Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
The Sackler Family: Museum "Philanthropy" and Dopesick Recap
165 Plays2 years ago
Hope you all did your homework by watching Hulu's Dopesick because we are talking about the Sackler family and their relationship with the arts. More specifically Bianca takes us through a chapter of her thesis on The Dinner Party and discusses The Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art— the person who acquired the piece and the space it is permanently housed in. Stick around to listen to our thoughts on how art was used as a tool to suggest the Sackler’s status and how acts of protest took place in influential museum spaces both IRL and in the show.
For all of Artpop Talk's resources, click HERE.
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction: FDA and the Arts
00:00:01
Speaker
Hello, hello, and welcome to Art Pop Talk. I'm Gianna. And I'm Bianca. Bianca, what do the FDA and the arts have in common? Well, that's a toughie. Essentially, they both suck. So for today's very exciting episode about things that suck,
00:00:24
Speaker
We are diving into the final chapter of my thesis on the dinner party, and we are going to continue some of these ongoing conversations that we've had on APT about how the art market and big businesses are basically one in the same. They are connected and influenced by the same major players as is the rest of the world. So with that, let's art pop talk.
Holiday Decor Anecdotes
00:00:53
Speaker
Hey, hey, how you doing, sister? Hello, hello, hello. My goodness. What's up? Good, good, good. How are you, my dear? I'm going to see you, like, so soon. I know. It's only two weeks away, and I'm getting really excited. Yeah, but, like, Mondays don't count, and, like, Fridays go fast. Yeah, and I have plans this weekend, and then I have the wedding in two weeks. Shout out, Art Pop Tart Catherine. So excited for your wedding. So when you think about it, it was really, like, two days.
00:01:22
Speaker
Totally, totally. I'm very much looking forward to the holidays. I put my tree up this weekend and You know, I think it's really cute. It is really cute Bianca and I have this whole thing with our Christmas trees because we're both in apartments, but I just got a little little planty little house plant and
00:01:48
Speaker
And I decorated it just with lights and those like tree stuffers. I didn't really get any ornaments, but I was FaceTiming Bianca earlier last week and I was like, hey, do you want to see my, I said my Christmas tree. And then I suppose, I guess it was anti-climatic when I just panned and it was like a bush on the floor.
00:02:10
Speaker
It's really lovely. I really love it. But when you I just to me that it just the words and the way you phrased it like It's just it's really cute. I really like it. I was just surprised when it wasn't like, you know a five-foot tree or whatever
00:02:29
Speaker
I guess I thought that I had told you what the plan was. I think you did and I forgot. Okay, well rude. So I apologize.
Spotify Wrapped Revelations
00:02:40
Speaker
Well, should we get into art news slash more chitty chatty? Yeah, maybe we can prep the art news because
00:02:50
Speaker
Spotify wrapped came out and I don't know how you felt about yours, Bianca, but mine was fucking banging. Mine was terrible. My Spotify wrapped. My Spotify wrapped. I was listening back to the, you know, playlist that they give you.
00:03:09
Speaker
And what fucking taste I have. Like honestly, I was listening to it on the drive and I was like, this is a fantastic playlist. It was just bad. It was weird. And another weird thing too was I was looking at how many hours of music other people listened to when they were sharing it on social media. And mine was just very, very low. And I don't know if
00:03:34
Speaker
I don't know, it only said I listened to like, less like a little under like 10,000 hours of music, which is not a lot considering I feel like other people were in the 30s. So yeah, I don't know, it was really low. So I don't know, there just like wasn't that much to pick from, I guess. So so give us your can you share your top five? Like, what are your stats? Give it give it to us. Yikes.
00:03:59
Speaker
Okay, so my top artists, one was Lady Gaga, two was Queen Herbie, which isn't a surprise because I listened to her like I can't do a workout without listening to her. Oh, she's such a good workout artist. Yeah. And then Miley was on there. And then like one of the
00:04:19
Speaker
This wasn't one of them. So it just feels like such a long time ago when I was listening to this music. So listen. Okay. Bridgerton had some pops. Oh, it's horrible. But I
00:04:41
Speaker
I really liked the reimagining of pop songs in Bridgerton, but I guess I didn't realize I liked it that much to where the composer for those songs was my number three. So it was literally Gaga, Queen Herbie, big shift to that composer, Chris Bowers, and then four was Miley.
00:05:07
Speaker
And then another thing that was like, eek, I don't know how I feel about it, is like around the time where like the Demi Lovato documentary came out, she also released that album. And there were some songs on there that I actually did like, really like, and Ari did a song with her, but she was my number five. And I have- Demi Lovato? Yes. Wow. I know. I was very,
00:05:34
Speaker
shocked. I had mixed feelings about that one. Yeah. But I mean, like I definitely do remember listening to that album. It just feels like a very long time ago. Yeah. And then for like my top songs, literally three of them were from Bridgerton. That's amazing. It was horrible. And then the way that Spotify
00:05:56
Speaker
introduced it to me was just so weird. I don't know if everybody else got the same jokes on their Spotify route, but mine said, well, everybody was trying to figure out what NFTs were. You were playing this one song on repeat. And it was- Yeah, that's what everyone got. Oh my God. I was just like, everything about that was rough for me. So give us your top five songs. I want to hear the title. OK, so number one was Wildest Dreams.
00:06:25
Speaker
The Bridgerton version. Don't mind that original song so much. However, I don't know. I thought this one was more of a bop. Number two was Strange, which is like, you know, the song that they play with for like the sex scene. But however, you know who I'm so surprised was not on my list was Celeste because Celeste is the artist who like sings Strange and
00:06:51
Speaker
I've been listening to her a lot and anytime I'm at work, I have control over the gallery soundtrack and I always play her because I just think she's such a good vibe. So I was shocked. I'm like, really? I got Demi, but I didn't have Celeste on there. It looked like a piece of garbage. It was very annoying. Number three, Montero. And then number four was Girls Like You, Bridgerton, which that
00:07:21
Speaker
original song is horrible. I hate it so much, but the string quartet can get it. And number five. It's it's just so weird. But I remember sitting at mom's countertop, I was doing some kind of work and
00:07:41
Speaker
I got on some kind of like TikTok playlist and the song De Niro came on and I think just in that one day I might have just played that song on repeat like 30 times and then I never did anything with it ever again and now it's on my top five. Oh my god that's hilarious. I will
00:08:00
Speaker
let you know that Bridgerton Girls Like You was my number, I think like six song. So it was like the six or seven song played in my top like 100 songs of the year or whatever. So because I was listening to that playlist and it came on shortly after my top five and I was like, yeah, that one is a bop.
00:08:22
Speaker
For Bridgerton too, to be honest, like I was working out to that album.
