In the aftermath of our bucolic bliss in the Berkshires and upstate New York, PEI reconnected with several of our intrepid voyagers for a little follow-up discussion. Kathryn Kraczon, the Assistant Curator at the Institute of Contemporary Art, as well as two Pew Fellows in the Arts, Daniel Heyman and Ben Peterson, provided thoughtful reviews and assessments of our visits. We offer them our gratitude for their contributions.
PEI posed several questions to our respondents. Following are Kate’s replies:
What do you think about the Tang’s practice of working with “non-professional” curators to realize their exhibitions? Through the years, Tang has worked with various professors of psychology, chemistry, physics, anthropology, etc., taking full advantage of expertise around the campus. For example, Lives of the Hudson, currently on view, was co-curated with Tom Lewis, an English professor at Skidmore. Artists often associate and collaborate with professionals from a range of expertise; why do you think this type of dialogue between curators and academics is so rare?
Kathryn Kraczon: As a curator at a university museum, I was extremely pleased that Holland Cotter recently noted the importance of the exhibitions coming out of these institutions: “If you want to find innovative models for small-scale shows with big ideas, teaching institutions are still the place to look, particularly university art museums.,” (“Top of the Wish List: No More Blockbusters,” The New York Times; September 9, 2009). Having recently moved from a “high-powered” contemporary art museum to a small, non-collecting contemporary museum, I’m familiar with how these two very different institutions function.
While the curators at both types of museums have the same values and goals regarding their exhibitions and their roles in facilitating new work—the artists and artworks are always the priority—what often affects programming at larger museums is an institution-wide focus on audience development and the position of the institution in the constellation of other regional, and national, museums. They are financially tied to tourism and the corporate sponsorship that accompanies a large audience (income from admission fees is negligible).
Smaller, often university-affiliated institutions cannot compete for this sponsorship and rely more heavily on grants and private donations, but are not pressured to generate the high admissions numbers. Instead, these institutions can focus on the regional academic and art communities, who are their primary audiences. Ultimately, larger institutions are constricted by programming constraints and smaller institutions are constricted by financial ones. The challenge, and gratification, of working at a smaller institution is that you can organize a great exhibition on any budget as long as you work creatively (and with artists who understand this and are willing to work within these parameters).
Using the phrase “more artistically open” to describe the Tang in relation to the Hessel is loaded and needs to be redefined. Perhaps the Tang’s practice of co-curating with professors (non-curators) is the primary method of integrating the institution into the campus and local community. For example, we learned that many Skidmore professors develop curriculums around these exhibitions. For the Tang, in a rather isolated location, this is an ideal form of audience development that both generates visitors and produces a unique exhibition program. I view the programming at the Hessel as equally innovative and not indicative of a high powered (aka blockbuster driven) institution. As Tom Eccles mentioned during the tour, they consider themselves to be in dialogue with the New York City art world due to their proximity, and I assume their programming is innovative, rather than crowd-pleasing, in order to entice New Yorkers and other regional art viewers to Bard.
I don’t believe the Hessel could function outside of the larger institution of Bard College. I suspect that the prestigious university or college that a museum is affiliated with adds a buffer of academic legitimacy to their programming, shielding them from outside influences. There seems to be less of a sense of ownership over programming from board members when the ultimate oversight belongs to the academic institution. The Tang encourages Skidmore professors to incorporate the exhibitions on view into their curriculums, but professors are, in general, reluctant to alter their syllabi year-by-year. If a university museum wants to develop these kinds of relationships it must be part of the museum’s mission, and as the full name of the Tang indicates— The Frances Young Tang Teaching Museum and Art Gallery at Skidmore College—teaching is in the title and therefore a focus. Ian Berry has been the curator there for ten years and has forged these relationships with faculty. They don’t just happen, they take time.
We often think of art school as “training grounds, places where students can try and fail.” Did you find the Hessel Museum to model an experimental approach for its students? Does this translate to the artist's side of the coin? Bard has recently hired highly renowned curators in the form of Tom Eccles and Maria Lind, whom ambitious students want to work and learn from. Is this how interesting art schools are built as well, through an all-star faculty?
Kathryn Kraczon: The argument that there are too many Curatorial Studies MA graduates is the same argument being made throughout US humanities departments. There are simply more liberal arts MA and PhD graduates than there are academic jobs to fill.
The main issue to address is why Curatorial Studies programs are necessary despite their controversial status. While contemporary art curatorial positions do not currently require a PhD, and very few contemporary art curators have one, virtually every position from Curatorial Assistant upwards requires an MA. With some exceptions (such as Tufts or Williams) there are few excellent terminal MA Art History programs in the US, and if that MA program is within a PhD program, there will be little, if any, funding (and even less support from professors, who concentrate their energy on the PhD students). PhD programs mint future professors and rarely accept students whose career goal is to be a curator, particularly a curator of contemporary art.
