The Role of Art Education in Curatorial Practice: - Literature review Example

?The Role of Art Education in Curatorial Practice: Literature Review The term ‘curator’ means ‘overseer’. It has its origin from the Latin word ‘curare’ which means ‘take care’. In simple terms, a curator is a person who is the keeper of any cultural heritage institution like a gallery, a museum, a library, or any archive. The curators are often experts in the collection involved and are involved in interpretation of the material. This work intends to look into the various roles and responsibilities of curators. In addition, the work will identify the responsibility of curator in museum. Furthermore, effort is made to look into the history of the profession. Growth of curatorship A look in to the book A Brief History of Curating by Obrist and Bovier (2008), will give a clear picture of how curating has evolved and changed over two centuries. It is pointed out by the work that during 19th and 20th centuries, art was highly connected with exhibitions. The success of avant grade during 1910s and 1920s was inextricably linked to collective gatherings and exhibitions. In those years, artists functioned as their own curators. However, these exhibitions were so few and sparse in nature that they failed to meet the needs of the new generation of artists. As a result, artists started to organise their own exhibitions. Over the twentieth century, one can see that artists had an important role in the creation of many new collections. An example is the Muzeum Sztuki in Lodz by Henryk Stazewski. Similarly, the founding directors of many modern art museums were curatorial pioneers (ibid, p. 67). Alfred Barr was the founding director of The Museum of Modern Art of New York, Hofmann was the founder of Vienna’s Museum Des 20. Thus, by the second half of the twentieth century, most of the important shows were arranged not by artists but by art professionals. As twentieth century progressed, exhibitions achieved more importance as the medium for communication. In addition, many museums and art galleries started exhibiting their permanent collections in a series of temporary exhibitions. Thus, curators gained more and more importance as time progressed (ibid, p. 67). Roles of a curator In the article named ‘Being a Curator’, Thomas (1999) points out that “Today, it would be unthinkable for an art museum curator also to be an out-of-hours art critic”. The scholar admits that very serious conflict of interest is involved when one becomes the critic of an exhibition for which one is the curator. The scholar admits that a curator/critic might offer different insights into the art of the past than an artist/critic who besides being too exclusively interested in the here and now could also dwell too long on such technical matters as drawing and paintcraft (ibid). Similarly, Rendle-Short (1999) too writes about the changing role of the curator. The scholar points out that gone are the days when a curator was considered as the keeper of the collection those who shape and give voice to the collection. Now, they have much more public contact. Especially in large institutions, the curator has achieved a lot of public service qualities. In addition, the scholar points out that in institutions which are smaller in size, the curator and direction are often synonymous. That means the curator is mainly engaged in facilitation, collaboration, and coordination between artists, audience and institutions (ibid). The same opinion is propounded by people like Sylvester (1999). In his opinion, curating can be better explained in the present scenario as the art of juxtaposition, scholarship and display. The curator at present is able to give life to the old art by displaying those things in such a way that the audience is taken by surprise (ibid). Sylvester is of the opinion that in the modern days, art requires a lot of explanation and contextualization. As a result, the curator is vested with the power to influence what audience perceives and to manipulate their taste. Thus, in the opionion of the scholar, curator can be better explained as the person standing between ‘us and the art’ (ibid). Probably because of the reason, Auty (2000) opined that to become a good curator, one should be a good artist as well. Thus, the scholar points out that as an artist can more effectively select and arrange art, there is no need of a separate curator and the money spent on such curators is wasted. He says ‘Artists may be hoping that the money will go to them but I am wondering if it might go to critics, or ex-critics.’ (ibid) Thus, it becomes evident that there are a large number of responsibilities for the present day curator to do which can be summarized as developing, safeguarding, studying and publicizing the collection under their care. The duties of a modern day curator are better explained by Rugg and Sedwick (2007). First of all, curators are responsible for the security of the tings under their care. To illustrate, when required, curators are responsible for the daily round of maintenance. It includes overseeing the work of security chief, technical and logistical heads, fire officers, and attendants. In addition, he or she should see that alarm systems, showcases, hung works, and the display of things are all well-maintained (ibid, p. 22). Moreover, when there is a need for restoration, it is for the curator to do a ‘health check’ for the works and give an expert opinion. Moreover, when any work is moved from one place to another, it is packed, conveyed and unpacked by the curator (ibid, p. 22). Another important area of responsibility is acquisition and development of collection. It is for the curator to see that they are in constant contact with various people including donors, collectors, antiquarians, corporations and patrons. Thus, when there is a suitable work