Weakened by the long-term effects of the pandemic, the opera is piling up debt and has already been forced to pull more than $120 million from its trust fund to sustain its operations, writes ArtMajeur magazine. As a result, the Metropolitan Opera faces a daunting challenge: how to maintain its prestige, artistic excellence, while ensuring its long-term financial viability?
Management is looking for solutions that are as pragmatic as they are unusual. Among them, one hypothesis has particularly stirred the art world: the sale of two monumental works by Marc Chagall without them leaving the walls of the opera house.
The fact is that these works are seamlessly integrated into the architecture of the Metropolitan Opera House. Commissioned in 1966 for its opening at Lincoln Center, the Triumph of Music and Sources of Music murals occupy a unique place in the opera’s history. Monumental – nearly nine by eleven meters each – these murals, located in the building’s lobby and visible from the outside, are more than just works of art on public display: they have become an integral part of the architecture and participate fully in the visual and symbolic identity of the Metropolitan Opera.
Estimated by major auction houses to be worth approximately 55 million dollars, they represent an exceptional asset both artistically and financially. Management plans to sell them to a private or institutional buyer on the condition that they remain installed in the upper level of the building. From a public perspective, nothing will change; however, from a legal and economic standpoint, the opera house will be giving up a treasure that has been key to its survival.
The potential sale is part of a broader revitalization strategy. The Metropolitan Opera has already made staff cuts, temporarily reduced the salaries of several top executives, including general director Peter Gelb and music director Yannick Nézet-Séguin, and slightly shortened its artistic season.
At the same time, the institution is exploring new sources of revenue, such as renting out the venue for popular concerts, and trying to forge international partnerships, especially in the Middle East, some of which remain uncertain.
However, the prospect of monetizing such iconic works raises concerns. For some observers, it is a reasonable compromise that preserves the aesthetic integrity of the site while avoiding more painful cuts. For others, however, this approach opens a symbolic gap: a gap in the commercialization of cultural heritage, even as it remains visible and accessible.
