As I entered the beginning of the exhibition, The Smiths were first in line. They collect tribal art from New Guinea, New Zealand, and New Calendonia. But the NEWest art piece was from before 1820! The Potikers went for the BIG names in the art world - Kline, O'Keefe, Albers and Hoffman were "in the house"! I LOVE Milton Avery's art. A few years ago, I was priviliged to see a wonderful retrospective of his works at the Hammer Museum in L.A. (I wish it were closer). The Potiker's Avery, "Nude on the Beach" was a very poor representation of the artist's work. A much better Avery, "Pool in the Mountains" hung in the next room as part of SDMA's permanent collection. I believe Hans Hoffman was on drugs when he painted "Woman Seated". The O'Keefe painting, "My Autumn" was a close up of yellow and red leaves. It was painted the year she made her life-changing trip to N.Y. I doubt she had a good time if this painting is an exmaple of her emotions. And don't get me started on the Potiker's Albers painting. I won't even go there!

The Rogozienskis collected art from the 17th century with some good examples. The Jamiesons collected Greek and Italian 1st-4th century marble torsos and heads. The Neeleys collected Brazilian and Mexican Contemporary art (wow! something after 1960--I was getting a little worried!). The steel and paint sculpture was god-awful, but I did like the small Yeshai Jusidman "Sumo Wrestlers" and the British born artist, Melanie Smith's very large painting titled "Concrete Jungle". The Dr.'s Ramachandras collected Indian limestone reliefs fromt the 3rd century - they payed it safe! The Thorntons (now I can really see what having big bucks can do to your art collection) had, Pissaro, Monet, and Tissot (NOT the watch Co.). But contemporary art was NO where in sight in their collection.
The Figis collected well-known Mexican art from the mid-century, a Tamayo, a Kahlo (a small but nice drawing) and a BAD watercolor by Diego Rivera of the back of a clown figure in a crowded square. The Jacobs displayed only two works from their collection - Ruscha and Ruscha. The first, a large painting of various tree trunks painted in 2005, was the winner for the most contemporary artwork in the exhibition! The other Ruscha was titled "OURS" - that I wish I had and NOT them! The car people, Hoehns, had the Rembrandts - now of course, it's obvious from their collection that they are not selling Chevrolets!

Joyce and Ted Strauss liked photography. Among their collection, a BAD Matthew Barney photo, but the Strausses were redeemed with a GREAT Nan Goldin photo! Across the room, were the other Strausses, Iris and Matthew, with a collection of absolutely terrible paintings by Elizabeth Murray, Baselitz, and de Kooning, but again saved with a great Ross Bleckner titled, "9th Examined Life." A wonderful black and white series from the late 1990's before he switched to his "cell paintings" and when I stopped liking his art. I really had wished that Iris and Matthew had spent their hard earned millions on something else, like maybe a really cool loft in Chelsea!, where they would be closer to Contemporary art galleries that might teach them a thing or two and put a nice dent in their "bad art" collection.

All in all, I was not impressed with the collector's collections. Except for a very few wonderful pieces, the exhibition showed their lack of good taste in art. If one's $$ cannot buy a really great example of a really great artist, then buy a Bentley, or better yet, spend the money on emerging contemporary artists who might just make it into the "Big League" one day.