Spotify Wrapped Design Debate
00:08:27
Speaker
I don't know why I enjoyed working out to it. You talked about that on the podcast. Yeah, I was working out to that for a while. And I think that's what what did me in. But I am just very annoyed that Celeste is not on my top five because I've Yeah.
00:08:42
Speaker
She lives rent free in my mind. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Overall, I am very pleased with my Spotify wrapped. We've got Lady Gaga coming in hot at number one. The anxiety I feel if she's not at the top of my list. No, truly, truly. I know. Um, Lady Gaga, Casey Musgraves, Queen Casey, going to see her in February. Can I wait?
00:09:08
Speaker
Miley Cyrus, Ariana Grande and then coming in at number five she has been on my top the past like two or three years and I kind of have a conspiracy theory that like
00:09:23
Speaker
Taylor Swift is on almost everybody's top five artists because I'm just not like a super big Taylor Swift fan. And I don't know if it's that like, she's releasing just so much music. And if it, if I'm listening to it or you know, I read is not my favorite album in the world. But I did want to listen to her version.
00:09:47
Speaker
So I didn't even finish it. Like I started listening. It's like two hours long, this album. And I didn't, I made it like halfway through. And Lover is still definitely my favorite Taylor Swift album. And I do listen to a lot of songs from Lover, but I was very surprised that she was my number five. And it's like, again, she's in my top for like, again, the second or third year in a row. And I find that very odd and
00:10:15
Speaker
I feel like there's some shadiness happening. I get what you mean though. It's just that the odds are in her favor when she releases so much content. Right, right. Yeah. Well, I would like to piggyback off of this conversation and get into art news. Do you think it's time? I would love nothing more. So for today's art news,
00:10:48
Speaker
I was thinking we could talk about the Spotify wrapped graphics and how people are either really not liking them or they do really like it. So Bianca, were you as concerned about the Spotify wrapped graphics as the rest of the internet this past week? Or did you even know any of this was happening?
00:11:10
Speaker
Um, literally no. Like why the fuck is this a conversation that's happening? I mean, I like Spotify wrapped. I think Spotify always has really good graphics. I think that's just at this point as part of their brand. Like you can just tell they have this kind of like funky, I don't know,
00:11:28
Speaker
pop like very cutesy aesthetic throughout all of their marketing. So I don't know, I wasn't shocked by any of the graphics on Spotify wrapped like I just it looked like Spotify wrapped. I don't know. Also, I don't know if this is happening largely on TikTok, but I did delete my TikTok a few months ago now.
00:11:48
Speaker
And I feel like my life is so much better. I just have to say, I know Gianna and I were riding the TikTok train hard for a while, and sometimes I do miss being included on conversations like this one. But I really don't miss it whatsoever. It just wasn't becoming a super healthy habit for me.
00:12:11
Speaker
Yeah, is that where a lot of these people are complaining about the graphics? Yeah, for sure. For me anyways, that's when I saw it on TikTok. And so specifically, I want to talk about the slide that was your top genre, kind of.
00:12:28
Speaker
graphic that they gave you and people are very like up in arms about this graphic because of the typography this really had people shook so essentially like for mine I took a screenshot and number one dance pop number two indeed number three what was that country dawn whatever the fuck that is I think that is largely Casey Musgraves and Dolly Parton yeah it must be my country dawn was my I think number two genre
00:12:58
Speaker
And my number two artist was Casey, and I'm listening to Dolly a lot, and Maren Morris. I could think that that's kind of country dawn. I wonder if Miley is included in that. But she was just named rock artist. Yeah, but younger now, maybe. So anyways.
00:13:16
Speaker
People were not liking how this typography was smushed as you kind of get lower down on the totem pole. So I found a person on TikTok. Her name is Kel. And she's a graphic designer. She's actually done work for Spotify before. And she talked to us about typography and how it's supposed to be used. And typography is there to evoke an emotion. And certain types of texts are super loaded.
00:13:47
Speaker
You do have to be careful in what text you are using, because if that was used in another art piece before or a symbol or an organization, you are making associations with that past work. So there is an art to it. Of course, typography's main use is communication. That's the point of typography, is reading.
00:14:12
Speaker
But also in terms of art, that doesn't mean that it actually has to be legible, which I think, and as Cal describes too, it's kind of like the biggest misconception or why people were so uncomfortable with this mushed text. So essentially this text was acting as a creative bar graph, and it did have the descriptor text next to it so we could still understand what was happening.
00:14:39
Speaker
But they were trying to be creative and playful and not only give you your ratings, but also give you like a bar graph. Which to me, I can't say that.
00:14:49
Speaker
I wasn't really up in arms about this typography. I didn't really think much of it. I thought it fit the flow of the other graphics. I didn't really spend much time or I guess I just didn't really care what my top genres are. I was like, oh, dance pop makes sense moving on. And even graphic designers were rating this typography. And it doesn't make any sense. You can't read the text, which is really not essentially the point because you do have the descriptor next to it. But holistically, Bianca, as you were talking about,
00:15:19
Speaker
I felt the same way. The graphics were playful. They were on brand for Spotify. Even if they were different from last year, they are a creative company. They have the ability to do something more like whimsical and playful. And that's what they did. But I think no matter what, like you're going to have people that either really like it or maybe they just think
00:15:40
Speaker
Perhaps it wasn't, I don't know, with the like elevated or like high brow graphic, perhaps. There was some other kind of weird like graphic splicing that they did that I think people thought maybe just looked like lazy, which I did not get at all. I think it was everything they did was super intentional.
00:16:03
Speaker
Yeah. So anyways, I thought that was interesting. Yeah, it definitely is. I know Spotify has kind of been on our topic of conversation for the past couple of weeks, but it definitely takes a presence up in pop culture. So now's out of the way. Now we're done. Better luck next year, Gianna.
The Dinner Party and Elizabeth Ann Sackler
00:16:20
Speaker
Get it together, Ben. Start listening now. So do we want to go ahead and get into today's art pop talk? Let's do it.
00:16:35
Speaker
We are going back to our OG APT case study, the Dinner Party. But because we've talked so much about that piece itself, its meaning, today we will get to talk about major players and history surrounding the piece, such as the museum institution that houses it and its patron. So really for today, our case study isn't so much the Dinner Party itself, but these influential people at the Brooklyn Museum of Art and the person who first acquired the piece, Elizabeth Ann Sackler.
00:17:05
Speaker
whose family and family business is responsible for the opioid epidemic in the US. In the second half of the episode, we are going to talk about the recent Hulu show Dope Sick targeting the investigation on Purdue Pharma and its powerful family members.
00:17:21
Speaker
So I have a lot of questions for Bianca. If you remember our past episodes where we dive into her thesis, this is kind of the structure that we use. We go chapter by chapter and I get the lovely task of going back and reading her thesis and her chapters and then I'm just gonna
00:17:40
Speaker
Chitty chat about it. How does that sound? Sounds good. So let's start with Dr. Elizabeth Ann Sackler herself. Who exactly is she? Why did you feel it was important to include her in your thesis? And if you can, tell us about her role in her influential family and how she acquired the dinner party.
