While Wendy Waszut-Barrett is traveling for research and art acquisitions (October 14-29, 2017) she is reposting the first fifteen installments from “Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar Acquiring: The Fort Scott Scottish Rite Scenery for the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center.” Here is her fourth post from February 18, 2017.
Part 4: The Art of the Deal – A Final Offer
The Valley of Fort Scott rejected the CEO’s $2500 donation for the scenery, countering with a request of $25,000 for the entire collection. They believed that selling drops for approximately $300 each was a very reasonable price. Although, if we did not want to pay that sum, they were willing to take their chances and auction off the backdrops individually, thus splitting up the collection.
The CEO was furious with this counter-offer and rationalized that their demand for more money was greedy and un-Masonic. He was ready to walk away from the entire offer and go with anything else that morning when I arrived at his office. It took over an hour to explain why this was a sound investment and would ultimately preserve an important artifact of Scottish Rite history. Midway through our conversation, I decided to take another approach; the price was still a “bargain” as even the fabric would cost more than $300 for each drop. That logic seemed to work.
The CEO agreed to the sum of $25,000. However, he stated that the transaction would be a “purchase” and not any kind of “donation.” I was directed to email a response to the Valley of Fort Scott, making sure they knew that WE were the ones preserving fraternal history and not selling it for profit. Inside my head, I could only think, “One gain for preserving theatre history, one loss for the Fraternity as a whole.”
This exchange was just one more incident that added to my growing uneasiness concerning the overall endeavor and working for the CEO of Minnesota Masonic Charities. Every interaction seemed to be based on winning a battle and not the actual preservation of fraternal history. I started to believe that none of my colleagues really understood the significance of this acquisition or any others that would be on display in the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center.
The next morning, on September 3, 2015, at 9:40 I composed a response and emailed our acceptance:
“Dear John,
It would be a disservice to both Freemasonry and Bro. Thomas G. Moses to auction off individual backdrops. To honor both the Fraternity and Bro. Moses’ contributions we agree to pay the requested sum of $25,000, thus preserving our combined cultural heritage. In addition to purchasing your collection, we will invest the necessary $250,000 to remove the scenery from your theatre, transport it to Minnesota, and restore the collection for many future generations to enjoy. We will need to schedule a lengthy time frame to remove the scenes, clean them, roll them onto tubes, and transport them to our storage facility. This process takes approximately three weeks with four people working full-time. This lengthy timeframe onsite is due to the fragility of the pieces and the safety of our workers.
Please draw up the necessary paperwork for the transfer of all 80 painted drops and all ancillary painted set pieces to the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center.
Sincerely,
Wendy Waszut-Barrett, Ph.D.
Curatorial Director, Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center”
The contract was for the sale of personal property between the “Joabert Lodge of Perfection of the Valley of Fort Scott, Orient of Kansas, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite” and “Minnesota Masonic Historical Society and Museum.” It was not finalized until October 16, 2017. This was the first in a series of contractual delays that fall. Time was running out to secure a rigging crew and order the necessary supplies before I left town on November 1. Something wasn’t right and I couldn’t exactly put my finger on it.
Throughout the fall, I continued to reflect on our Fort Scott road trip. Why drive me such a long distance if I could only spend a few hours in the Fort Scott Scottish Rite Theatre to evaluate the scenery for conditions and feasibility of transportation? I had been very up front that I needed an entire day to evaluate the collection, eight hours at a minimum.
Why had I not been sent alone to evaluate the scenery? It would have taken me the exact same amount of time – three days to travel, evaluate, and return – as I would not have ventured on to Guthrie? I was on salary for 30 hours a week, so there was no additional expense beyond my travel and lodging. It certainly would have been less expensive than sending four of us with four hotel rooms and all of our meals.
Plus, the additional “side trip” to Guthrie, Oklahoma for a nice steak dinner and a brief tour of the Masonic Temple was nice, but completely unnecessary. It also meant that we had to leave Fort Scott by noon to get to Guthrie on our second of three days. Bob Davis knew of our coming, but didn’t go out of his way to do anything other than a generic tour. It made no sense at all.
Later, I would come to realize that not demanding to take the necessary time to complete a proper evaluation would mean that our representative had failed to lower fourteen drops; ones that I had not caught in the three-hour rush. These were tied off scenes and our representative had made no mention of their absence during the evaluation. The collection was not comprised of the 80 drops that I photographed, but instead 94 instead.
Furthermore, many scenes did not contain the standard leg drop, cut drop and backdrop. In most cases, a painted cyclorama formed the final layer in a stage picture. This would become problematic in both rolling and transporting the collection due to the dirt that accumulated on the netting. I also knew that the inclusion of a painted cyclorama would have to be included in the scenery installation at the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center.
To be continued…
