Curation
When looking at art, in a gallery, museum or anywhere else, I tend to forget the curation and focus on the art itself. Now this could be a sign of a poorly curated show or on the other hand how seamlessly the pieces were brought together. Then again I am biased, I too make objects so for me they come first and everything else is second. Manny shows, especially those financed by public institutions, are curated chronologically, for teaching purposes this makes complete sense, the history of the would through art or the life of an artist through his/her artistic development. What about a group show in a gallery, what brings these pieces together? These paintings for example were made by two different people at the same time chronologically they make sense, it can also be argued that the friendship between the two people brings them together but is that enough? Curation can make or break a show, what if anything brings these two painters together?
Even though I am not an artist, I tend to do the same thing. Perhaps it is the fact that we grow used to walking through museums where the curation is not presented to us, and so we are accustomed to not noticing it. When I do notice it there is an obvious theme to the exhibit or show, and it is clearly presented in some fashion.
ReplyDelete