In November, 2021, an executive search firm went on the hunt for a new director and CEO of the Philadelphia Museum of Art – one who would be “equal to its history” and “help this venerable institution to invent the future.”
When its art museum was established in 1876, Philadelphia was among the most glittering cities of the Gilded Age. Successive generations of industrial barons endowed the institution with a spectacular collection of American, European and Asian art.
At the time the job posting went up, the museum had just opened a Jasper Johns retrospective so ambitious that it sprawled across two cities and institutions, with the other half at the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York. In its collection, reputation and exhibitions, the PMA sat firmly in the upper echelons of the American art world.
“The next Director will be an inspiring, resilient, seasoned, and astute leader of the utmost integrity with a demonstratable track record who will build trust and respect and invigorate all the Museum’s constituencies,” the lofty want ad read.
Seven months later, the board announced that it had found that extraordinary leader in Sasha Suda, then the director and CEO of the National Gallery of Canada.
The Canadian was three years into a five-year contract in Ottawa when she vaulted into the American big leagues.
“We believe Sasha’s arrival will mark a new era of growth and civic engagement for the museum,” Leslie Anne Miller, chair of the board of trustees, said in a press release. “Sasha is the leader we need at this transformational moment.”
But in the years after that glowing announcement, something went seriously awry.
Last fall, the museum fired Suda for cause, alleging she had misappropriated funds by giving herself a series of unauthorized raises.
Suda then sued the museum, alleging a toxic campaign of board overreach and undermining led by Miller. The theft accusations, which she denied, represented what she called the “final attack.”
Sasha Suda was director of the Philadelphia Museum of Art from 2022 until last fall.Justin Tang/The Globe and Mail
Suda outlined her complaints in a legal filing, which includes descriptions of “a once-great institution mired in dysfunction,” a “coup attempt” and a “cabal” that “inflicted maximum harm.”
Excerpts from Sasha Suda's lawsuit against the Philadelphia museum.
The museum responded with its own filing, describing Suda as making “delusional allegations of victimhood and persecution” and lacking the “character and judgment to hold a position of trust or confidence at any institution.”
When contacted by The Globe several times over the course of three months, Miller and the museum declined to comment.
Excerpts from the museum's response to Suda's litigation.
Suda disputes the museum’s characterization of her time there; the allegations have not been tested in court. She initially didn’t respond to The Globe’s requests for an interview, but she ultimately agreed to speak. The interview via video lasted more than an hour, and both her lawyer and her communications consultant were present. Suda also provided written responses to some of The Globe’s questions.
Suda described a conflict with Miller that developed incrementally over time. They clashed, she said, over where the line existed between management and the board – about who had the authority to do what.
“Sadly, a few trustees put their own egos and need for control before the institution’s long-term best interests,” she said.
As the Philadelphia museum continues under new leadership, several current and former board members and employees spoke with The Globe about what happened to Suda.Hannah Yoon/The Globe and Mail
The museum and Suda are now at the centre of a controversy that has captured international attention within art circles, not only for the clashing narrative, but for the pure drama of a legal battle packed with accusations, acrimonious character descriptions and internal text messages and e-mails.
To get a clearer picture of what happened, The Globe interviewed 25 current and former board members, employees and close observers of the museum, along with former colleagues and associates from the Canadian chapters of Suda’s career. The Globe is not naming most of these sources because they were not authorized to discuss internal matters, feared career repercussions or both.
The inner workings of art institutions normally stay hidden behind a refined facade of grand architecture and priceless artworks.
But the loud and messy saga in Philadelphia has exposed the mechanics of museum governance, thrusting into public view the tensions that can arise between a director and the trustees they answer to.
Close observers of this feud tend to see it in black and white. To them, this is either the story of a principled, ambitious and visionary director who tried to do her job despite the meddling of entitled trustees, or it’s about the devoted board and staff of an esteemed institution trying to defend it against a presumptuous upstart who was attempting to change too much too fast.
There were some frustrations over her leadership at the National Gallery – elements of which mirror critiques at the Philadelphia museum, including high staff turnover and complaints over her management style. But the turmoil in Ottawa didn’t become public until a few months after she left for the States.
