way. Sorry museum.
Although I haven’t been inside, I love the look of the building. I shows that Roanoke is still alive. There are so many cookie cutter buildings in towns Roanoke’s size, that having an interesting architectual design really speaks that Roanoke is someplace special, and has a future.
Not only an ugly eyesore, but, wouldn’t 66 million dollars spent somewhere else helped the community a lot more. With a lot of people struggling to make ends meet, I don’t think a heap of metal and a building full of useless paintings are “doing” much…accept sitting on the wall waiting for the “lack” of visitors to appreciate them. A True American Artist, Walt Disney, who is not only commercially viable but made an “evil” profit. And if you REALLY want my opinion, as well as the AVERAGE person…Even $2million of my money is WASTED! And it greatly offends us that we have no say!
I have been out of the valley for some time, working overseas. I have not been inside of the museum yet but will surely take my family in the late spring of 2010.
I have, when visiting, observed the museum structure while driving by and it looks fascinating to me. Trust me, another “old southern town” brick building would not stir the imagination or curiosity of adventurous. This building and from what I have read, hopefully over time, the art, will create its own vibrancy in this southern downtown landscape.
The building, it’s different, and that is what will ultimately draw visitors and in turn more displays. This museum will be successful. Cherish the courage of a southern town like Roanoke taking such a gamble. Support this museum. I for sure, along with my family will do so when we return.
We visited the museum last December while visiting family during the holidays(I live in Atlanta)and was floored by it! Wonderful collection..stunning architecture. We ended up having a wonderful lunch in the museum and spending the day in the downtown area galleries and shops. We plan on another visit to Roanoke during January and are very much looking forward to another museum outing! *Particularly looking forward to the Rembrandt exhibit! Good job Roanoke!! (My only advise would be the addition of an IMAX)
I still like the way it looks. Its eye catching and I think the people who complain about the price or appearance probably complain when their ice cream is cold.
It really does lack exhibits and gallery space for the size of the building. Its 70% foyer. It seems more like a multiuse facility than a traditional art museum since the gallery to “other stuff” ratio is so lopsided. Maybe that’s what they were going for?
Either way…if it brings in outside money I don’t really care what it looks like or whats inside.
The Taubman is lacking in brand awareness. I went with my family once in Dec.2008. I felt the admission price was very high for the content.If the Taubman changed to a “suggested donation” like the Metropolitan in NYC, those of lesser means could enjoy the museum too.Lower prices would increase traffic which would increase awareness.The Roanoke Valley is not a hotbed wealthy, arts oriented people. Increased awareness among people of average income should be a priority.
Finally, if part of the Taubman mission is to make Roanoke an arts destination why is there such a lack of local artists on display? There would be more pride in ownership by all residents if more “locals” were featured. If I want to see 17th century Italian Renaissance art or Flemish painters I’m more likely to go to the source.I love the museum and it’s promise but I am discouraged by it’s management so far.
I love the addition of the creative structure to our skyline and the intriguing view it offers visitors from 220, but haven’t been inside the museum since opening day. I think that the Italian and Flemish permanent collections are a waste of space- a modern building in Roanoke should focus most of its promotional energy as well as wall and floor space on modern and contemporary art from America, Roanoke and Virignia in particular.