The Hollow Egalitarianism of LA's Revamped Art Museum

The Los Angeles County Museum of Art recently unveiled its new David Geffen Galleries, a project led by architect Peter Zumthor and director Michael Govan. The design replaces the traditional, chronological layout with an open, single-level concrete structure. Management describes this as an attempt to dismantle traditional institutional hierarchies by allowing visitors to determine their own path through the collections.

While officials promote the building as an equitable space designed for all, significant criticisms remain. The project cost $720 million, yet it provides less exhibition space than the building it replaced. Visitors and critics point to issues like confusing navigation and a lack of clear labeling, which the architect defends as a way to remove the influence of traditional educational structures.

Behind this aesthetic shift lies a specific ideology that prizes a romanticized view of manual labor. Zumthor frequently describes his work in terms of craftsmanship, claiming to reject the consumerist polish of modern architecture. He frames the use of concrete and the inclusion of specific construction labor as a way to give voice to displaced objects, treating the building as a site of historical connection rather than just a storage space for art.

This high-minded architectural philosophy stands in stark contrast to the internal conditions faced by the museum staff. Despite the rhetoric of equality and connection, data indicates that a significant percentage of full-time LACMA workers do not earn a living wage. The disparity between the museum’s public mission and its employment practices led to the formation of LACMA United, a union representing workers seeking better pay and stability.

Employees overwhelmingly voted to unionize in 2025, a move that museum leadership initially resisted. The union argues that the institution must extend its vision of inclusivity beyond the gallery walls to the individuals who actually operate the space. The ongoing tension at the museum suggests that changing the layout of an art collection does little to address the underlying economic realities of those tasked with maintaining it.