for the collection, it is for the curator to study the quality of the work and engage in negotiation. In the case of museum, curator has the difficult task of checking the origin of various antiques at auctions. Another vital area of duty for the curator, in the opinion of Grois (2008, n. p.) is research and education. It is the duty of the curator to be up-to-date with latest developments by attending regular meetings, conferences, and interaction with other specialists in the field. Furthermore, the curator must be able to develop information plaques and catalogues. Furthermore, there should be regular publication of literature for the various stakeholders including specialists and the general public. In the opinion of Murray (1996, p. 33), the curators are also responsible to organise temporary exhibitions at times. In such cases, they will be made to select artifacts representing a specific style, a specific time period, or a specific artist. In this case, the curator will not be able to function effectively without proper knowledge of art and the interest of the visitors. Thus, one has to admit the fact that the traditional role of curator as an expert in the art or artifacts but with limited public interaction like a hen brooding over eggs has undergone radical changes (ibid, p.33). Instead of the old curator who was knowledgeable about art or artifacts, the modern curators are knowledgeable about people and their interests too. Thus, according to the US News and World Report, curating has become one of the 50 best careers in the world. In other words, the present curator is one who works as an expert who bridges the gap between academia and the general public. That means the new curator cannot survive simply by hanging or exhibiting the arts or artifacts. Instead, he or she will have to help the visitors curate themselves in creative ways. Slishman (1995, p. 56) points out that the new curator is supposed to curate the content in order to maximize visitor engagement. Thus, the notion of highly educated, less communicative curators has given way to people who are specialists in people and communication. Yet another strategy of interpreting this change in the role of curators is suggested by Kennedy (2012). In the scholar’s opinion, the modern curators play various roles; that of a marketer, object conservator, museum interpreter, and program producer, to mention but few. However, the interesting fact is that these all roles are the outgrowth of the traditional curator. The reason behind this evolution and mutation, according to Kennedy, lies in the emergence of new tools (ibid). The article by Thomas (1999) looks into the ways the new curator is different from the old curator. The scholar takes the readers back to the period between 1890s and 1950s. It was this period that witnessed great strides in expansion and collection of art. Over this period, the traditional curator was never questioned, and they remained as the protectors of knowledge instead of sharers of the same. They had less communication with the general public. However, as time changed, the modern curator had to cope with a number of changes, says Thomas. He or she has to become detached with the idea of scholarship and subject authority. Instead, it became more like bridging the gap between business and the essential roles of curatorship. Another area of interest is the sense of aesthetics and art the new curator should possess. It was this bygone era when people visited museums only to see certain artifacts which were unusual things and gave no attention to the way they were arranged. The modern visitor comes to see and experience the museum and exhibition as a whole and hence, it is the responsibility of the curator to select the works and arrange them appropriately, understanding the aesthetic needs of the people. Admittedly, these points will make one think whether it is necessary to have curators anymore as everyone has become a curator on their own. However, Rendle-Short (2000) comes up with the claim that without curators, museums cannot function. The reason is that without access to the ‘old school’ curators, museums will cease to become treasures of knowledge as they will not be able to gather information about more than 40 years into the past (ibid). In addition, activities of collecting new artifacts and carrying out new researches will all face a grinding halt. Admittedly, there are people who are unable to identify the beneficial relationship between curatorial practice and art. Sylvester (1999) claims that curatorial practice helps best represent a contemporary visual art to an identified audience. Thus, the trio of artist-curator-audience engages in a mutual symbiotic relationship. In the opinion of Sylvester (1999), it is necessary for artists to have their works seen by curators. This is so because curators can give them valuable insights about the potential of their works for public presentation. Thus, through discussion on matters like presentation, contextualization and distribution, the artists will be able to further refine their work in order to gain better public acclaim. Thus, it becomes evident that association and interaction with a curator will give artist opportunities for further development as curator can show various avenues of thoughts, experiments and opportunities. Another important area is the development of exhibitions. In exhibitions, curator becomes the editor of what is displayed and becomes a key player in deciding how the artist’s work is accepted by the wider audience. With deep knowledge about the underlying power plays and practicalities, curators can provide an overview of all the factors that must be taken into consideration while planning an exhibition. Another point, as opined by Auty (2000) is that the curator is the key voice while presenting a work to the media. The basic details