[MikeR]

[пока идет процесс перевода, выставляю ответы Дэниела по англ. - М.Р.]

The role of the Board of Trustees [of the Museum] is not exactly clear – who are they: art patrons, sponsors, or shareholders of the non-for-profit organization?

In America, and in the West generally, institutions have Boards of people who govern the institution and make important decisions on policy. In our Museum, all the members of the Board support Roerich's ideas and the Teaching. People in other countries often assume that I, as Executive Director, make all decisions, but that is not true. The Board is above the executive officers. The members of the Boards are chosen mainly in recognition of their commitment to the institutions and their work, sometimes because of their involvement in the actual work of the institutions, and their loyalty over years to the aims and purposes of the institutions. In addition to commitment and loyalty, they all display a superior degree of intelligence and a sincere desire to evolve spiritually. There is a Board for the Museum, and a Board for the Agni Yoga Society. They are separate institutions -- in accordance with instructions given to us by Nicholas Roerich himself. I can explain that separately if there is interest.

And why does the N.R. Museum in New York not consider it necessary to preserve the collection of S. Roerich’s paintings, since even though the Museum had been created by N.K. Roerich, it was meant as a keeping place for the entire heritage of the Roerich family, which forms a single entity.

You are right, the Museum and the Society were founded by Nicholas Roerich. The way we are structured and organized was according to his instructions. Svetoslav Roerich (I will use the spelling he himself, and his mother, preferred) from the beginning was an honored member of our Board, and he was in agreement with all that we did. We are not a "Roerich family" museum. When M. Ts. R. was established in Moscow, in my discussions with Ludmila Vasilievna, that difference between us was clear. She was proud that the name of her institution was "of the Roerichs," in the plural, and ours was singular.

Every organization has By-Laws (what you call "yctab") and also a Mission Statement, registered with the state, defining the goals and primary tasks of the organization. Our Mission Statement is devoted to the task of promoting the ideas and ideals of Nicholas Roerich, to show his art and spread information about it, to publish his books and other writings, to continue his commitment to the Roerich Pact and the Banner, and to make cultural activities available to the public. Svetoslav supported those goals, as a member of the Board. Preserving his own art was not part of the Mission of this Museum. He gave us many paintings from his own collection of the works by his father, but never gave us any of his own paintings, except for the portraits of his Father and Mother.

And if the main purpose behind the activities of non-for-profit organizations is not profit-making, then why, from your standpoint, the paintings cannot be given as a gift or sold to another museum for a reasonable price? Or are the calculations on maximizing profit acceptable – whoever offers more, will become the new owner?

We are registered with the state, and are tax-exempt. For that reason, we have certain obligations to the state. We also are members of the American Association of Museums, which imposes ethical rules on its members. Our financial dealings are examined by the state. We are not in the business of making a profit, but we are expected by the state to have good business practices, in other words, to maintain the value of the museum and its collections. We cannot just give away our assets, or sell them at bargain prices. It is not permitted, and is seen as dishonest. Also, we cannot sell assets that are under the Mission of the Museum. We may sell assets that are not part of the Museum's Mission but only if the funds are used to support the Mission. For example, we may sell a painting by Svetoslav Roerich to buy one by his father. So you see, we are not so free to do anything we want, as people think, and we are not motivated by greed, as some people like to present us.

How did it happen that the painting by S.N.R. with the portrait of NK, which was exhibited in the Museum turned out to have belonged not to the Museum but to another party, a private individual, who recently sold it at a Christie’s auction?

We have several paintings hanging in our Museum that were lent to us. Most museums have works on loan, sometimes entire collections. The painting you are referring to belonged to a woman in Massachusetts. It was too large for her to hang in her home, and she lent it to us more than twenty years ago. When the bank collapse happened, she told us she'd have to take the painting and sell it at auction. Of course, we were unhappy, but the painting was hers, and we were grateful for all the years she allowed us to exhibit it.

Which paintings exhibited in the Museum no longer belong to the Museum and have other owners, and which paintings are still owned by the Museum?

We have about two hundred fifty paintings. They all belong to the Museum. I'm not sure I understand your question. Our collection grows slowly, because we don't have the funds to buy paintings. But sometimes people give us paintings or leave them to us in their wills. When Katherine Stibbe died, we inherited eleven paintings from her. The collection of paintings by Svetoslav Roerich that is being discussed here was a donation from her, a few years before her death.

Are you familiar with Nicholas Roerich's article, "Freedom of Things?" It is about the right of works of art to go where they are wanted. Buying and selling art was quite natural for Roerich. He sold his paintings, and kept careful lists of the names of the paintings, the dates of sale, the names of the buyers, and the prices. We have many of those lists. He did not have the same ideas as so many do today about paintings belonging "to the people." He wrote articles praising collectors. If there are readers of these comments who believe it is a sin to sell paintings, please know that you are in the minority. And if you believe that it is a bad sin to sell a Roerich painting, then I suggest you read those articles. In the Soviet era, conditions were different, and maybe some members of this forum had their ideas shaped during that time, when the State sold everything and bought everything. My country has mountains of Russian art that were sold here by the Soviet government to anyone who offered the money.

Was Katherine aware that her gift was outside the Mission of the Museum?

Katherine Stibbe was for many years President of the Board, President of the Museum and the Society. She was fully aware of everything in our By-Laws. She had bought the paintings as her way of supporting Svetoslav. Over the years, she supported him regularly. But she had moved from a large residence to a small one, and had no room for the paintings, so she gave them to us. We had no room to display them, but could store them, so for years the paintings sat in a closet. That was not a satisfactory situation, and the paintings were beginning to deteriorate. The Teaching tells us that paintings need viewers and appreciation, or they die.

How was the Museum able to find wall space to display the Bolling collection?

The Bolling collection of thirteen paintings was a temporary exhibit, to give the children of Roger Bolling time to decide what they wanted to do with the paintings. In the end, all were sold to Mr. Bulochnik. And even for that exhibit, we had to remove some of the our own paintings by NK from the walls. But the visitors to the Museum appreciated the opportunity to see a roomful of paintings they never had seen before. And these were all paintings by NK, so there was no question that it was appropriate.

If Svetoslav's paintings are outside the Mission, then why did the Museum get involved in publishing H.R.'s diaries, since they are also "not related" to Nicholas Roerich?

We are two organizations. Everything that has to do with EI is under the Agni Yoga Society -- the Teaching, her books, and her notebooks.

Thank you for "listening."