Hello,
The question of how much technical knowledge one is supposed to have as a
curator is always a struggle. If one is not a technician, but an art
historian (as curators traditionally are, and as museum tend to hire) it is
a challenge to keep up with all the new technological advances on the fronts
of sound, visuals, interactivity, code etc. Everyone on this list will be
keeping up to a certain degree, but it’s impossible to know everything.
Those who are curators of painting, for instance, do not have this spectrum
to cover. At the same time, few curators of contemporary art are now asked
to define themselves by their expertise in a specific medium (meaning they,
too, must have a broad spectrum of knowledge). How many “curators of
painting” under the age of 50 do we still have out there? Instead, the title
often reads “Curator of Contemporary Art”. “Curators of New Media Art” are
an exception to the general trend.
The way I’ve come to terms with the fact that I’ll never be able to know
everything is by defining my role as a curator. Basically, I see myself as a
bridge between artist and audience.
I know much more about technology and its theory as applied to art - as well
as art history - than the average exhibition-goer, but I almost always know
less than the artist I’m presenting – and who has specialized him or herself
in that one area for several years. The trick is to bring these two parties
to a level where they can both speak to each other through the artwork.
Question: How can I select an artist’s work for exhibition without knowing
exactly how the work was made?
Answer (one of many possibilities): Through continual viewing of hundreds –
thousands – of works. If I see the same aesthetic coming up all the time, a
redundant concept, nothing unique in the results etc., it’s probably not
worth exhibiting. If a spark seems to be there – query the artist. It’s the
one-on-one discussion with the artist that usually matters most in making a
decision on what works to present to an audience.
This is by far more informative than sitting down with a manual and learning
C++ (at least for me).
If I think the artist requires more background knowledge for a basic
understanding of his or her work than my audience possesses, but it’s still
a work I really believe in, it’s up to me to work with the artist to
contextualize and present the work in a fashion that will give the audience
intellectual access to the work. This holds true for contemporary art in any
medium.
...
Having this discussion on this list may turn out to be moot because it’s
preaching to the converted. We can bicker about how much code one needs to
know, but it doesn’t matter because we all have a basic knowledge of, and
interest in, art/technology... Even if many of us did start with video and
moved into other areas of media art from there.
For me, the real questions are: How much knowledge do those curators of
contemporary art with no background in media art need to have in order to
regularly place media art into their general programming? How do we deal
with promoting process-based instead of only image-based art? How do we
contextualize process-based works so that a general audience (which is
usually quite image-based) wants more?
I have a dirty little secret I’d like to share: I’ve never programmed a
website and hope I never have to. Thankfully, there have always been other
members of the team who I can sit next to while they write it. This lack of
a certain basic technical ability hasn't lessened my abilities as a curator
of media art one single bit.
Unrepentantly,
Rosanne Altstatt
--
Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
|