Suda led the National Gallery of Canada before her move to Philadelphia.Blair Gable/The Globe and Mail
Suda said she questions whether the criticisms she has faced would have arisen if she were a man. “As a woman rather on the young side in this sphere, I have often faced challenges and resistance,” said Suda, 45. “But I have always approached my job with a sense of mission. Our cultural institutions are under pressure - financial, social, political - like never before.”
In Philadelphia, Suda was brought in to lead a museum that had, as the job posting delicately acknowledged, been through “difficult times” – including budget cuts, HR scandals, prolonged union negotiations and the sudden death in 2008 of the institution’s beloved and long-time director Anne d’Harnoncourt.
The city that had once been gilded enough to fill its museum with art treasures had its own struggles over time, hollowed out by manufacturing decline, suburban flight and the opioid epidemic.
“If you watch Rocky, you see the city at its nadir,” said Lloyd DeWitt, who worked at the museum as an associate curator from 2003 to 2011, during what he and his former colleagues now think of as a golden age.
“But when Rocky runs up the museum steps,” he adds, “everyone understood that the art museum was the thing that was leading the city out of its slump.”
Three years ago, the Philadelphia Museum of Art hired Suda to guide it out of its own dark chapter. There’s no doubt the institution has grabbed more attention in recent months, just not of the type Suda and the board must have imagined when they first came together.
Actor Sylvester Stallone gifted a statue to the museum when making Rocky III: Here, he and co-star Tommy Morrison are re-enacting a scene from Rocky V underneath it in 1990.Chris Gardner/AP
Transformation and turmoil in Canada
Suda was born in Orillia, Ont., and grew up in Toronto in a family that spoke Czech at home, her parents and grandparents having come to Canada in 1968 from what was then Czechoslovakia after the Prague Spring uprising.
As a kid, she visited the Royal Ontario Museum and Art Gallery of Ontario, but it was trips to the big New York museums while visiting a relative that stayed with her.
She studied art history at Princeton University, where she co-captained the women’s rowing team. Suda then attended Williams College, a small private liberal arts institution in Massachusetts, for her master’s in art history, and New York University for her PhD. By that point, her academic focus was medieval art.
Suda’s museum career started out with her sleeping in the back seat of a car on the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s loading dock, waiting for artworks to arrive in the middle of the night escorted by couriers. She was hired as a PhD student by a Met curator who needed a Czech-speaking assistant for a show about the medieval court of Prague.
She worked at the museum over the course of several years as an intern, research assistant, tour guide and postdoctoral fellow, before moving back to Toronto and taking a job as assistant curator of European art at the AGO in 2011.
There, she co-curated Small Wonders: Gothic Boxwood Miniatures in collaboration with the Met and the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. The exhibition drew popular fascination to tiny intricate prayer beads from a collection donated to the AGO by the late Ken Thomson.
“She had a commanding presence,” says DeWitt, who was Suda’s direct supervisor at the AGO, after his time at the Philadelphia museum. “Her career trajectory made sense in light of her educational path.” He recommended her to succeed him as curator of European art. She also headed the museum’s prints and drawings department.
Suda was heading two curatorial departments at the Art Gallery of Ontario when she was selected to run the National Gallery.Cole Burston/The Globe and Mail
In 2018, the National Gallery of Canada was looking for a new director to replace Marc Mayer after he had served two five-year terms.
The posting for the federally appointed role sought an “innovative and strategic leader” with integrity, sound judgment and superior interpersonal skills. Early in 2019, the minister of heritage, Pablo Rodriguez, announced that the next director and CEO of the National Gallery of Canada would be Suda. Rodriguez did not respond to The Globe’s request for an interview.
One senior curator from the NGC was on a work trip to New York when the appointment was announced. The museum world is small, and when a top-level job like this is up for grabs, people have a sense of who might be in the mix. But when the NGC curator heard who the new director was, they had to google Suda’s name to figure out who she was.
Gregory Humeniuk, a former colleague of Suda’s at the AGO, had a measured reaction when he heard the news. “Given her ambition, I was not surprised,” he said. “But I was surprised given her experience.”
To those who have questioned if she had the managerial chops to merit landing the job, Suda says she had significantly more managerial responsibility at the AGO than most of her curatorial peers across the continent.
Suda started at the National Gallery in April, 2019, and immediately set about transforming the place. Her stated goals were to improve Indigenous representation, rectify other historical exclusions and make the institution more welcoming. She terminated several senior staff members in short order and then embarked on a total reimagining of the institution, which sparked controversy.