00:18:06
Speaker
Yeah, sure. So basically, the third main chapter of my thesis is all about the dinner party in the space of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum. And I really wasn't sure where this chapter was going to go originally, but then I had the opportunity to go visit the piece in person.
00:18:29
Speaker
And it really changed my perspective as we'll get into about where my research should go in the future of these kind of feminist art spaces. And while I was writing my thesis, I graduated in the spring of 2019.
00:18:46
Speaker
with my masters. And of course, as many of you may be familiar with now, Purdue Pharma went through their lawsuit in the 2018-19 years. And as we'll get into, Nan Golden obviously played a major part in how that was being represented at museums. So this felt also very timely for me to consider as I was writing my thesis as well.
00:19:10
Speaker
We've talked previously about the work's history, as Gianna said, and particularly in the second episode of APT Ever, and then in our episode on Ornament as well. But I'll warn you, if you listen back to our episode two, bear with us for that episode's quality as we were fresh bebe podcasters.
00:19:30
Speaker
Uh, but you know, hopefully the content is, uh, still there for you if you're interested. So to just recap on the piece a little bit, the piece premiered in 79 at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. And, uh, then it went on tours and storages and tours and storage, and it was in storage for a very long time until 2002. And in 2002, Elizabeth A. Sackler, who was a longtime friend of Judy Chicago,
00:19:57
Speaker
acquired the piece and donated it to the Brooklyn Museum. And then in 2007, the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art opened to the public. And the center is now the works permanent home functioning as this kind of piece de resistance of the feminist art wing. It is very central to the heart of the feminist wing there. So a little bit on Elizabeth. She was born in New York in 1948.
00:20:23
Speaker
She is the daughter of Arthur M. Sackler and Elizabeth grew up in obviously a very wealthy upper-class family which allowed her to attend a private high school in New York where she became involved in the activism of the civil rights movement and in 1997 she received her PhD in public history and was the first female chair of the Brooklyn Museum's board.
00:20:46
Speaker
Her family has a history of collecting fine art, which did not escape Elizabeth by any means. In 2016, she did an interview where she said, quote, art has always been a part of my life.
00:21:01
Speaker
But the social justice piece comes out because I can't help myself. That's nice, Elizabeth. While Elizabeth has been a social justice and arts advocate for almost her entire life, you've probably now in recent years become familiar with her family name, as obviously they have made headlines in relation to the opioid epidemic that has taken hold of the United States. Now we'll get into this more, but as I suppose a pre-context to
00:21:30
Speaker
answer the question about her role in the Sackler family. Elizabeth was not named in the 2018-19 lawsuit against her family. She actually came out in support of the protests held at artistic and education spaces that display the Sackler name and none of those protests that we saw kind of in Dopesick the show and you know with Nan Golden as we'll discuss
00:21:56
Speaker
None of those protests have been held at the Center for Feminist Art in the Brooklyn Museum. Elizabeth said that she and her children have not profited from OxyContin and said Purdue Pharma's role in the opioid crisis was morally abhorrent. So before we get into Elizabeth's kind of like direct contribution to the dinner party a little bit more,
00:22:19
Speaker
you already started speaking about her family. So in your thesis, you do break down some of the Sackler family members for us briefly, but you do mention a major contribution that they made. So to quote you in your thesis, Arthur M Sackler, a psychiatrist who in 1974, along with his two brothers Mortimer and Raymond, donated $3.5 million to the New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art in the 1970s, earning them a wing of the museum with their name on it.
00:22:49
Speaker
So I was hoping that you could talk to us more about the power of this family and like the hold it had in the art world or where did their involvement or infatuation with the arts come from or where did it start. We understand a little bit of how it kind of occurred for Elizabeth being already born into that but for her father like or even grandfather like where did that come from?
00:23:14
Speaker
Sure, so I'll try to answer that. I'm going to give a little bit of background on the three main brothers, which you might remember from the show. We have Arthur Mortimer and Raymond Sackler, and these were the three children of Jewish immigrants who grew up in Brooklyn in the 1930s.
00:23:32
Speaker
All three of these siblings went to medical school and they worked together for the Creedmoor psychiatric center in Queens. They have often been cited as quote early pioneers and medication techniques which ended the common practice of lobotomies and were also regarded as the first to fight for the racial integration of blood banks. Arthur Sackler was widely regarded as this kind of patriarch of the family and in 1952
00:24:02
Speaker
The three brothers bought a small pharmaceutical company, which was called Purdue Frederick. Raymond and Mortimer ran Purdue, while Arthur, the oldest brother, became a really pioneer, I guess, in medical advertising, which was a focal point of the show. So he devised campaigns that appealed directly to doctors and then enlisted prominent physicians to endorse Purdue's products.
00:24:32
Speaker
While Arthur wasn't necessarily running Purdue Pharma, he was on that back end of the advertising portion. He's also a large art collector. He was one of the foremost art collectors of his generation, and he donated the majority of his collections to museums around the world. He died in 1987, and his one third of Purdue Frederick was sold by his estate to his two brothers,
00:25:00
Speaker
who turned it into Purdue Pharma.
The Sackler Legacy in Art and Pharmaceuticals
00:25:03
Speaker
So after his death, the two other remaining brothers conglomerated into Purdue Pharma. The Sackler family has donated to countless
00:25:13
Speaker
cultural institutions. We have the Met, the Museum of Natural History, the Guggenheim, Smithsonian, Jewish Museum, Tate Gallery in London, National Gallery, Natural History Museum of London, the V&A Museum in London, Royal Botanical Gardens, the British Museum, and the Louvre. So I suppose my explanation for them being large arts and education philanthropists is simply due to the fact that they have money
00:25:42
Speaker
And kind of referring back to our episode on the art market, investing in the arts is another way to make a profit. So yes, they are quote unquote philanthropists and they give a lot of money to museums, which as we've talked about is unfortunately needed by a lot of rich people. Yes, sure, they have an affinity for arts and culture.
00:26:08
Speaker
But from my perspective, it seems like that is why they broke into this realm, is because they have an exuberant amount of funding and investing in the arts only increases that. I want to talk about this a little bit more in practice, maybe give an example of how this has played out.
00:26:28
Speaker
and why this is actually really important, particularly regarding Arthur and how this might help us kind of think further about Elizabeth's situation at the Brooklyn Museum. In 2019, the senator and then presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren joined a lot of activists and students
00:26:47
Speaker
calling for Harvard University to remove Arthur Sackler's name from the art museum to which he donated millions of dollars in objects and so on and so forth. I'm going to read the description of the museum from Harvard's website. In 1912 Langdon Warner taught the first courses in Asian art at Harvard.