The existence of Curatorial Studies programs provides a graduate degree to students who know they would like to pursue a curatorial career in contemporary art, but also rightly legitimizes Curatorial Studies as a discipline, much like Film Studies or Women’s Studies were legitimized over the last few decades. And, like Film Studies and Women’s Studies, there are exponentially more qualified applicants than there are available positions in the field. An Art History MA seems more flexible in terms of alternate careers choices than a Curatorial Studies degree—publishing, arts education, non-profit development, etc. are all career options related to the field—but my ignorance of what the curriculum of a Curatorial Studies program involves prevents me from judging the qualifications of its graduates.
Museum Education, in particular, is a field that needs curatorially-oriented staff and could benefit from Curatorial Studies programs that offer some form of education training. There is friction between Education and Curatorial Departments at most museums, and institutions are increasingly reshaping their educational departments to align more closely with curatorial programming. Eungie Joo, for example, moved from a position as curator at REDCAT to Director and Curator of Education and Public Programs at the New Museum, and has successfully integrated the education program into the broader museum programming.
If there is a homogenization occurring in Curatorial Studies perhaps a benefit will be, as with many inchoate disciplines, the development of an increasingly common language in the field. The value of a Curatorial Studies program like Bard’s is that students are working directly with two highly respected and relevant contemporary curators, Tom Eccles and Maria Lind. In an Art History program they would rarely have access to both an institution like the Hessel and to world-renowned curators.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Follow-Up Discussion for Our Weekend Excursion (Part II)
Pew Fellows Daniel Heyman and Ben Peterson weigh in from their perspectives:
Who are the audiences for college and university museums? During discussions on the trip, some expressed the opinion that the Tang seemed to be more artistically open and integrated into to the campus and local community, while Bard seemed to be more like a high-powered contemporary art museum that could be found outside an academic community just as readily as inside it. Do you agree? As an artist did one approach resonate more for you? Where would you prefer to show your work and why? Which of the two curatorial approaches did you find more artist-centered?
Daniel Heyman: Now here is something I feel I can relate to as I often show in college and university galleries, and spend a lot of time talking to curators and groups of students at colleges and universities. University galleries address both the academic needs of their institutions, as well as the broader community. The Tang was a perfect example, with several shows, each curated with a different purpose in mind. The Hudson show was a “curators” show, where the museum curators worked with faculty to develop themes through selection and placement of objects that could be contemplated from a wide variety of view points – historical, art historical, social, environmental, etc., -- being a perfect kind of pedagogic tome. Though I was not too interested in the show, there was enough in it for me to ponder and reflect upon that was new and interesting either in the kind of objects presented or in the context in which they were exhibited, or through the accompanying text that brought together various ideas around those objects. I was more interested in the single artist shows on the top floor, Nicole Eiseman in particular, a much more traditional exhibit that was deferential to an artist in that the ideas presented came directly from the art work, and not in its placement or the placement of other unrelated works in close proximity. Both approaches seemed to be interesting enough for all audiences, whether viewers considered themselves “high-powered” in the know art goers or not. The Bard exhibition spaces also had a variety of shows, one major space devoted to a single artist’s work, other spaces with works placed in group show environments, and that central gallery that seemed to be a presentation of a curator’s take on the collection. I found these exhibits less interesting not because of how the work was exhibited, but because I was not particularly interested in the particular works exhibited. The idea that the Bard shows were of a more general or worldly nature is a notion that seems to reflect the navel gazing of the contemporary art community and its focus on what’s new and what’s hot. The Bard shows certainly seemed trendier than those at the Tang, with the line between those in the know and those outside of the loop more clearly delineated. Whether or not this served a purpose other than a place for self congratulation for those in the know I am not sure. For me an art experience involves a kind of inner shudder, good art creates a crack in your mind where a new idea can gather steam. It can happen anywhere where someone has given thought a form. I found it more in front of the Frank Gerry building at Bard than at either of the museums, but that is simply a question of taste.
Curatorial studies programs and the number of students attending them have multiplied dramatically over the past decade. (Since it began its graduate program in curatorial studies in 1994, Bard alone has awarded the M.A. degree to more than 100 students.) How do you imagine artists might work with these curators in the future? Can artists still lead the way in innovating curatorial approaches, as has an artist like Fred Wilson, for example. How can an artistic practice be applied to push a curator beyond their conventional positions?
