Scandal or Sacrifice?

2/15/2019

www.nytimes.com/2019/02/09/arts/protesters-guggenheim-sackler.html

Recently, the Guggenheim - a prestigious museum and arts endowment foundation - was found to have accepted funding from a wealthy family with ties to the notorious drug, OxyContin. Protesters picketed the museum in disgust, outraged that a drug which has claimed so many lives was now connected to an organization with so much clout and influence.

Personally, I don't see this as being cause for outrage in and of itself. My issue is not so much that the profits from a drug like OxyContin were used to fund the arts, but that a drug which causes much pain and suffering has not been taken off the market, or at least reevaluated for general use.

How do you feel about this issue? weight in here, and I look forward to hearing your opinions! (:

14 Comments

Caroline Mersch

2/23/2019 01:09:53 pm

I don't really support pills in general. Big pharma companies and their intensions have been heavy and negative towards the public I feel. The quote of the son of the companies' founder talking about "bury[ing] the competition" with their Oxy is disgusting. Some medication has turned into a money and power churning business. It's suppose to help people, and I think it just turns them into addicted consumers for the most part. Also supports the misuse of Oxy and other drugs to be a normal street drug and accepted as such. Where money comes from has a value and choosing to accept money shows where one's values lie and what one may feel is important in a big scheme of things. With museums, especially established ones as the Guggenheim, there will always be money to come- there's donors and people with power that want more and acknowledgment of themselves. I can't imagine how hard it is to find people with "pure" money that have a lot of it and willing to give it away with nothing to gain in return.

Eden

2/23/2019 04:06:21 pm

Hey Caroline,

I agree that these large pharmaceutical companies are quite sinister, and certainly do not seem to consider the well being of the general public. I take issue with anyone turning a profit from the pain and suffering of others, and I see your point that most great wealth is accumulated with a degree of 'dirt'.

That being said, I would much rather see some of that money put back into institutions like The Guggenheim than in the bank accounts of these pharmacological profiteers - regardless of its origin, these donations can do some good.

Donna Pham

2/24/2019 10:29:27 pm

At first, I was like "okay, museum funded by drug company. So what?" But after reading the article, I really was shocked. I don't support drug companies or any companies that lied to clients about their product. I don't know how the Guggenheim Museum was founded or what kind of artwork it displays, but how Richard Sackler stated on "burying the competition," it really shows that the company only cares about money, and not their consumers, especially if it in regards with their health.

eden

2/26/2019 03:38:54 pm

Hi Donna (:

Thank you for the comment. I felt a similar way when I first read this article; I have a definite dislike for drug companies, but organizations like this must be funded somehow.

The Guggenheim is a prestigious art museum with a large permenant collection of

eden

2/26/2019 03:51:33 pm

(sorry, hit a button in mid-response)

... a large permanent collection of well known artwork and special exhibits. The donations they receive help to keep it up and running, and they participate in enrichment events and contribute to fine art programs throughout New York City.

Like you, my issue is with the drug itself. To think that a small donation to the arts could clear the social karma of those who profit from it is almost laughable, but at least a sliver of good came out of it.

Dania Beltran

2/25/2019 01:46:30 pm

I can see why something like this would be controversial. OxyCotin donating money to "support the arts education" can be seen as a complete PR move amiss their lawsuit. Kind of like a "Hey guys! We donated x amount of money to x museum and they were able to build a theater for the public as well as more gallery space! We're not so bad after all."
At the same time, I understand why the Guggenheim would accept the money to begin with. I understand why people are upset but I don't think holding their protest at the Guggenheim or even being angry at them for accepting the money is the right place for their fight and their words to be heard.

eden

2/26/2019 03:59:13 pm

Oh, it is certainly a PR move, but it also comes across as a power play. Donating to an organization that draws in so many donations from wealthy elites means that they can use that influence in their favor, possibly affecting their legal situation.

It will be interesting to see what the outcome of this lawsuit will be.

Marina Vilhena

3/3/2019 08:13:12 pm

Hey Eden,

I also agree that the biggest issue at stake is that ˝a drug which causes much pain and suffering has not been taken off the market, or at least reevaluated for general use.˝ Moreover, in my point of view, those in silence ignoring how many lives are sacrificed for the profit of these companies are passively supporting such a vicious cycle. Dirty money is dirty money and whoever touches it, regardless how low they are in the chain, will also get their hands dirty! That is why I believe that we MUST use our voice as active agents protesting against this type of business – a protest that can be traditionally expressed by protests or simply by refusing any donation that comes from or relates you to something that you do not agree with.

Cat

3/13/2019 02:11:06 pm

Hey Eden,

Let me first say that I agree with the consensus, big pharma is corrupt and we all know it. I always think of the saying, "vote with your feet and your money" which basically means that if you don't agree with something you shouldn't support it financially. It can be a very powerful statement if everyone bands together to do this but it can be fruitless if done alone. I believe The Guggenheim has the power to reject the money and make a statement. By accepting the money, The Guggenheim is enabling the problem. I think the question comes down to whether or not we expect the art community to be at the forefront of progress and promote social justice values. On a positive note, the art community and supporters of The Guggenheim are the kind of people who are concerned with where the money is coming from. If the purpose of art education is to create critical thinkers who try to make the world a better place, we're on the right track.

Chris link

3/14/2019 09:52:00 am

Whats up Eden,

The whole business model of addiction for profit is just disgusting. The fact that a museum that holds such an expansive collection of art would accept funding from corrupt prescription drug money is very dissapointing. I thought the protest demonstration of the "prescription slips" being released into the museum was a great way to bring awareness to the lack of ethics involved with accepting this money. The PR move of Oxycontin donating the money in first place just feels so slimy, and a way to rectify their reputation.

Fabian Lopez

3/16/2019 02:18:24 pm

When it comes to drug manufacturers that produce notorious substances such as opioids, they will be condemned no matter what they do. At the end of the day it's just another donation from the 1%, as institutions like the Guggenheim are always rubbing shoulders with the bourgeoisie. People would be surprised who the majority of the corporations donate towards, but that's another rabbit hole in itself.

MarkAnthony

4/4/2019 08:16:11 pm

Hey Eden
Great article, and some very interesting prospective on things. I had a lot of the same feelings that have already been expressed. Maybe the Guggenheim was trying to do something "good" with the"dirty" money.

John Harrison link

4/7/2019 10:17:21 pm

Good article. I always support protests against the rich and heavily regulating industry. The two don't need to be mutually exclusive. While I do sympathize with the desire to rid institutions like the Guggenheim of dirty money, it's impossible under the current system. It's my belief that these institutions should be publicly funded through taxes on the rich. We need to look at the way our entire system is set up and question what billionaires are getting in return for these donations.

Robyn

5/13/2019 04:14:50 pm

This is interesting, I think the issue of pharmaceuticals is a significant issue in the U.S. Accepting money reminds me of prohibition with communities acceting money from mobsters.

Scandal or Sacrifice?

Leave a Reply.

Blog

Archives

Categories