00:27:08
Speaker
and the first at any American university. By 1977, Harvard's collections of Asian, ancient, and Islamic and later Indian art had grown sufficiently in size and importance to require a larger space for their display and study.
00:27:23
Speaker
With the generosity of Dr. Arthur M. Sackler, a leading psychiatrist, entrepreneur, art collector, and philanthropist, the Harvard Art Museum founded a museum dedicated to works from Asia, the Middle East, and the Mediterranean. The Arthur M. Sackler Museum opened in 1985. The structure remains the home of the History of Art and Architecture Department and the MediaSlide Library.
00:27:49
Speaker
Now I'm going to quote this Forbes article by this hilarious author. I'm going to see why it's so funny here in a second. Evan Gerstmann. This guy was cracking me up earlier. To quote Gerstmann, the problem with the demand to remove Arthur Sackler's name from Harvard and other institutions such as the Smithsonian
00:28:12
Speaker
though, is that Arthur Sackler had absolutely nothing to do with any of this. The movement against him is a sad example of the sort of guilt by association that has become far too common. An earlier post discussed another protest moment at Harvard, one that is attempting to get an African American dean at the law school removed from his deanship. What crime has he committed? None whatsoever.
00:28:39
Speaker
He simply agreed to legally represent Harvey Weinstein. Oh boy. There were no allegations of wrongdoing on the Dean's part. Mere association with Weinstein was enough to call for this removal. What is so strange about this case is that Arthur Sackler actually died before OxyContin was developed or marketed. He never made a penny off of it and obviously wasn't involved in its marketing or
00:29:07
Speaker
in any fraudulent behavior regarding OxyContin. In fact, it doesn't appear that he has been accused of ever fraudulently representing the risks or benefits of any drug. As the president of Harvard has written, Dr. Arthur Sackler died before the drug was developed
00:29:24
Speaker
His family sold their interest in the company before the drug was developed. Furthermore, none of the many OxyContin-related lawsuits name Arthur Sackler or his heirs. Well, because Arthur is dead, so... Quite interesting. I get that argument. I get that he...
00:29:45
Speaker
He died and if he didn't have anything to do with the opioid epidemic that his predecessor was caused, I understand that. But what information do we have about collectors in a way where
00:30:01
Speaker
maybe that information is more accessible in museums. And again, it goes back to our other conversations, like our museums having these conversations about their donors and who their collectors are. However, I just really hate it when
00:30:19
Speaker
we compare Apple in orange situations. I mean, I suppose we can talk about academia and the Harvard Museum taking donations from the Sackler family, those connections. But talking about OxyContin and then Harvey Weinstein are just two very different things. And I feel kind of uncomfortable with him using that as a way to fuel his argument.
00:30:49
Speaker
Oh, 1000%. The two are not related in any way.
00:30:55
Speaker
So I yeah, I found his argument to fall flat. I just feel like he could have found a different case study that actually had to do with like, perhaps like other problematic donors. Well, and here's the thing, you know, we'll keep talking about this throughout the episode. But Arthur Sackler, no, he was not directly responsible for the marketing and
00:31:24
Speaker
selling and production of OxyContin. But as the show pointed out and as is factually based, Arthur Sackler reinvigorated and is responsible for the hiring of physicians to market drugs for you. So Arthur Sackler still took advantage of the broken healthcare system that we have in this country.
00:31:53
Speaker
that is not something that is okay regardless of his involvement in OxyContin. There were still other drugs that Purdue Pharma had manufactured prior to OxyContin which they do discuss in the show and as you see unfold Richard Sackler
00:32:14
Speaker
has this kind of fascination with his uncle Arthur and how Arthur was this marketing genius. And you also see the episode in which Arthur is called to speak before Congress. So you do have this predecessor. This master of manipulation. Yes, a master of manipulation in itself who is taking advantage of our broken system.
00:32:42
Speaker
No, he wasn't responsible for deaths by OxyContin, but there were still other problems with what he was able to do and manipulate. I also just wanted to point out something as well where Richard in the show is kind of staring at that work of art in his bedroom and he says it was his uncle Arthur's and he hated it.
00:33:03
Speaker
I just thought that was an interesting point that they added because Arthur Sackler did donate all of those Asian and Indian artworks to the Harvard Art Museum. So he was a collector of Asian art, which they made a point to share.
00:33:20
Speaker
Fascinating. I want to save more of my thoughts for our DOPESET conversation. Yes. So let's move on.
Trigger Warnings in Museums: Use and Impact
00:33:28
Speaker
What is the significance of the Sackler Center and the Brooklyn Museum of Art other than we know that it houses a dinner party, right? So what is the function and the presence that it has within the larger art world? And can you talk about
00:33:44
Speaker
the organization referred to as the council who helped establish programming and conversation in the center. Sure. So again, I'll give a little bit more background on the relationship of Elizabeth to Miss Judy. Elizabeth first met Judy Chicago in 1988 when she visited Chicago studio in Santa Fe. And at the time, Chicago was exploring her Jewish heritage in her Holocaust project. And
00:34:12
Speaker
The pair became very close. They shared Passover together. Sackler has since become one of Chicago's most prominent collectors, saying of the artist, quote, Judy was really my teacher about the feminist movement. Then in Chicago's book, The Dinner Party from Creation to Preservation, the artist writes the following on Sackler.
00:34:35
Speaker
quote, her own personal history prepared her to play an important role as a patron, as she is from a family that has practiced both art patronage and philanthropy for many decades. One important lesson to be learned from her decision to house the dinner party is that one person can intercede history, in this case by single-handedly guaranteeing the work's preservation.
00:35:00
Speaker
Her act also illustrates the crucial significance of patronage, something that has been sorely lacking in relation to women's art, which is one reason so much of it has been erased. Intrasan't, no. So while there are small museum and historic sites around the country that are dedicated to women's social achievements, the Sackler Center is really kind of the first of its kind and only of its kind.
00:35:26
Speaker
It acts as an exhibition and education environment dedicated to feminist art, its past, present and future. Its mission is to quote, raise awareness of feminism's cultural contributions to educate new generations about the meaning of feminist art and to maintain a dynamic and welcoming learning environment.
00:35:48
Speaker
Unlike the National Museum for Women in the Arts in Washington DC, which is the only major museum in the world that is dedicated to championing women through the arts, the Sackler Center functions as a very unique entity within a larger cultural art institution. It resides on the fourth floor of the museum where visitors can also find the contemporary and decorative arts collections.
