Your book Beaverbrook: A Shattered Legacy spans the life of Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook as it relates to the dispute over two famous paintings in the Beaverbrook Art Gallery in New Brunswick, Canada. What was your interest in writing this incredible story?
Jacques Poitras: There were two main elements. One was Beaverbrook himself, a larger-than-life character in the world of business and politics. The general outline of his life and his achievements are fairly well known in New Brunswick. The roguish side was less well known. And then in the midst of this dispute, yet another side emerged -- someone who, despite his great successes, seems to have somehow bungled the job of leaving his gallery and his foundation in good working order for succeeding generations. It took more than 40 years, but the mistakes Beaverbrook made became very apparent in this dispute. So that was one thing, the new take on this mythic figure.
And the second was the overarching theme. When Goose Lane first asked me to take on the book, I sensed that this story would say something about New Brunswick society in general. Beaverbrook occupies a big place in the province's imagination, but he also represents how we see ourselves. The deference to him in the 1950s was a reflection of our colonial thinking, whereas the willingness to defy his heirs in 2004 showed, in my mind, a greater independence of thought.
Put those two together, add all the other colourful characters and some incredibly valuable paintings, and you have a pretty good story.
Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook (photo left)
There was a time when the mere presence of Lord Beaverbrook in New Brunswick would have the Provincial Government, the Premier, and local business leaders at Max Aitken's beck and call. Are those days not only gone, but even largely forgotten?
Jacques Poitras: I'm not sure they're forgotten, and one could argue that that deference has shifted now to other people and institutions. But even Beaverbrook still has his loyalists. One man in one of my audiences told me he should be forgiven for all his foibles because of his role in helping win the Second World War. I disagree; I think we need to know the full portrait of the man. But it is a credible argument that his achievements outweigh his mistakes.
Lord Beaverbrook casts a long shadow in the book, and his influence lasted long after his death, resulting in the ownership issues of the paintings in question. How has the case reflected on the Beaverbrook family name in New Brunswick and elsewhere?
The name was already the object of some derision in England, where Beaverbrook's two grandsons and his great-nephew have all had their turns showing up in the London papers, not under favourable circumstances. Over there, this story seems to have been treated as yet another episode in the declining fortunes of the family. It was much more of a shock in New Brunswick, where people didn't focus so much on the heirs but still held the man himself in high regard. The grandsons made what might be called some public-relations blunders in the dispute, which didn't really help their case in the court of public opinion. People who followed the case closely, and who read the book, have realized, however, that it wasn't the grandsons "on trial" here, it was Beaverbrook himself.
The Fountain of Indolence by J.M.W. Turner 1834 - One of the disputed paintings (shown left)
An obsession with control and micromanagement may have led to Beaverbrook's success as a press baron in England. Was that same obsession one of the root causes of the ownership dispute?
Jacques Poitras: Not so much the obsession with control, but the manipulation of people and motives, I would say. Beaverbrook liked to orchestrate these Byzantine webs of power and influence, so he could play people off each other -- with the resulting instability allowing him to maintain his powerful position. He tried to do the same in Fredericton: he didn't have one lieutenant on the ground, he had three or four, depending on who was counting. They came together to do his will (such as seeing the gallery to fruition) but they often feuded, and once he was gone things really fell apart. At that point, the lack of clear authority and structure became not just a problem but a real curse.
In the end, when the verdict was rendered by the arbitrator, who were the real winners and losers in the case?
Jacques Poitras: The case is still under appeal so we can't say for sure. If the gallery's victory is upheld, then it will have survived a very tough, difficult period. And as a result, a lot more people will know about the great works in its collection than would have otherwise been the case. The charitable foundation run by the grandsons, on the other hand, might not recover: it is short on cash, and it has borrowed money to pay its legal bills, with Cherkley Court, Beaverbrook's former country estate, as partial collateral. The estate is owned by the foundation but if it loses the appeal and is forced to pay the bulk of the legal costs, it may be on the table. That would be an astounding end to this story.
If the gallery loses the appeal, then obviously it loses the core of its collection, some truly irreplaceable works. The foundation would survive financially, but of course its reputation in New Brunswick would be destroyed.
Either way, the relationship between the gallery and the family is over -- much sooner than Beaverbrook would ever have wanted.
Hotel Bedroom by Lucian Freud 1954 - One of the disputed paintings (shown left)
Is there a lesson to be learned from this case for would be lenders of fine art and other valuable items to galleries and museums?
Jacques Poitras: Yes: make your wishes absolutely clear, in writing. I think that is quite common now, given the higher standards of professionalism, accountability and so on that we see in institutions today.
Is there potential for other ownership dispute cases to arise in other galleries and museums as a result of murky or even lost ownership and lending information and records?
Jacques Poitras: I'm sure there are, but the issues here aren't limited to who owns the works, but on the intentions of the donor. The McMichael Gallery in Ontario, for example, was involved in a dispute over whether the Ontario government was living up to the wishes of the couple that had endowed the collection the first place.
What advice would you give to both fine art lenders and gallery personnel regarding the precise ownership for cataloging and recording of works on display?
Jacques Poitras: I'm not an expert, but clearly the importance of explicit records of donor intent and of ownership is paramount.
Beaverbrook Art Gallery - Fredericton, New Brunswick (photo left)
Is the Beaverbrook Gallery fine art ownership case over entirely, or are there still more chapters in this story to be written?
Jacques Poitras: There is the appeal, and then there is a second case still to come. It's between the gallery and the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation over a second group of 77 works that that foundation says it owns. This case is being heard in the courts, not by an arbitrator, and it has more or less stalled pending the outcome of the first case. The issues are different; the Canadian case is less about what Beaverbrook intended (although that plays a party) and more about a curious transaction between the gallery and his widow in 1969-70. In some ways it's a simpler case, but elements of it are equally tawdry and soap-opera like. I was able to draw on some preliminary court filings and archival material to explain the background of that case in this book. It's a pretty rich story as well.
What is next for Jacques Poitras?
Jacques Poitras: I'm in the midst of various other stories in my day job at CBC Radio. I'll continue to report on the dispute as it unfolds, and I'm on the lookout for another story that might make a good book.
Thanks Jacques for taking the time for this interview.
My book review of Beaverbrook: A Shattered Legacy by Jacques Poitras.
Author Jacques Poitras (photo left)
Jacques Poitras has been CBC Radio's provincial affairs reporter in New Brunswick since 2000. He has written numerous award-winning feature documentaries and has appeared on Radio-Canada, National Public Radio, and the BBC. Beaverbrook: A Shattered Legacy was a finalist for the BC Award for Canadian Non-fiction, a prestigous national prize, and won the 2008 Best Atlantic Published Book Award.
Poitras' first book was the critically acclaimed The Right Fight: Bernard Lord and the Conservative Dilemma. Jacques Poitras lives in Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.
No comments:
Post a Comment