Foreign Relations of the United States, 1917–1972, Volume VIII, Public Diplomacy, 1969-1972

178. Action Memorandum From the Director of the Art in Embassies Program, Department of State (Thompson) to Secretary of State Rogers¹

Washington, October 20, 1972

SUBJECT

• Art in Embassies Program

After three months as Director of the Department’s Art in Embassies Program, I have come to the conclusion that we do not have a thoughtful Art in Embassies Program but rather an “Art Decorating Embassies Program.”

We tend to gather unrelated objects. The ambassadors, for the most part, are politically reasoned and lean toward literary ideas rather than appreciation of the artistic merits of individual paintings and other artworks.

To cover U.S. interests and include the interests of the ambassadors; to cover artistic interests; and even to go as far as covering U.S. sociological interests, I recommend that art works be collected with a theme and meaning of how one work supports another.

We should have on hand X number of collections. They should be composed of 30 to 40 works of art. Each collection should be on a different theme with backup material intellectually thought-out. These collections would then be broken down into 4 or 5 works for various rooms in different embassies, resulting in X number of small groups of art works on X number of themes in each embassy.

For example: After determining the ambassador’s interests and the interests of X country for which a collection is being assembled I should be able to say: “You need four paintings for the dining room. X country is primarily an agrarian country. Here are four paintings representing our farm lands: one a rural scene, one a marketing scene, one a domestic scene in an agricultural area, as well as one contemporary work by an artist from a farming region. You need six paintings for the drawing room. For contrast, here are six paintings of New York City at various stages from 1700 to present, and, for the library, X number of old political cartoons of Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, etc., which have artistic merit, but also show our historical greats had press problems. Perhaps in entrance hallways: paintings and sculptures of fern, fauna, and birds of the U.S. from a collection on a naturalists’ theme.”

There are a million themes to build upon:

1. Transportation—from prints of the pony express to Lester Cook’s² space paintings.

2. National parks of America and ecology themes.

3. Art trends of various periods.

4. Theater, science, industrial, and architectural themes.

5. Paintings of historical events and persons. (Shouldn’t we prepare for embassies to participate artistically in the Bi-Centennial-1976?)

6. Spanish American, Black American, and Immigrant American painters.

7. Portraits of American Women of every era.

And so forth and so on.

This gives the ambassador something he can get his “teeth” into to use as an extension of both his and the U.S.A.’s interests, plus show a variety of artistic talents.

Artists and lenders are infinitely more prone to lend a work of art if they think the work is needed to contribute to a concrete idea with a specific need for his work to be included, rather than being asked to loan a work to cover a wall in some ambassador’s house.

No one person can be director, and curator of a museum, let alone a number of mini museums scattered over the world.

Curatorial help is essential if such a program is to be put into effect. The curatorial work of research, collecting, cataloging, and backup material for each “theme” collection can be contracted out through museums and/or universities’ Fine Arts Departments. Universities are eager for such compensatory programs for their students and teachers, and the museums for their younger curators in training.

I am sure both museums and universities would give guidance to the contracted curator and offer research facilities. The fees for each curator to put together 30 or 40 works in a collection would be between $2,000 and $2,500 for about a 3 months’ assignment.

There are endless sources, both private and public, to fund such a program. Funds raised would be donated directly to the universities or museums and tagged for this particular project, which would finally benefit the State Department’s Art in Embassies Program.

An important “by product” of such an operation would be the good will and better understanding that a “work together”-“help each other” situation generates. Art historians need jobs and the Department, as any “establishment” organization today, could use this added P.R.³

1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, Director’s Subject Files, 1968–1972, Entry A1–42, Box 28, 1972 OGA—State (Sept.–Dec). No classification marking. An attached USIA Action Request slip indicates that copies were sent to Shakespeare, Schneidman, and Towery and additional copies were sent to Winkler, Crane, Jenkins, Carter, Pistor, Austin, Sivard, and Gildner. The Department’s Art in Embassies staff (A/ART) was located under the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations, Bureau of Administration.
2. Presumable reference to artist Hereward Lester Cooke, a curator at the National Gallery of Art who also served as an adviser to the NASA Art Program.
3. Rogers initialed his approval. A stamped notation reads “Oct 27 1972.” Attached but not printed is an undated set of procedures, upon which Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Operations John M. Thomas initialed his approval.