The NGC, a Globe analysis revealed in 2023, paid out more than $2-million in severance in the 2½ years after Suda took over. The gallery wouldn’t provide specifics at the time, but estimates of the number of departures ranged between 30 and 40.
“When you bring a transition to a place, and you say, ‘I’m going to open a door wider, I’m going to make this accessible to more people,’ then you ... inevitably threaten areas other people felt were their territory,” Suda told The Globe. She said such changes “would poke the bear a little bit.”
Suda led the National Gallery through the early years of COVID-19; on July 16, 2021, she helped staff welcome patrons back to in-person visits.Ashley Fraser/The Globe and Mail
When she took over, the NGC had already launched a new Canadian Photography Institute, seeded by a $20-million photography archive donated by Ken Thomson’s son, David Thomson. (Thomson’s family investment firm, Woodbridge Co. Ltd, owns The Globe.) The project, which had been formalized in a memorandum of understanding, shuttered in 2020 – with Thomson’s team withdrawing further support and pointing the finger at Suda.
In a statement at the time, a curator of Thomson’s photography collection, David Franklin, blamed managerial obstruction. “A spectacular opportunity for Canada to be the global leader and innovator in this increasingly dominant field of visual art … was forever compromised," the statement said.
In response to The Globe’s questions for this story, Suda said the gallery made “reasonable requests” to structure the photography institute in a way that abided by federal policy and what she described as governance standards. In an e-mail to The Globe, Franklin said Suda never communicated any concerns about governance structure. “To everyone’s knowledge, the original MOU fully respected Crown Corporation guidelines.”
At the time the Philadelphia Museum of Art was looking for a new leader to replace its outgoing director and CEO of 13 years, Timothy Rub, Suda was not actively seeking a change from the NGC, she said. She said she considered the role – and then ultimately accepted it – because she had always felt an affinity for the American museum.
On June 7, 2022, Suda sent an e-mail to the leaders of the other national museums and federal cultural entities including the CBC and the National Film Board of Canada, informing them that Philadelphia had just announced her as its new leader.
“I am extremely excited about joining the PMA,” she wrote, adding, “Thank you for all your support, inspiration, fantastic conversations, and team spirit.”
She signed off, “With total admiration and gratitude.”
She said/she said
Even before Suda agreed to take the job, there was a flashpoint over the most basic of questions: What was the museum hiring her to do?
Suda says in her lawsuit that she was initially interviewed for a dual role that combined the directorship, focused on the art side of running the museum, with the CEO position, focused on the business. She says that when Miller, the board chair at the time, called to offer her the job, Miller “abruptly changed course” and only offered her the directorship.
Suda withdrew her candidacy, but the museum ultimately decided to offer her the unified director and CEO role, she says. Suda accepted.
One source told The Globe that although Miller is described as the central villain in Suda’s lawsuit, she was key to Suda’s hiring and optimistic about her arrival.
The chair of the board’s finance committee, John Alchin, also expressed enthusiasm in Suda’s early days. “The positive change in tone you’ve established in two short and tumultuous weeks has been extraordinary,” Alchin wrote in a text message to Suda, which Suda filed with the court.
There was a sense that Suda might be the breath of fresh air that the institution needed, one former museum employee said. At a virtual all-staff call before she arrived, Suda came across as confident, open and relatable.
The former employee believes Suda made a concerted effort to build a rapport with the museum’s unionized employees, who went on strike at the very moment she joined the institution. About a month later, the union and museum finally reached an agreement after two years of contract negotiations.
A few months after Suda's exit, a group of retired National Gallery curators raised the alarm with the heritage minister about what they saw as significant problems at the Ottawa institution.Blair Gable/The Globe and Mail
Meanwhile in Ottawa, discord at the National Gallery suddenly burst into public view. In November of 2022, a group of retired long-time NGC curators wrote an open letter to the minister of heritage raising the alarm. They pointed to the dismissals of management-level employees – most of them during Suda’s leadership – and to what they said was a broader pattern of attrition and key roles left vacant.
“Staff morale is at an all-time low,” they wrote.
They described “a dramatic decrease in exhibitions organized in house and an almost total collapse of the national exhibition programme,” and warned that “the risk of the National Gallery of Canada’s irrelevance to national culture is high.”
