This image was lost some time after publication, but you can still view it here.

Hey, remember the when the Whitney Museum was all hot and controversial? In case you don't, the museum was defaced by scandal when board member Robert Hurst was scoped out by the Times for evading taxes on art purchases. We hear, however, that the paper's Tim O'Brien is back to digging away at the museum's finances and direction under new director Adam Weinberg. We're thinking that there's more to come on Robert Hurst, seeing as he's held on to his position despite embarassing everyone around him. After the jump, an anonymous reader reports on the artsy-fartsy fracas and possible motives for the continued scrutiny.

Increasing chatter in art circles is that the Times has had reporters digging for the past months on a (yet again) story on the Whitney Museum. The reporters have been calling people with the line that they are doing an update on the museum under its new user-friendly concierge/director Adam Weinberg. So what makes this one different? For one thing it s being done by reporters from the business desk whose questions have made some wonder what the Times real agenda is.

Speculation is that the story is fueled by former Director Maxwell Anderson s lust for revenge at the institution and Board who tossed him out. Clues: Anderson, self-proclaimed "leader of the digital vanguard in the museum world" and obsessive/compulsive e-mailer, has apparently left a digital trail including accusations of trustee cronyism and interference, and recently, implications of his public retribution. And at the Times, in recent articles that have left knowledgeable people scratching their heads, lead art critic Michael Kimmelman has been buffing up the public memory of Anderson, who many feel embarassed both himself and the museum.

Why embarassment? His installation of an electric eye at the door of the museum s staff annex to artificially increase the museum s visitor numbers; the weekly broadcast e-mail updates on his wife s acting career — featuring clips of the lingerie-clad thespian in Hack and similar dramatic gems — along with the suggestion that a write-in campaign might get the missus a permanent role; Anderson s ill-concealed obsessive jealousy of Whitney godfather/board president Leonard Lauder and other New York museum directors (Moma s Glen Lowry in particular).

Could it be that Kimmelman s serial reputation enhancement over the past months has been the up-front fee for a self-serving Deep Throat routine by the man known to refer to himself as america s best museum director ? Could it be that Anderson s severance agreement with his former employer does not have a non-disparagement clause?