One donor said, "They [Slive and the Faculty] shouldn't have agreed to that [decession] provision. But more than that, the Corporation shouldn't have pressured them to agree."

The idea to sell artwork "didn't come from the Fine Arts Department," Putnam said, adding that it "most likely" originated from the administration.

In interviews with donors and faculty members, the aborted plan to sell artwork emerged as not only one of the most frustrating aspects of the expansion plan, but also one that was somewhat typical of the confusion that prevailed over the drawn-out negotiations between the administration, Corporation and Fogg faculty.

Since the 1960s, the past three directors of the Fogg have actively sought additional space for the museum's growing collection and staff. But it was Slive who in October 1977 launched a $15 million fund drive for a larger extension than had been considered previously.

"It has become apparent that the Fogg can no longer tolerate the physically cramped conditions of its building," Slive stated in his 1976 report to the University.

Only yesterday, however, Corporation Member Andrew Heiskell voiced skepticism that the Fogg's needs for increased space are exceptionally severe. "Who isn't cramped?" Heiskell asked. "It's just a matter of what you can afford."

Other Corporation members interviewed, however, generally acknowledged the Fogg's need for a new addition, although some, such as Putnam, said Stirling's design was "probably bigger than we need."

When Slive formally began his nationwide fund drive, he had already raised about $3.2 million from several longtime supporters of the Fogg. Then came a string of financial coups for Slive. The Kresge Foundation donated $500,000, the Kress Foundation contributed $250,000, and the Lehman Foundation Pledged $100,000.

A donor whose name has not been disclosed offered a reported $6 million if Slive would enlarge his plans from a renovation and modest extension to an entire new building on the site of Allston Burr Hall, which the Fogg acquired when the University decided it had no more use for it.

The Fogg accepted the major donor's offer and accordingly raised the fund drive goal. The University agreed to use $5 million from the incipient $250 million Harvard Campaign to help reach the new total.

But according to one Visiting Committee member, Slive was warned by the Corporation to avoid approaching donors who would be likely targets of the main University Campaign. With only one exception, according to the committee member Slive was able to raise millions without interfering with the Campaign.

But after this string of initial successes, it appears that a series of confrontations between Slive and the Corporation delayed progress.

The Corporation commissioned repeated re-estimates of the addition's construction cost, each showing that the outlays would have to rise significantly.

After a May 1980 estimate, Stirling reduced the scale of the addition, but even then, the latest estimated figures--$7.8 million for construction alone--exceeded previous estimates by about $1.9 million.

Slive responded successfully to the increased construction costs, however, reportedly returning to his unnamed donor and successfully obtaining another pledge of nearly $2 million Still, the Corporation, according to a Visiting Committee member continued to "play Slive like a yo-yo."