5 ms·
The money was never to be spend, the museum loaned them to the artist. They were suppose to be used as the literal material for the commissioned art work.
by tokai 5y ago
The money was never to be spend, the museum loaned them to the artist. They were suppose to be used as the literal material for the commissioned art work.
- moate 5y agoPartially incorrect. The artist was paid a fee as well as provided money to use for the piece and to purchase/frame it. This article didn't make entirely clear which of that money they're asking for.
- wil421 5y ago> Haaning signed a contract with the Kunsten, promising to deliver the artwork and to return the $84,000. It’s pretty clear the $84k was for the art and the ~$7k was for the expenses to create the art.