00:36:15
Speaker
The center also features other adjoining rooms intended for studies, educational purposes, and public programming, which are provided by, as Gianni mentioned, the center's Council for Feminist Art. This council is led by chair members and the current center's senior curator, Catherine Morris, who I believe used to work at the Philbrook Museum in Tulsa. And it's designed to invite members, quote,
00:36:41
Speaker
to engage in a dialogue about feminism's relevance to visual culture and participate in exhibition openings, private visits to artists, studio tours, and art fairs, curator-led tours, lectures, and much more. In the three spaces that surround Chicago's table, a regular exhibition of scheduled feminist art is on view with two to three new shows per year.
00:37:08
Speaker
Upon its opening, the center premiered with Global Feminisms, which focused on feminist art from 1990 to the present. Since its opening, they have exhibited a variety of works and artists. And while the center often brings in particular pieces or artists for these exhibitions, their 2018 and 19 show, Half the Picture, highlights over 100 of the center's works from their permanent collection.
00:37:35
Speaker
The permanent collection of feminist art is specifically designated to the Sackler Center, and that is listed on the Brooklyn Museum's website. It contains 167 artworks. That number may have changed over the past few years. This collection is mostly made of works that range from the mid 20th century to the present and are specifically categorized as feminist artworks. However, you can go through the Brooklyn Museum's
00:38:03
Speaker
digital catalog for their entire collection and you can search through women artists whose works are not designated as feminist and are featured in other areas of the museum's collection.
00:38:15
Speaker
So speaking of kind of their accessibility, I want to talk about these different spaces, the physical space and the digital space. And I want to talk about that in relation to the quote trigger warnings that are physically in the Sackler Center and digitally on its public archive. The way that trigger warnings are functioning in museum spaces do
00:38:38
Speaker
kind of serve up some controversy because they aren't always used for its true intent but rather to create messages that are targeting miners and deterring miners from entering certain spaces.
00:38:53
Speaker
So tell us about the psychology behind trigger warnings and how they are being weaponized in feminist spaces and not used or seen in comparison to other kind of historic spaces in museums, regardless of their explicit content.
00:39:10
Speaker
Yeah, so I want to recommend a collection of essays from 2017 that are together in a book called Trigger Warnings, History, Theory, and Context, which you know I might guide you to if you want to know more about the evolution of these messages. But by now I'm sure many of you are familiar with the term trigger warning as it's entered popular culture and are kind of everyday vernacular.
00:39:35
Speaker
An essay in the book by Sarah Colbert on the history of post-traumatic stress disorder, including how the concept of trigger warnings might spread from its initial usage in medical circles to the internet as an attempt to identify content that may be problematic for users with a history of trauma. Though Colbert acknowledges that there are intellectual freedom concerns when trigger warnings are mandated.
00:40:01
Speaker
or that some faculty kind of shy away from the content based on student complaints about what they deem to be kind of offensive, she advocates for trigger warnings as a quote necessary and helpful resource for some people as it prepares them to engage with the content, not avoid it. So while I agree that trigger warnings are useful, they are a needed addition to make people, both presenters and audiences,
00:40:31
Speaker
conscious and conscientious about the content that they are either exhibiting or consuming, this is a very, very slippery slope for many museums in particular. For example, on the webpage where one accesses the feminist archive, a disclaimer appears to the browser
00:40:53
Speaker
reading, quote, the feminist art base may present images directed to adult audiences and deals with challenging subject matter that may include sexual content or violence. If you are under 18, do not browse the feminist art base without permission of a parent or guardian. Interestingly, this message warning in the Brooklyn Museum's online visitor of
00:41:17
Speaker
explicit content is not found anywhere else throughout the online collection, including the permanent collection of the Sackler Center. However, a similar signal of caution was physically present at the time that I visited the Sackler Center for Feminist Art on December 27, 2018.
00:41:42
Speaker
conducting research for this project, again I traveled to the Brooklyn Museum specifically to view the dinner party and the Sackler Center, and as one entered the doors of the center standing on a sign, there was a notice that read, quote, this exhibition contains explicit content and may not be suitable for all audiences, including minors. Viewer discretion is advised. Of course, I was
00:42:07
Speaker
quite surprised to see such a warning sign in front of the center's doors because it felt like a discouragement of the works about to be viewed rather than an encouraging opportunity for people to embrace and really think critically about the feminist messages that were being conveyed in this type of space. A space that is
00:42:28
Speaker
supposedly innovative and full of groundbreaking feminist art. If the Sackler Center was displaying artworks that potentially recalled intensely traumatic experiences, I could understand why a trigger warning might be necessary in front of those doors in particular, but again there is no trigger warning
00:42:48
Speaker
anywhere throughout the rest of the museum. And I want to quote a study that I used in my thesis, so I'll tell you a little bit about it because I think it's really useful. Sheri Eileen Erleika is a art educator who previously worked within the educational department at the Brooklyn Museum.
00:43:09
Speaker
and was a prominent figure in producing the dinner parties Institute curriculum, which is a short course that's dedicated to teaching K through 12 teachers how to utilize the dinner party with their students. In 2011, or like I produced a study in which 19 adolescent girls who were minors participated in the women artists and their artwork program at the Brooklyn museum.
00:43:34
Speaker
Quote, this study investigated what could be learned about girls' interests in feminist exhibitions and why girls' interests in feminist exhibitions are relevant when teaching them about feminist artworks. It also considered, if at all,
00:43:48
Speaker
engagement with feminist artworks that interest girls reinforce or change their thinking about gender inequality. With this study in mind that was actually conducted at the Brooklyn Museum and engages the feminist artworks on view in the Sackler Center, it really seems surprising that the curatorial or directorial staff would feel it necessary to display signs that not only warn about the content,
00:44:12
Speaker
but directed as being inappropriate to minors, given that they produce the study about how important it is to educate youths about this topic and about these artworks. Orleica argues that quote, feminist artworks often address controversial and complex issues through imagery that can be sexually and violently graphic. And concerns arise about how to meet the educational, social and developmental needs of adolescent girls when teaching from these artworks.
00:44:42
Speaker
Determining a starting point that enables educators to understand adolescent girls' perceptions of feminist artworks is key to developing appropriate and beneficial programs and lessons for them.
00:44:53
Speaker
I know that this is just a single study, but I want to just make my argument known that this should not just be a program for young girls, it should be open to all children.
Censorship and Museum Guidelines
00:45:05
Speaker
It is important for young boys to also understand the impact of this artwork and how they can aid in gender equality as well.
00:45:16
Speaker
And it's, it is particularly troubling for me to see these disclaimers next to feminist art specifically. Again, they're not found anywhere else in the Brooklyn Museum or anywhere else on its website. And for me, these signs, you know, are really a turning point into
00:45:33
Speaker
adults mindsets as well because you're walking in and if you're an adult you're reading this with a precursor already this little nudge in your head telling you that this is graphic this is violent this is different this is othered than the other work that has been on view rather than inviting museums into a feminist space to learn something new they're met with this instead cautionary text that reaffirms many biases towards feminist art that it's not appropriate
00:46:02
Speaker
That it's overly sexual that again, it's violent, you know, this is something that hasn't gone away just recently we have works on view at the museum I'm currently working at that were specifically
00:46:20
Speaker
hung in our curriculum gallery, which is a space designated largely to faculty and students that pair with different happenings on campus, maybe different courses. It's a place where faculty can request artworks from our permanent collection to be on view. And in this particular case, we had an opening reception for, I believe, our Kara Walker exhibition.
