The Big Bang at Centre Georges Pompidou: Reconsidering Thematic Curation - Essay Example

Why Curate Tell me about yourself and why curate? Charlesworth: I graduated from Goldsmiths College in London in 1996. I studied art there for some years, I am an art critic and I write on art criticism in well-known art magazines such as Art Monthly and Modern Painters where I work as an associate editor. I am also associated wit the Royal College of Art where I work as a tutor. I am currently working on my PhD thesis. I am particularly interested in the art styles and criticism during the decade of the 1970s which is also the subject of my current thesis. I also blog occasionally where I share my reflections on the evolution of contemporary art with my readers. As an art critic, I believe that the role of the curator is very important. Curating acts as a mediating force between the creative freedom of the artist and the authority of the institution. Curators have a crucial role to play in serving as a link between the artist and the public. The curator straddles the two worlds and uses his or her peculiar understanding of art to determine the value of a particular artist or art piece in the current milieu. Artists are always looking for channels to reach out to the public while the public expects access to art which has value. The curator is in a unique position as he represents the interests of the public and the institution while selecting art pieces and collections to preserve for future generations. It is another matter altogether that the role of the art curator is continuously evolving. Author: What kind of challenges does the art curator face in the present scenario? Charlesworth: The present challenges are not very different from challenges at any other time. The challenges are posed by the evolution of the field and the gradual capitalization of art. Basically, it is the tension between the conventional assumptions and the sense of greater independence in current curating. Whatever the crisis may be, it is reflected in the conflict between those who call for reform and those who desire to maintain the status quo. Basically, there is an orthodox school of thought that seeks to retain its traditional form of presentation. On the other hand, there is a growing self-reflexivity among other curators. Another challenge that the field of curating needs to cope with is the growing pluralism in the field. We are experiencing a variety of expressions as well as a larger number of stakeholders in the whole process. I believe that the challenges can be overcome through a continuous debate over the role of the institution of art in society. In particular, the role of the curator should be expanded to accommodate the growing pluralism in the field. Curators need to move beyond the confines of the traditional role and assume a greater responsibility towards the field and the public. Sadly, many curators have confined themselves to towing the line left by their predecessors and are unwilling to engage in independent critical inquiry. This is not a positive sign for any field, and art in particular. The curator has an important role to fulfill and he should take it up enthusiastically. Author: You view self-reflexivity as a major challenge to the role of the curator then? Charlesworth: I think self-reflexive poses a significant challenge in the current environment because it does not allow the art curator to engage in any meaningful discussion on the quality of art works, which is the main role of the curator. The curator is prevented from employing critical evaluation of the art works and is simply reproducing the values of an earlier generation of curators in the present age. The main role of the curator is to determine the worth of a piece of art for current and future generations so that it can be preserved. Curating should not be hijacked by the ego of the curator. In my opinion, this happens because the curator becomes invested with the authority conferred upon him by the art institution and he becomes inspired to use it to gratify himself. I am not saying that all curators commit this practice, but it is a growing practice in the present art environment. The greater sense of self also pushes many curators to see themselves as artists, which also obfuscates curating from other roles such as that of the artist and the author. Hence, to deal with the challenge of self-reflexivity it is important to engage in an unbiased discussion of the artistic value of a particular piece and how much influence the power of the institute should have in the determination of its value. Author: Do you sense some confusion about the role of curating with other roles? Charlesworth: That has certainly happened and more so in recent times. The curator has assumed the role of the author. Curating has traditionally assumed the function of mediation and balancing the influential authority of the art institution. This was enabled to a great extent by the shared critical values and assumptions of the curatorial field which provided insight and critical thinking to the curators. Unfortunately, those values have been lost or are no longer as vital as they used to be. As a result, curating has become confused with authorship on the one hand and with an instrument of the art institution on the other. As a result, the role of curating in legitimizing the value of an art piece or its selection for an exhibition has diminished and lost its relevance. Curating has now become more individualized and reflects a highly personalized approach. The result is that we have very little that can be described as having a universal appeal. Curating has become localized and limited to the reflection of a narrow range of vested interests. I also sense a growing sense of elitism in the field. This is because the curatorial role in moderating the power of the art institution has diminished and the elite sections are free to exercise unbridled power over determining the value or worth of a piece of art. Curating has thus been relegated to a state of confusion where the roles between artist, curator and institution are becoming blurred. Author: Do you suppose that curating is losing its sense of historicism? Charlesworth: To a great extent, I think it is. But this may be one stage in the evolution of curating as a meaningful art function. The twentieth century art scene was marked by its revisionist approach as major icons were questioned and critiqued quite actively. That vigour cannot be found now. Instead, we have phenomena such as thematic curation (Tang, 2006) where there is hardly any sense of historical continuity or relevance in the art exhibitions. I find this particularly disturbing because it does not leave much room for the curator to exercise critical judgment. The work of art is dislocated from its place in the historical evolution of art. This prevents the curator from considering an art piece with regard to its historical, political and economic context. Moreover, thematic curation is also damaging to the art field because it perpetuates and reinforces a prescribed standard of beauty and value which is carried on generation after generation of curators. This is particularly disadvantageous because the public is deprived of the professional judgment and insight of the curator. The championing of the same standards and values in all generations ignores the developing conventions and standards in the art field. Works Cited Charlesworth, J. J., 2007. Curating Doubt, Art Monthly, 3.06, pp. 1-4. Tang, J., 2006. The Big Bang at Centre Georges Pompidou: Reconsidering Thematic Curation. Theory, Culture and Society, 23, pp. 243-252. Read More