In her interview with The Globe, Suda said she disagreed with the picture painted in the letter. She took over the Ottawa gallery just before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in what she described as a challenging time, given a financial deficit and public backlash over the attempted sale of a Marc Chagall painting. She said she sought greater independence from the gallery’s donors and had a “phenomenal relationship” with the board.
The National Gallery once considered selling Marc Chagall’s The Eiffel Tower (1929), then chose not to. That controversy was, according to Suda, among the difficulties she inherited in Ottawa.National Gallery of Canada via CP
Back in Philadelphia that fall, the relationship between Suda and Miller had already begun to sour. Seven sources said the women were at odds over issues related to the division of power and authority.
The Philadelphia museum is a not-for-profit corporation, led by a director and CEO responsible for the curatorial vision and day-to-day operations, and administered by a board focused on governance, policy and fundraising. The board has the authority to hire and fire the director – a role that reports directly to trustees.
One former museum employee said Suda didn’t show interest in interacting with the board – some 60 trustees, most of them wealthy donors. The former employee said Suda discouraged board members from engaging with staff.
Suda said she disagrees with that characterization. She said the culture at the institution was such that certain curators had “deep personal relationships” with trustees, which “occasionally crossed the line of governance best practices.”
In Suda’s telling, Miller had functioned as “a kind of interim leader” for about eight months between Rub’s departure and her own arrival.
“When I came, she was really hands-on in the institution,” Suda said. “I was surprised by how much authority had been abdicated to the board.” She said there was friction over “how to bring back more balance.”
When Rub was director and CEO, he met weekly with Miller, one former employee said. The source said Miller wanted to continue that approach, but Suda often cancelled the meetings or showed up unprepared. This did not sit well with Miller, the source said.
Suda said this is false. She said she in fact met with Miller weekly, oftentimes for three hours. She said that although the meetings became shorter over time, other points of contact more than made up for it.
Those who worked with Suda gave varying accounts of her work style and relationship with key players in Philadelphia, such as Leslie Anne Miller, the now-former chair of the board of trustees.Justin Tang/The Globe and Mail
Miller, a prominent lawyer who has been involved in Pennsylvania Democratic politics, and her husband are wealthy collectors of American art. They are prolific donors who have a pair of galleries named after them in the American wing of the Philadelphia museum.
Supporters of Miller describe her as a passionate and involved board chair. Critics say her sure-footedness can manifest as a tendency to play hardball.
One former member of the museum leadership recalled a conversation with Miller, in which Miller said Suda had overstepped in relation to a museum committee. The source said Miller made it clear that the relationship was not going to be smooth if she kept having to check Suda.
A museum trustee told The Globe it was not unusual for members of the executive committee to talk down to Suda at meetings, speaking in a rude and disrespectful way. According to one former employee, though, the negative commentary was not a one-way street. The former employee said Suda would sometimes mock or criticize board members, including Miller, in front of staff.
In her responses to The Globe, Suda said: “I categorically deny any kind of mocking or criticism in front of the broader staff.” She said the inverse was true; several staff members, she said, approached her about what she described as “abusive exchanges” with Miller and another trustee, Ellen Caplan. Caplan declined The Globe’s requests for comment.
Tensions mounted. “Way too much she said/she said crap is floating around – I feel like I have to be overly diplomatic so that I’m not seen as in a power struggle with Leslie,” reads an August, 2023, text message from Suda to Alchin, the chair of the board’s finance committee.
Suda filed these text messages with John Alchin, chair of the board’s finance committee, as part of her litigation against the museum.
Unease was also growing among museum staff. Two former employees said they felt that Suda – a Canadian with no experience leading a major American institution – was enacting too much change, too fast, particularly when it came to personnel and hierarchy. They said the string of departures caused staff to fear losing their jobs.
Citing interviews with museum insiders, The Philadelphia Inquirer recently reported that at least 60 employees – many from the senior executive team – were fired, let go or pressured to leave during Suda’s tenure.
Asked about this figure by The Globe, Suda said it is unfamiliar to her and questioned its accuracy. She said several of the personnel changes were encouraged by board leadership.
Pennsylvania powerbroker David Cohen, who overlapped with Suda in Ottawa when he was U.S. ambassador to Canada, has become one of her most vocal supporters. He is adamant that the problem in Philadelphia was not Suda. It was the board.
