MOMA as Manipulator By Boris Lurie (Part 2): It must be said that the Museum staff at present is composed of less machiavellian figures than in the past, but this fact, if anything, makes it even easier for business interests to use them. Whenever criticism of Museum choices is voiced, the answer is that such "selectivity" is essential to the art historian`s job; it is difficult, though, to reconcile the various types of "selectivity" practiced, as different yardsticks seem to be applied to different art from different periods and different countries. Some acquisition programs seem to be fully geared to foreign policy only (such as the South American program). The fact is that the Museum does not function on any basis of "selectivity", but on the basis of pressure as exercised by interested groups. All this is perfectly normal procedure in any other business enterprise; but in the case of a publicly-supported museum it is an entirely different matter. What is involved here is a manipulation of culture. Manipulation of culture is not a harmless thing: It becomes manipulation of education, and education in turn may overflow into action. It is the staff, more so than the trustees and members, who are directly involved in such culture-manipoulation. Manipulation of culture emanating from the number-one modern art museum in the world, backed up by the biggest collection of modern art treasure, plus some of the biggest names in world business, has a tremendous power on the thought, education and habits of people.The Museum of Modern Art and particularly its staff, present and past, are guilty of such culture manipulation. The technique of cultural manipulation as practiced by the Museum is accompanied by a tragic by-product, including the destruction of individual talents and even physical annihilation. The artist or art movement unable to set up a power pressure group is doomed to be killed off. It is unable to communicate with the public as no one will exhibit such work, it cannot get minimum financial support: the press is closed to it.The artists` spirits after repeated failures will be broken, artistic suicide and even actual death may follow. Although the present staff appears to be interested in making minor accommodations as regards the demands of the artists, the actual purpose of such accomodation is to uplift the tarnished "big corporation" image of the Museum; to keep up with changing times, it being fashionable now to be "liberal" or "leftist"; and to make the public forget the long history of culure manipulation. By making minor accommodations of an insignificant mature, by keeping the dialogue with artists` advisory committees going, the Museum staff is in fact succeeding in pacifying any potential conflict and pulling out the flames even before the fire has really started. - Published in : RAT, New York, Vol. 2, No 24, Dec 25 - Jan 7/1970