00:46:41
Speaker
And the question was raised about if we should close the doors to this part of the museum that's normally wide open. And it was because on view in the curriculum gallery we had
00:46:53
Speaker
Paired Objects for National Coming Out Day in partnership with our LGBTQ services department on campus. And we got into the topic of censorship and trigger warnings. And our exhibitions on view currently, those by Kara Walker and Horace Pippin, are very graphic exhibitions. I mean, if you're familiar with Kara Walker's work in particular, her work is
00:47:21
Speaker
extremely traumatic to experience. And it's very graphic, but yet in their curriculum gallery, it was male genitalia, it was LGBTQIA plus kind of experiences that were being exhibited in the curriculum gallery. And then that was the topic that is this appropriate? Is this appropriate to be on view for children when
00:47:50
Speaker
you know, here are four white people talking about censorship. And we had ignored the traumatic experiences that black people and underrepresented communities may experience while looking at Kara Walker's work. It just was a really interesting conversation that is still very much taking place through museums everywhere. And, you know, I had to speak up and, you know, talk about how we cannot censor
00:48:18
Speaker
the curriculum gallery without censoring the entire museum. If you want to censor your institution, I think that that is totally fine.
00:48:29
Speaker
I think that there are a lot of trigger warnings and censorships that are useful. And again, I'm not a parent. I do not have kids. And so it is not my job to speak for how parents would like to have their children interact with art objects. That is not my call. However, if that's the case, there needs to be a disclaimer at the very entry point.
00:48:57
Speaker
of every museum. It needs to be on their website. You can't pick and choose what people may be triggered by. And you don't get to cater feminist art as a negative experience for people. So that's just my view on the censorship aspect.
00:49:18
Speaker
I have so many thoughts about this because as a docent or a gallery guard and if you're listening and if you've been in any of those positions before, you might have been approached by a parent and it's a really common question that I would get asked like, hey, is there anything that I should know about the art like before I take my kid in there? Is there anything inappropriate about that?
00:49:41
Speaker
Being in this line of work and particularly being in this role in the pandemic I've just been so completely fascinated with reevaluating the docent experience and really how to like utilize those workers to the forefront because I was
00:49:56
Speaker
brought up in a museum where I had the privilege to be utilized in such a participatory way that I thought was so valuable. And I just think that frontline workers and docents are like truly your biggest asset, they are your eyes and ears. And if you prepare those people to give information, and being able to have conversations with parents, this blatant lack of censorship with no conversation could dissipate with more active conversation from your workers.
00:50:25
Speaker
Bianca for our listeners, and even for artists to I've been thinking about this a lot because as you guys know, I handle subject matters that are traumatizing for myself, they conflict my my own trauma, my own experiences and
00:50:40
Speaker
that's something that I kind of grapple with is do I need to put trigger warnings or disclaimers with my art. But also I think it's something interesting for listeners to consider who are going through like academic programs, whether that's art history, or whether that's a fine art program, depending on your curriculum for mine, talking about the layout of how you present your artwork doesn't always, you don't always unfortunately get
00:51:07
Speaker
that conversation and particularly like trigger warnings like disclaimers about your content and how to display those in in a gallery or museum is like not a thing that I talked about in my undergraduate. So I think that's this is a key conversation for those young professionals. But how can people think more critically about this kind of signage when visiting museums? And do you see any hope or potential for something as influential as the SACO Gallery to change their
00:51:36
Speaker
signage practices. I think that this is a conversation that's it's again just very much still present in museums. It's not going anywhere and I hope that as we get new people involved in museums that they're able to really make this this change. I'll say that I don't know that
00:51:56
Speaker
the sign is put there by the curator of the Sackler Center for Feminist Art. I had reached out to the curator and assistant curator with a list of questions when I was writing my thesis and asked them specifically about this signage and I never got a response. So I believe that this is put there by the larger kind of board or higher ups at the museum. I don't think that this is necessarily the
00:52:26
Speaker
primary choice of the curators, maybe it is, but it seems to me that this is kind of a
00:52:30
Speaker
directorial and like very high curatorial decision I suppose um and again I don't know who that came from but I think I just want to re-emphasize the point that if you are not a white upper class straight male the world is violent against you and as a result of that art history is going to be violent against you so
00:53:00
Speaker
When there are these disruptions, quote unquote, or backlash from underrepresented groups, women, people of color, the LGBTQIA plus community, people with disabilities, when they create artwork about their othering, it is seen as a backlash against the norm and therefore requires censorship because it is viewed as
00:53:26
Speaker
as traumatic. But it seems to me that this is traumatic against the white upper class straight western art world. And again, I am fully in support of trigger warnings and not everybody is going to experience trauma in the same way. Obviously we know that.
00:53:50
Speaker
every piece of art therefore is going to require a trigger warning because everybody has different experiences which is again why I think these messages should be on display in every wing of the gallery. I mean if you think about the history of art it is violent against people of color, against women, against the LGBTQIA plus community. It is
00:54:12
Speaker
violent against everyone else except for the straight upper class white male. I mean, if you think about the rape of the Sabine women, rape of Persephone, rape of Yoruba, you know, like there are so many of these classic examples that are just blatantly taught, they're blatantly exhibited. And they're so violent against women, but this is a classic example of art. It couldn't possibly be triggering. But when a woman artist
00:54:42
Speaker
takes that into her own hands and creates artwork about their own experience, then it is seen as violent. So yes, I think there is hope and I look forward to hearing more discussions about it. All right, everybody, we are going to take a little break. And when we come back, we'll be talking all about dope sex.
00:55:37
Speaker
All right, everybody. Welcome back. I feel like I have been doing a lot of talking throughout this episode. So Gianna, I'm going to ask you to lead us into our recap of Dopesick, our conversation about the show.
Dopesick Series and the Sackler Portrayal
00:55:51
Speaker
Absolutely. I'm going to do my darndest just to give you my candid thoughts. Before I do that, though, I just I still have like a lasting little thought in my head that I can't shake from our first half conversation of this episode.
00:56:07
Speaker
I just think it's really funny that if Trader Joe's can train its employees to essentially flirt with you, then we can train docent people to be able to have conversations about this type of content. Like I even if it's about like flirting with guests and being comfortable, like I am all for talking with Trader Joe's and seeing what their tactics are because those people that work at Trader Joe's are smooth as hell.