Cohen sees Suda as an enormous talent who would have benefited from mentorship and support from trustees. Instead, Suda was on the receiving end of what he described as “as bad an example of board leadership of an institution as I have seen in my career.”
After seven years as chair, Miller stepped down in the fall of 2023. She was succeeded by Caplan, a prominent philanthropist and long-time museum trustee.
Suda claims in her legal filing that the transition “did not resolve the dysfunction” and that Miller had “poisoned the well.” She said the former board chair described her to people affiliated with the museum as untrustworthy, incompetent, a snake and immature.
One of Suda’s supporters in Philadelphia is David Cohen, former U.S. ambassador to Canada.Justin Tang/The Globe and Mail
The money
When Suda was in talks for the museum’s top job, she made clear that she would not accept the role for less than what Rub was being paid after 13 years at the helm, the museum says in its filing.
The museum says Suda demanded an annual base salary of US$720,000, which it says amounted to a nearly five-fold increase over her pay at the National Gallery of Canada.
The museum claims that the board of trustees reluctantly agreed but informed Suda that she would not receive any raises during her term, absent extraordinary performance. The employment agreement, which was filed with the court, states that any change in Suda’s annual base salary “shall be determined at the sole and absolute discretion” of the board.
Suda told The Globe she was never told that she would not receive raises during her term.
The museum’s version of events is that Suda repeatedly asked for raises, was told “no” and then nonetheless took three unauthorized increases between March of 2024 and July of 2025. “You need to show more progress on righting the ship and raising funds,” the chair of the compensation committee told her in late 2024, according to the museum’s filing.
The museum and Suda are locked in a legal battle over whether her salary increases were properly approved.Hannah Yoon/The Globe and Mail
The museum has not specified the size of the alleged improper pay increases Suda received without board approval. Suda asserts that she received a 3-per-cent cost-of-living adjustment in line with what unionized staff negotiated. She claims in her filing that this amounted to US$39,000 over two years and was “fully transparent in its application.”
Suda has pushed back against the notion that she hadn’t been delivering on the museum’s goals. She contends that she cut the deficit by two-thirds, re-established the museum’s connection to Philadelphia’s schools and met fundraising targets; right around the time she was fired, she said, she secured a verbal commitment for a US$25-million gift to the museum. She says she restored labour peace, met the institution’s equity and diversity goals and delivered on programming.
In her lawsuit, Suda says Caplan requested a “360-degree review” of her job performance in the fall of 2024. Suda says the process was “deeply flawed” and failed to seek input from two of her strongest supporters, even though she had received “a glowing internal performance review” a short time before.
The document that she refers to as a performance review – which Suda filed with the court – is a self-assessment in which Suda laid out her objectives and progress. The 360-degree review is not included.
In September, 2025, Suda and the board’s compensation committee met to discuss raises for certain members of the executive team. According to the museum, it was only after a long conversation that Suda “belatedly admitted” that she had already signed off on the pay increases.
The compensation committee was frustrated and asked Suda to leave the room so they could discuss privately, according to the filing. While the committee was still in that private meeting, the museum claims that Suda sent one of the members a text “in which she admitted, for the first time,” that she had also received raises over the past few years.
In Suda’s version of events, when the issue of her raise came up, she encouraged the committee to speak to the CFO, who could confirm everything had been done properly. Caplan, Suda said in her lawsuit, refused to speak to the CFO because “the truth didn’t serve her purpose.”
Suda also states that Alchin, the chair of the finance committee, “maintained direct oversight over and worked collaboratively with Suda on budget matters,” and that her salary was included in the budget and disclosed on the museum’s tax forms.
Miller’s successor at the museum board is Ellen Caplan, seen here with her husband, Ron, at an event last spring.Hugh E Dillon/The Globe and Mail
In making her case that her pay increases were discussed and reviewed at multiple levels, Suda filed internal museum e-mails as exhibits. In a message chain from March, 2023, the museum’s CFO tells the director of human resources that she was “trying to figure out what increase sasha might be entitled to in FY24.” The e-mail continues: “I will budget her with a 3% increase … Prior to finalizing I will check with John Alchin or Leslie to make sure they are comfortable.”
