Priceless paintings rotting on public collection walls

Patrick Burnett

Two recent cases of neglect involving paintings by South African master Jacobus Hendrik Pierneef have raised renewed concerns about the status of art held by lesser-known public institutions.
Last month, South African Art Times reported on a Pierneef painting estimated in value between R500,000 and R700,000, which was removed from Free State’s Dihlabeng municipality in July and the frame burnt for firewood. The painting was later recovered.
Since then another case has come to light, with Beeld newspaper reporting in September that a Pierneef hanging in the Johannesburg Regional Court had been damaged by water.

The apparent disregard for art demonstrated by these two cases comes at a time when interest in South African art internationally is at an all-time high. Ironically, a Pierneef painting sold for more than R11-million at a Bonhams auction in September in London.
One art administrator, who did not want to be named because he works for the government, said the safety of art held by public institutions was “a huge problem”.
“There are many examples of public paintings that simply fall from the walls,” he said.
However, although two recent cases had involved Pierneef paintings, the problem was more widespread than one particular artist.
He said when confronted with the problem, no government department wanted to accept responsibility. The problem could be found at municipal level, but also in museums and other public buildings.
Meanwhile the South African Heritage Resource Agency (SAHRA), which is charged with conserving and protecting South Africa’s heritage, said it has had a poor response to its attempts to establish what kind of heritage objects are held by local authorities.
SAHRA has been involved in developing a database to document the extent of heritage resources in South Africa.
In March, then CEO Phakamani Buthelezi said the first phase of developing the database had already been completed through an audit of objects at presidential residences, parliament, museums and state institutions.
SAHRA’s executive officer for corporate affairs Herma Gous said the second phase consisted of a roll out of the audit to other locations and the development of the South African Heritage Information System (SAHRIS) to house the information gained from this audit.
Gous said the brief was that in developing the inventory it should focus on heritage resources under state ownership, including national, provincial and local government, as well as the museum sector.

But as part of phase one a questionnaire had been sent out to over 1,000 respondents to assist with the identification of collections for inclusion in the audit.
“Unfortunately, the response was limited, especially from government departments and local authorities, except for the larger ones.”

Gous said the challenge faced was how SAHRA would know what was held unless institutions came forward and informed them about their collections.