Since news broke last month that Toronto’s Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) decided against acquiring a new work by Nan Goldin, the fallout has been fierce. The decision, prompted by trustee Judy Schulich, who reportedly branded the Jewish American photographer “antisemitic,” has led to calls for her resignation. It’s also renewed scrutiny of how wealthy donors influence museum governance.
Schulich, a major AGO benefactor and executive with the Schulich Foundation, one of Canada’s largest private foundations, is yet to comment publicly. What’s clear is that her intervention played a decisive role in the gallery’s rejection of Goldin’s moving-image work Stendhal Syndrome (2024), a project the AGO had planned to acquire jointly with Vancouver Art Gallery and Minneapolis’s Walker Art Center. The news first surfaced via Toronto-based journalist Samira Mohyeddin on X and was later confirmed by the Globe & Mail, which reported that an unnamed committee member compared Goldin to Nazi filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl and called her a “liar” over her advocacy for Palestinians.
An open letter demanding more transparency and curatorial independence at the AGO—and calling for Schulich to step down—has to date collected more than 500 signatures, including Goldin herself. Organized by Jewish groups including Jews Say No To Genocide, Independent Jewish Voices Toronto, and United Jewish Peoples Order Canada, the letter frames Schulich’s intervention as part of a worrying pattern of donor influence over curatorial decisions.
The vote to acquire Stendhal Syndrome was close, 11 to 9 against acquisition, but the repercussions were significant. John Zeppetelli, AGO’s curator of modern and contemporary art and a champion of the work, resigned in the aftermath. Two volunteer committee members also stepped down. Meanwhile, Vancouver and Minneapolis moved ahead with the acquisition, leaving Toronto on the outside of what had been a high-profile joint purchase.
AGO director Stephan Jost defended the decision as part of the complexities of running a public museum in a politically charged moment. “We are a public museum and pluralism is a reality,” he said. “Today’s geopolitical climate has created challenges around the world for cultural organisations like ours as we are being asked to mediate conflicts beyond our control. … We are focused on our mission and working to ensure our processes are about art and respectful dialogue.”
“Judy Schulich, a trustee of the AGO, intervened to block the acquisition of a new work by Jewish American artist Nan Goldin,” the open letter reads. “According to accounts of the meeting, Goldin was labelled antisemitic and her speech dismissed as ‘full of lies.’ … The use of wealth and institutional power by donors to intimidate curators, override professional decision-making and censor artists is antithetical to artistic freedom.”
Goldin herself weighed in, telling The Art Newspaper: “It indicates that money and power guarantee immunity, even when there’s a clear-cut case of censorship of an artist. It throws into question the priorities of this museum. Does that committee (that was dissolved) have the same influence as the board?”
In response to the controversy and an independent governance review, the AGO announced last week that it will split the modern and contemporary curatorial working committee into two: one focused on 20th-century art, the other on 21st-century art. The change is scheduled for later in 2026.
Despite the failed acquisition, the AGO does hold three Goldin photographs in its permanent collection: Brian in Hotel Room with Three Beds, Mérida, Mexico (1982), Cody in the Dressing Room at the Boy Bar, NYC (1991), and My Bed, Hotel La Louisiane, Paris (1996).