The HR director responded saying this “sounds good.” The CFO then sent another e-mail saying, “For budgeting purposes, please assume a 3% increase …” Although the exhibit does not include correspondence to the board, Suda contends that the CFO followed protocol and obtained the necessary approvals.
Caplan convened a special committee to investigate Suda’s salary increases, and the board hired a law firm to conduct interviews and review expenses such as club memberships and travel. The investigation was led by a former acting United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
Suda told The Globe that among the expenses the museum took issue with was a Four Seasons hotel stay on a trip to South Korea with donors. She said it was the norm for the director to stay at the same hotel as donors, and that her predecessors had routinely done so.
Once the law firm’s investigation was complete, the board’s executive committee held a vote on Oct. 27 on whether to terminate Suda for cause, which would absolve the museum of the obligation to pay severance. The motion passed 12-0, with one abstention. Suda was told of the decision the next day.
Attempts to quietly negotiate a voluntary resignation fell apart. According to Suda’s lawsuit, the museum demanded that she sign a non-disparagement and confidentiality agreement that didn’t impose the same obligations on the museum. She also said that the institution offered no more than six months severance and demanded she repay the raises.
On the morning of Nov. 4, Suda received an e-mail stating that it was official: She was being terminated for cause. She told The Globe she has never seen the report from the investigation.
Later that morning, the executive committee convened an emergency board meeting to discuss the report, two trustees said.
The chair then told the board that Suda had been fired. Although the executive committee’s vote was near-unanimous, the broader board included both supporters and detractors of Suda.
Suda told The Globe she was shaken by the news, but showed up to a scheduled dinner at the museum with trustees and members of the Bizot Group, an exclusive network of directors from the world’s most prominent art museums. “I did leave that dinner a little bit early, just as the dessert course came, because it was quite overwhelming,” she said.
When the news broke in the local media that Suda had been terminated, there was speculation online that the reason was the Oct. 8 unveiling of a polarizing rebrand that saw the Philadelphia Museum of Art become the Philadelphia Art Museum, or PhAM for short. Internet commentators mockingly abbreviated the new name to “PhArt.”
There was also speculation that Suda had been fired because she had been too “woke.” No one who spoke with The Globe for this story said they believe Suda was fired because of the rebrand or her approach to DEI.
Suda’s successor in Philadelphia is Daniel H. Weiss, formerly CEO of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.KENA BETANCUR/AFP via Getty Images
The museum on the hill
Less than three weeks after Suda was fired, the Philadelphia museum announced that Daniel H. Weiss, the former president and chief executive of the Met, would replace her. In contrast to the visionary tone of the job posting that originally brought Suda and the museum together, the announcement of his appointment emphasized steadiness and gravitas.
After he arrived, Weiss – a medieval-art specialist, like Suda – began a review of the museum’s rebrand. In early February, the museum announced that it would once again be known as the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
“Returning to the name that is beloved by staff, trustees, and members is an important gesture,” Weiss said in a statement. The board voted unanimously for the change. Around the same time, the museum’s chief marketing officer, its chief financial officer and its chief of staff all resigned, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
To pursue her wrongful termination claim, Suda tapped high-profile New York lawyer Luke Nikas, a partner with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. Nikas often handles legal disputes over valuable works of art, and was Alec Baldwin’s lead attorney on the criminal case arising from a fatal shooting on the set of the Western movie Rust.
Suda had sought a jury trial in which to air her claims and seek two years of severance, but a judge has granted the museum’s petition to force arbitration. Nikas said in an e-mail that while they don’t intend to appeal the decision, the matter could still go to trial in front of an arbitrator.
With all this drama, the Philadelphia Museum of Art has had no trouble attracting attention, and perhaps would like much less of it. None of this heat and noise is about what draws people to the hushed, genteel galleries and corridors in the first place, whether to work or to wander as visitors. They come for the art.
Behind the neoclassical facade of the building, Marcel Duchamp’s nude still descends her staircase in shards of perpetual motion.
Vincent van Gogh’s sunflowers defy any dreary day, their brief, fragile spikes of ochre sunshine immortalized as they were in 1889. Paul Cézanne’s monumental bathers lounge and lean on their summery riverbank in perpetuity.
They remain unchanged, alongside all the other treasures in oil and marble and ink that generations of well-heeled Philadelphians shared with the world through their grand museum on the hill.