00:56:35
Speaker
Like, where are those people? Can I get them in a gallery? Anyways. Oh, for sure. That just was on my mind. And I really needed to share that with you guys. I hope you liked that comparison. So now let's talk about Dopesick. First off, I really, really enjoyed the show a lot. I didn't really, I mean, to be honest, I knew about the Sackler family because of Bianca's thesis. I wasn't completely unfamiliar with this epidemic.
00:57:05
Speaker
but all the kind of idiosyncrasies and conversations within the Sackler family and their active corruption, but also not even there is also the FDAs was
00:57:21
Speaker
really, really wild to learn about. One thing that I particularly liked about the show was the two kind of different timelines we had or two different time spans. In the beginning, it was like a little bit tricky for me. I was like, okay, where are like we in the past or are we in like, they are present, you know what I mean? But then it was really easy to kind of pick up on. But I thought it was particularly important that the
00:57:50
Speaker
picked a case study to hone in on who is being afflicted by Oxycontin the most and I thought them using these
00:58:02
Speaker
small town like small Appalachian Mountain towns was not only pretty like truthful in how this kind of selling operation worked particularly targeting a group of people that already don't have access to the best healthcare and then supplying these drugs as kind of like a one-off as an easy marketing and kind of money tactic was
00:58:26
Speaker
was really interesting. I think in regards to Michael Keaton's kind of character, that whole being a doctor, then getting hooked on drugs, losing his license, that kind of being our artistic take of the show.
00:58:47
Speaker
Obviously, I didn't mind so much. I don't know. And Bianca, I don't know if you did any research about kind of the influence of that character or how that came about. I think all in all, like the case study was truthful, but how we got those narratives, that's kind of where entertainment aspect came from.
00:59:05
Speaker
Yeah, I just, I love Michael Keaton so much. But yeah, for me, the timeline was actually the most distracting part of the show. I liked that they went back and forth because I think given the nature of the case itself, they had to kind of connect those past and future dots to make all of the findings and evidence seem coherent to us. I did enjoy that back and forth.
00:59:32
Speaker
But I think it was just confused. I wanted more time stamps. Like any time they shifted, I wanted to know what the date was. Instead, we only got it like a few times throughout each episode when clearly it was shifting more than that. So that is just the only thing that I thought would have been more useful. But the show is based on the book by Beth Macy, Dopesick, Dealers, Doctors, and the Drunk Company that Addicted America.
01:00:01
Speaker
Yeah, to your point, Gianna, I do think that the way they crafted the show to have that kind of entertainment aspect where you really start to feel personally for the characters that have been afflicted by Purdue Pharma and the drug, I thought was a really inventive way of taking actuality and then turning it into something that seems very personable. Yeah, yeah.
01:00:25
Speaker
So it seems like we have our big kind of major characters, specifically with the Sackler family. And you mentioned a lot of the brothers for us. You mentioned Raymond, you mentioned Mortimer. And I feel like we didn't get much of Raymond. No, we got some of Raymond. We didn't get much of Mortimer in the show. However, we did get our head honcho, Richard. And as you talked about earlier, his fascination
01:00:53
Speaker
with Arthur very seemed as though he was portrayed as a very kind of obsessed one-track mind this has to be the legacy that I leave but also I have to be better than Arthur right yeah so I'll read a little quote that was in an interview with the creator of the show so the show's creator Danny Strong said quote
01:01:23
Speaker
I wanted to do a full storyline of Arthur Sackler in the 1950s and 60s as a sort of Godfather storyline to go back in time. And then I did it in episode seven with the Senator Estes in front of the Kefber hearings. I wanted that to be a whole storyline for the whole season. And unfortunately, there was just too much at the end. So I had to cut it.
01:01:47
Speaker
And then, you know, as we were just saying, Richard is kind of constantly mentioning Arthur. So we do get that kind of harkening back to when this as, as the creator said this Godfather storyline, that viewers learn more about Uncle Arthur in episode seven. And then that's where we learn more about this man that Richard keeps speaking of. And
01:02:13
Speaker
they become aware of the methods that Richard is using for marketing OxyContin. In episode seven, the creators reveal that Arthur used the same techniques of hiring experts, again, back to the company's claims and creating medical publications to help market the drug. So according to the show, many of the methods used to market OxyContin came straight from Arthur Sackler's playbook. And again,
01:02:41
Speaker
Strong the the creator wanted to include more of that in the series It's interesting to me to hear that he wanted to hit on Kind of like the Arthur complex a little bit more because I actually felt like that came through it was definitely an investigation and we learned more about the like obsession that Richard had with Arthur and
01:03:04
Speaker
just through Richard's own like God complex but the moment that you talked about the painting or the work of art that Richard is looking at in his bedroom it's in an intimate setting and he's talking with his wife about it and how he's always hated this painting but he keeps it as like
01:03:25
Speaker
almost a way to like put kind of like a pebble in his shoe like a thing to really like push him in and keep him going like fuel his hate fire right and a lot of these different like character traits i don't know how much is in artistic direction or or how much the creators of the show were able to find out about this guy's complex but that was a very like intense moment i guess for me
01:03:54
Speaker
you know, being the art buff, I'm like, wow, like, you're using this dude's like, art to fuel your hate fire. And the fact that like, you're so privileged to have these like, historical objects, and you're just, you're just using it for like, twisted and sick, like personal pleasure was like, creepy. Right, right. So should we talk more about the the art aspect of the show? I just obviously Jen and I think
01:04:21
Speaker
both really appreciated the fact that they really centered in on their philanthropy aspects. And even in that first episode when we have this gathering, this first gathering of the Sacklers, and the camera zooms out and you see the printed name on the door, the Sackler wing, and
01:04:42
Speaker
The show actually did film at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. That is only one wing that the Sacklers have had. However, I thought it was fitting that they chose, obviously, the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, given that the show centers on the state of Virginia and this region of Appalachia. And obviously, Dr. Fenwick is a resident of Virginia. And that's where the kind of larger
01:05:11
Speaker
federal cases building. So I thought that that was really poignant. And just the fact that they really, the creators really honed in on making them a pivotal point of, of the art world. And then of course, it comes full circle whenever at the end, they actually have a stand in for Nan Golden. And we get the shot from the back of these red curls. And
01:05:36
Speaker
You do get that kind of ending scene where there's anchors and voiceovers who are saying artist Nan Golden and Payne and her organization Payne are protesting all these museums. But the fact that the creators actually casted someone and filmed this scenario in the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts with a person who looked like Nan Golden, I just really appreciate it. And I love that they did such a small thing
01:06:05
Speaker
to really make it a reality and I hope that people involved in the arts and art historians really also took note of that and they are probably the only ones I would imagine who really know who Nan Golden
01:06:19
Speaker
Yeah, you know, it was interesting because having a biased perspective about being interested in the art and going into this, that was something that I was actively looking for. But really, it was kind of clever the way they did it. The art, especially in the beginning, like we have the intro scene of them like walking through this like gallery space, having this meeting surrounded by works of art. We do have an early on scene where he's talking about the artwork in his like private residence.
