Exec pay, Chicago discounts, etc.

January 20, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Occassionally, I like to devote a blog to connecting you to conversations on other blogs. It's that time again.

Of course, feel free to comment here on anything you find out there (Hint: right click and open any link in another tab. That way, it's easier to find your way back here).

--According to Playbill.com , Broadway in Chicago is celebrating hometowner Barack Obama with $44 tickets to its lineup of shows, including "Jersey Boys," "Mary Poppins," and "Xanadu." The catch? You've got to buy them today, January 20th. 

--Stuck for something to read? There are lots of critics' end-of-the-year lists over at NPR Books. Thanks to what I found at the site, I now have James Howard Kunstler's novel "World Made by Hand," P.F. Kluge's "Gone Tomorrow," Josh Whedon's graphic novel "Runaways: Dead End Kids," and Joseph O'Neill's "Netherland" on my already daunting reading pile. Anyone out there read any of these yet?

--I can be a sucker for acquisition stories. I'm fascinated with how artworks comes to be part of a museum collection. The IMA Blog offers an insightful look at the acquistition of John Wesley Hardrick's painting "Little Brown Girl," which served as the poster and catalogue cover image for the "Shared Heritage" exhibition back in the Bret Waller days. Apparently, the work was missing for years until it was offered to the IMA from a dealer. Only then did the IMA folks discover that it was actually owned by the museum. How do you buy a painting you already own? An interesting problem.

--Half the country, it seems, is in D.C. today. And, of course, they are hungry to see visual art. Okay, maybe not. But surely some will take advantage of what's offered in Washington galleries. You can see Tyler Green's thoughts on the the choices--including new galleries at the Hirshhorn and Gilbert Stuart portraits at the National Gallery--in his Modern Art Notes.

--Speaking of D.C., at the Arts Marketing blog, Chad Bauman, Director of Communications at Washington's Arena Stage, discusses executive compensation in the arts. He notes that the Director of Minneapolis' Guthrie Theatre earns over $682,000 a year. And that the conductor of the financially challenged Cleveland Orchestra makes $1.2 million--and he's only seventh on the list of top orchestra salaries in the country. The question, I don't think, is whether top talent should earn top dollars, but whether or not a not-for-profit can comfortably ask for public funds when higher ups are making such big bucks. Is a visionary leader like a top box-office actor--expensive but ultimately worth it to a company's bottom line? And do we need proposals like the piece of proposed legislation in San Francisco that would put a cap on compensation for a top exec at six times that of the lowest-level employee?

Your thoughts?
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT