By Anna Pulley
By Erin Sherbert
By Chris Roberts
By Erin Sherbert
By Rachel Swan
By Joe Eskenazi
By Erin Sherbert
By Erin Sherbert
For a version of San Francisco history from the perspective of the masses, visit the Rincon Annex at Mission and Spear streets. The cartoonish yet unsettlingly realistic murals Anton Refregier painted there as a Works Progress Administration commission in 1940 provide a suffering everyman's version of our city's past.
This grand old Postal Service building has since been gutted to create offices and a touristy shopping center. But its murals remain as a monument to our country's mid-20th-century WPA spirit of an expansive public realm that seems different in character from today, when amenities such as museums and parks are built and maintained not by the government but by private foundations that exist to create tax write-offs for the rich.
Refregier painted gaunt, El Greco–like figures with sharp-angled features put in relief with intense colors and dramatic contrasts between dark and light. Often described as a socialist-realist, he depicted a world where the weak suffer at the hands of the mighty.
By 1940, San Francisco business leaders had succeeded in turning the memory of the 1906 earthquake and fire into a phoenix myth. The city cared for its least fortunate so well that only a few hundred people died, this tycoon-fashioned story said, and the city was swiftly resurrected to its former glory. In reality, some 6,000 people died and many more were left crippled, impoverished, and homeless.
Refregier chronicled this reality in a scene of starving, injured, dead, or near-death earthquake victims that evokes modern Darfur. In another scene, Irish workers hold Chinese laborers by their hair as they beat them. Another panel depicts the trial of labor leader Thomas Mooney, who served 22 years in prison for a bombing conviction based on perjured test-imony. Refregier's artistic message is that California history for most people consisted of a struggle that was difficult and at times cruel.
The supposedly subversive images so offended Northern California swells that they got Congress to hold hearings to consider a proposal to destroy the murals. The hearing matched the oratory skills of former labor leader and Congressman Jack Shelley against the machinations of Congressman Richard Nixon. Shelley, and the murals, prevailed.
For another perspective on art, where it is used to aggrandize rather than critique capital's commanding heights, walk one and a half blocks to 2 Folsom, the Gap Inc. headquarters. This is the current location of the modern art collection of Don and Doris Fisher, who are backing a plan to build a modern glass-and-steel art museum in the Presidio to house the artworks the Fisher family has collected during the past 30 years.
Just as the history behind Refregier's murals — and the artwork within them — contains the moral that ordinary people deserve better than they get from the powerful, Fisher's private collection has served the opposite purpose. Now displayed in the vast foyer of his government-subsidized penthouse office, his regal collection of investment-grade sculptures, paintings, and statues seems displayed in a way designed to awe the business rivals, politicians, and supplicants he grants audiences to. It turns out he personally pays almost $1 million per year to use Gap's office space to store his art collection. In this light, his proposed Contemporary Art Museum of the Presidio starts to look like a way to transform this private personal expense into a nonprofit museum tax write-off, all the while inflating his image as a public-spirited man.
When it's completed, Fisher's museum will create an artistic statement that is the opposite of Refregier's: The fact that the rich and powerful gain ground at the expense of the rest of us will be portrayed as triumph rather than tragedy.
At its most elemental, Fisher's proposal to move his collection from its current location — which happens to be in the middle of the city's growing art gallery district next to BART and multiple Muni and bus lines as well as myriad other attractions — appears to be an accounting measure.
The Fishers currently pay $900,000 annually to Gap to store their modern art collection at 2 Folsom and in a Gap-owned building on Harrison, according to a June 2007 proxy statement. The 15-year agreement to house the collection at the Gap headquarters runs out in 2016. At that time, the Fishers' rent could theoretically skyrocket, if San Francisco office leases were to increase from current rates during the next nine years.
Fisher has proposed to solve this problem by building a 100,000-square-foot museum in the Presidio, where the old Army bowling alley is now, at a cost of $45 million.
If Fisher's museum becomes the property of a nonprofit foundation, as is ordinarily the case, any money he puts toward its construction would be considered a donation to charity. He could write off a substantial amount from his tax bill, not to mention the tax benefits from any artwork he might donate to the museum. In this way, the massive personal expense Fisher currently incurs maintaining the penthouse floor of the Gap building as a private art museum turns into more of an expense to the government.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing if it creates a public benefit — the U.S. tax code is written to encourage philanthropy. But tycoons and their nonprofit foundations are famous for blurring the line between public and private benefit. So the question becomes: How public-spirited would Don Fisher's museum be?