01:06:48
Speaker
However, the art is something that serves as this aesthetic backdrop. It's something that does exist just in the background of their business conversation. And then at the end, as you're suggesting, they do have the stand-in. And then there's also the protests at the Guggenheim where we hone in on a person who, one of our case studies that we're following, the young girl dies from
01:07:13
Speaker
you know, getting hooked on drugs and her mother goes to this protest and we have her laying on the floor in the Guggenheim. Yeah. And then it's not till the end where it's really kind of pushed to the forefront. We even have a scene where they're opening up like a center for children in the arts where it's like it's not an art museum, but it's like some kind of nonprofit organization or an art making space. And they're at this like event kind of almost like a ribbon cutting or like a grand opening.
01:07:42
Speaker
But again, that just serves as this backdrop for, you know, their other business conversations and all these legal disputes that they're in. And I don't know, I think that was a really clever way to do it with only how many episodes was it? Was it nine? Ten? Ten episodes. Yeah. To still have that their philanthropy and their presence in the art world have a way to talk about it without talking about it. Right.
01:08:09
Speaker
And I think that that just echoes so clearly kind of what I was saying earlier when you asked about how did they get involved? What is their kind of connection to the arts?
Sackler Legacy: Final Thoughts
01:08:19
Speaker
And I think the show illustrates that really well is maybe they never had this kind of inherent passion for the arts, the three brothers. But as you said, it's in the background. It's just in the background of their everyday lives. And the show really picks up on that.
01:08:37
Speaker
And they're so wealthy that art is just there. Philanthropy is just there. They're having these lavish events kind of at museums. They have the privilege of having their own wing. They have, you know, million and billion dollar pieces of art just around them constantly. If you're looking in Richard's office, if you're looking in his home,
01:08:57
Speaker
You know obviously they have the wing at the museum like there are little pieces everywhere that just if you're an art historian or if you're familiar with the arts you can recognize those pieces and kind of gauge what that might be worth and it's just sitting there like it's nothing.
01:09:13
Speaker
Speaking of that also in the way that they just like throw money at people the way that they buy people silence they they they buy their Their allegiance to Purdue Pharma just like it's nothing to that's definitely a tone
01:09:28
Speaker
Of the series that's carried out through those not only their interaction with art or the lack of interaction It's just there but the same way in which they also treat human beings Right is quite interesting Yeah, yeah, and then also I mean are we gonna talk about our childhood crush?
01:09:48
Speaker
Oh my gosh, I think we have to because I literally said to Andrew as you're watching this show, I was like, that's Raymond. When he came on screen for the one I love, Raymond is the one I love. Literally, he did such a fantastic job too. I just really enjoyed his character and
01:10:15
Speaker
I was just so happy to see him on my screen. And I literally, I mean, he wasn't Raymond to me in the show, but just the fact that literally, Gianna, the first thing I said when I saw him was, that's Raymond. Yeah, yeah. I think, unfortunately, he has one of those complexities where there's no escaping this one character. He didn't play a superhero, but he played our OG beach boy.
01:10:43
Speaker
Mermaid Love and Beach Boy. Oh my gosh, there's nothing like your first Beach Boy crush and it was Raymond. I just love everything about Aquamarine, like the soundtrack, everything. It's just everything. Such an excellent film. Sometimes I still think I could be a mermaid. If I like go into the water, I'm like, ooh, where's my tail?
01:11:09
Speaker
If you don't like Aquamarine, as much as you like H2O, just add water. I don't know if we could be friends. I don't know.
01:11:16
Speaker
They're both excellent, but Aquarene is on another level. He did a good job. That actor, I think his name is Jake McDormand. He's been popping up in some stuff like he was in Lady Bird, and I thought that role for him was really funny because Beanie Feinstein has a crush on him because he's her hot teacher and she's in Catholic school.
01:11:41
Speaker
But all in all, yeah, I really like the show and I didn't really know what to expect from it. I've been watching a bunch of like Sad Girl Central Station TV lately and I'm not super mad about it but I've been watching that and then also on HBO Max I have decided to watch Succession which is like not a happy watch.
01:12:06
Speaker
It feels like very Sacklery. It does so like while I've been watching that I've just been watching like another show just about like horrible family Dynamics and and media and just big business and so it's been sacral central station vibes But I've been into like I don't know I guess like the the actual like factual history of it all Yeah
01:12:32
Speaker
Bianca, thank you for taking us through your thesis. I mean, that was your last big chapter. I feel like this is one of those full circle APT moments. Oh, yeah. Thanks for asking me about it. I just thought this was the perfect time, you know. Yeah. I think I hope that there's still a larger conversation to be had at the museums that still has the Sackler name. And I really hope that people take an interest in the show and
01:12:59
Speaker
you know, what the show did, I think was really great. And I hope it sparks another kind of invigorating conversation amongst those
Upcoming Q&A Episode
01:13:06
Speaker
institutions. Because again, this was happening kind of 2019, when all these protests were happening. And then we had COVID strike. So there was kind of this, you know, push aside of the opioid crisis in this country, because we had to deal with another pandemic. And so I hope that yeah, they just
01:13:27
Speaker
They just continue. And again, Nan Golden and her organization, Paine, are really keeping it up. So yeah.
01:13:35
Speaker
Well, Gianna, before we let everybody go, we do have some housekeeping notes for you all. We will have one more episode for the month of December that will come out next week as per usual. And then Gianna and I will be off for two weeks for the holiday season and we will return in January on January 4th. So we've got today's episode, next week's episode, two week break, and then we are back on January 4th.
01:14:06
Speaker
In the new year, Gianna and I have a special request for all of the listeners.
01:14:13
Speaker
While I am home in Oklahoma for the holidays, Gianna and I are finally going to record the Drunk Art History episode. We have gotten way too many requests for us to get drunk and talk about art history, but in order to do that, we need questions from you all. So
01:14:37
Speaker
We are asking you to send in questions via email. You can send in a voice recording if you like, and we will play it back on the show whenever we record the episode. It can be any question, any question whatsoever, and we will be drunk and we will answer those questions to the best of our capabilities. So we'll put out reminders on social media, but send all of your questions to artpoptalk at gmail.com, and that episode will come out on January
01:15:06
Speaker
Fourth. Yay. All right, everybody. We will talk to you all next Tuesday. Bye, everyone. Art Pop Talk's executive producers are me, Bianca Martucci-Vinc. And me, Gianna Martucci-Vinc. Music and sounds are by Josh Turner and photography is by Adrian Turner. And our graphic designer is Sid Hammond.