are all provided by the curator to the media. In addition, as the curator is in constant contact with critics, journalists and various other curators, it is possible for a curator to raise the profile of an artist and offer various opportunities. The work by Krysa (2006) comes up with the claim that the curatorial work is not exempt from the onslaught of technology. The work points out that the control and exploitation has become more immaterial, cognitive and networked in nature. As a result, it is more totalitarian too (ibid, p. 7). This changing nature of curatorship is visible in the report ‘Curating Research: e-Merging New Roles and Responsibilities in the European Landscape’ by Angevaare (2009), the Coordinator of Netherlands Coalition for Digital Preservation (NCDD) and Editor of LIBER Quarterly. It is pointed out in the report that as digital information is exploding and as it is prone to loss, it is highly necessary to curate digital information too. Thus, digital curation has become a new outgrowth of the traditional curatorship. The report points out that the Koninklijke Bibliotheek and the LIBER agreed to develop e-Depot to ensure proper preservation and curation of digital asset (ibid). Thus, the works prove it beyond doubt that curatorship is not a profession that is losing value but is one that is to achieve even more responsibilities as time grows. Taking good note of the situation, Morland and Amundsen (2009) write in ONCURATING.Org, Issue 4/10 about the political potential of curatorial practice. The scholars point out that as a result of the increasing number of museums, biennials, market for contemporary art, art fairs, and group exhibitions, there is a considerable change in the role of curators. They have come out of the confines of the museum and have assumed a more centralized and freer position in the art world. As a result of this change, critics have started giving more attention to the overall structure of an exhibition as a whole instead of concentrating on individual artworks. Thus, one can say that the power has been displaced from the artist to the curator. This is rightly said because now curator is the person who agitates, speaks and being listened to. However, the danger is apparent. We are in danger of losing sight of the quality of individual work and concentrate on the overall quality or aesthetic appeal of the exhibition or display as a whole, says Denial (2009) in an interview. Thus, as O’Neill (2009) points out in an interview, since the late 1960s, contemporary curating considerably changed from the previous curating by becoming a practice with a considerably extended remit instead of organising exhibitions of discrete artworks. Presently, it is not only about exhibiting, but also about all the activities associated with the framing and mediation of art. Thus, according to the scholar, curating is an ‘expansive work that includes various activities like exhibition making, commissioning, editing, discursive production, cooperative working and modes of self organisation’ (ibid). Thus, it becomes evident that as Christov-Bakargiev (2009) opines, an art exhibition can change the way an individual thinks about the world, or he or she experiences time or space. This depends on how the curator uses the grammar in the exhibition and ‘how long the wall label is’ (ibid). Thus, curatorship itself is an art or organising art and enabling others to converse with the same. The conclusion From the analysis, it becomes evident that curatorship had its beginning two centuries ago. At first, curators were preservers of knowledge and sharing of knowledge to the general public was not a major concern. However, over the years, the duties of curator rose in numbers, and at present, curator is not one who is meant to collect, maintain, and restore artifacts or art. Instead, curator is responsible to organise the artifacts according to the aesthetic needs of the public in order to ensure proper engagement of the audience. This requires additional knowledge about people, art, and aesthetics. References Angevaare, I. (2009) “Curating Research: e-Merging New Roles and Responsibilities in the European Landscape”, LIBER Quarterly, 19 (2). [online] available at [accessed 23 March 2013]. Auty, G. (2000) “Artists only need apply”. Art Monthly, p. 17 Christov-Bakargiev, C. (2009) “A twist of paradox”. 4/10. The political Potential of Curatorial Practise. [online] available at ONCURATING.Org [accessed 23 March 2013]. Denial, A. D. (2009) “Delusion and Curating”. 4/10, The political Potential of Curatorial Practise. [online document] available at ONCURATING.Org [accessed 23 March 2013]. Grois, B. (2008) Art Power. MIT Press. Kennedy, R. (2012) “The fine art of being a curator”. The New York Times, July 18. [online] available at [accessed 23 March 2013]. Krysa, J. (2006) Curating immateriality: the work of the curator in the age of network systems. Autonomedia. Morland, G. E & Amundsen, H. B. (2009) “Political Potential of Curatorial Practise”. 4 (10): 1-13. [online document] available at The ONCURATING.Org. [accessed 23 March 2013]. Murray, J. (1996) Confessions of a curator: adventures in Canadian art. Dundurn. Neill, P. (2009) “The Politics of the Small Act”. 4/10, The political Potential of Curatorial Practise. [online] available at ONCURATING.Org [accessed 23 March 2013]. Obrist, H. U & Bovier, L. (2008) A Brief History of Curating. Ringier. Rendle-Short, F. (1999) “ On the edge”. Art Monthly, 126: 16. Rugg J & Sedwick, M. (2007) Issues in curating contemporary art and performance. US: Intellect Books. Sylvester D. (1999) “Curator and Critic London”. Sydney Morning Herald. Slishman, J. L. (1995) The Curator as Artist/the Artist as Curator: Exhibition. Bergen Museum of Arts and Science Bergen Museum of Arts and Science. Thomas, D. (1999) “Being a Curator”. Art Monthly, 123: 4. Read More