Just prior to the recent Christie's auctions of antiques and artifacts owned by Barbra Streisand, Tom McPherson, director of the Craftsman Farms Foundation which exhibits the Arts and Crafts furniture of Gustav Stickley, injected into the wide press coverage about the auctions his assertion that his organization had been contacting Ms. Streisand for eight or ten years to solicit her donation of two Stickley pieces that were to about to be auctioned.

When New York Times art reporter William Hamilton called a representative of Ms. Streisand to check when she first had received this request and to inquire why she hadn't responded to it, it was quickly determined (and conveyed to Mr. Hamilton) that neither Ms. Streisand or any of her associates had ever heard of the Craftsman Farms interest until the inquiry of Mr. Hamilton.

It was only then that Mr. McPherson contacted a representative of Ms. Streisand to leave word that he had PR issues between his museum and Ms. Streisand and that they “had to be resolved before the papers get it.

This drew a clear implication of either/or, either the Farms get the Stickley pieces or the papers get the story.

Although Mr. McPherson declined to validate to whom he had submitted his requests, the issue of his charge became the central focus of subsequent press about the auctions.

Mr. McPherson colored the reportage of the auctions so thoroughly with his false claims of having conveyed his request previously, that Ms. Streisand has now chosen to clarify the truth of the matter.

Barbra Streisand's Response:

I think it’s a matter of fairly accessible record that charitable giving is an important part of my life, so I feel no call to defend how much or to which causes I give. But because I refused to capitulate to coercion, a very false issue was exploited in the press concerning my recent Christie’s auctions, so I finally feel obliged to comment and to set the matter straight. In this concocted debate about whether I was morally bound to donate two Gustav Stickley corner cabinets to the Craftsman Farms Foundation, the press largely disregarded the fact that all of the proceeds of the first of the three auctions went to charity. What a conveniently short memory some of the media have.

But there is a much more important issue that was ignored in this coverage the circumstances under which one should choose to make contributions. Had I ever been contacted by the Foundation in advance of the auction arrangements.. which I most definitely never was.. I quite certainly would have donated the pieces. But when the director of the Craftsman Farms finally conveyed his interest to us.. by having the New York Times call to inquire why we had not responded and acquiesced to the Farm’s request (a request which had never been communicated to us).. it was done in a coercive and adversarial manner, colored with the implication by the director of the Foundation that if I didn’t make the donation, they would take the story to the press (which, obviously, they had already done). It was impossible to capitulate to such rude and inappropriate tactics. As a matter of record, I had offered another lovely Arts and Crafts piece to the Metropolitan Museum, but they didn't have room for it.

This brings up another consideration. While I believe it is proper for any legitimate charity or cultural entity to request a donation (we receive hundreds each year and give each serious consideration), I think any supporter of charities has the right to determine the causes he or she most passionately wants to contribute to. And no potential recipient, however worthy, has the right to say “either you accede to our request or else we will go to the newspapers," which is how the Craftsman Farms' desire arrived on our doorstep. The fact remains that no one should dictate to anyone how their charitable instinct should be expressed.