Ben Peterson: I think on some level I can agree with the feeling that the Tang was more integrated, while Bard seemed more like a "high powered" art museum, but of course some of that feeling rests solely on the architecture of the spaces, Bard having a very contemporary feel to the exhibition spaces, while the Tang seemed smaller and more broken-up (easier to teach multiple groups at once?) Of course, the focus that Bard puts on the artist and his or her art production, versus the Tangs mission to "teach" the art of the artist, or integrate them into a thematic show, leaves me wondering how many artists are good fits for the Tangs program and weather art which resists "teachability" (or readability for that matter) would suffer in the context of the Tangs wider mission. Of the two I think the Tang has the potential to curate far more interesting shows, there is something in the professionalism and "vetted" quality of Bards collection that makes it feel very "safe" even if the work is not (confession: I liked Rachel Harrisons WORK far more than the concept of the exhibition or it's installation, as far as SHOWS go I liked the Tang far better). As for the question of which i would rather show work at........context, context, context.
We often think of art school as “training grounds, places where students can try and fail.” Did you find the Hessel Museum to model an experimental approach for its students? Does this translate to the artist's side of the coin? Bard has recently hired highly renowned curators in the form of Tom Eccles and Maria Lind, whom ambitious students want to work and learn from. Is this how interesting art schools are built as well, through an all-star faculty?
Ben Peterson: Having spent a few days working in the Hessel Museum, I have to say that "experimental" is not the word I would use. "Pedagogical" might be closer to the truth, because while the art is radical (often in intent and execution) the display, and perceived "permiability(sp)" of the museum itself leaves something to be desired. Are star artists and curators the way to make an interesting school, sadly..... probably.....yes....you can't build a good team with lousy players, and I would rather have had Mike Kelly for a prof. than Hans Hoffman....I feel sad even writing that...where was my Black Mountain College?
Who are the audiences for college and university museums? During discussions on the trip, some expressed the opinion that the Tang seemed to be more artistically open and integrated into to the campus and local community, while Bard seemed to be more like a high-powered contemporary art museum that could be found outside an academic community just as readily as inside it. Do you agree? As an artist did one approach resonate more for you? Where would you prefer to show your work and why? Which of the two curatorial approaches did you find more artist-centered?
Daniel Heyman: Now here is something I feel I can relate to as I often show in college and university galleries, and spend a lot of time talking to curators and groups of students at colleges and universities. University galleries address both the academic needs of their institutions, as well as the broader community. The Tang was a perfect example, with several shows, each curated with a different purpose in mind. The Hudson show was a “curators” show, where the museum curators worked with faculty to develop themes through selection and placement of objects that could be contemplated from a wide variety of view points – historical, art historical, social, environmental, etc., -- being a perfect kind of pedagogic tome. Though I was not too interested in the show, there was enough in it for me to ponder and reflect upon that was new and interesting either in the kind of objects presented or in the context in which they were exhibited, or through the accompanying text that brought together various ideas around those objects. I was more interested in the single artist shows on the top floor, Nicole Eiseman in particular, a much more traditional exhibit that was deferential to an artist in that the ideas presented came directly from the art work, and not in its placement or the placement of other unrelated works in close proximity. Both approaches seemed to be interesting enough for all audiences, whether viewers considered themselves “high-powered” in the know art goers or not. The Bard exhibition spaces also had a variety of shows, one major space devoted to a single artist’s work, other spaces with works placed in group show environments, and that central gallery that seemed to be a presentation of a curator’s take on the collection. I found these exhibits less interesting not because of how the work was exhibited, but because I was not particularly interested in the particular works exhibited. The idea that the Bard shows were of a more general or worldly nature is a notion that seems to reflect the navel gazing of the contemporary art community and its focus on what’s new and what’s hot. The Bard shows certainly seemed trendier than those at the Tang, with the line between those in the know and those outside of the loop more clearly delineated. Whether or not this served a purpose other than a place for self congratulation for those in the know I am not sure. For me an art experience involves a kind of inner shudder, good art creates a crack in your mind where a new idea can gather steam. It can happen anywhere where someone has given thought a form. I found it more in front of the Frank Gerry building at Bard than at either of the museums, but that is simply a question of taste.
Curatorial studies programs and the number of students attending them have multiplied dramatically over the past decade. (Since it began its graduate program in curatorial studies in 1994, Bard alone has awarded the M.A. degree to more than 100 students.) How do you imagine artists might work with these curators in the future? Can artists still lead the way in innovating curatorial approaches, as has an artist like Fred Wilson, for example. How can an artistic practice be applied to push a curator beyond their conventional positions?
Ben Peterson: I think on some level I can agree with the feeling that the Tang was more integrated, while Bard seemed more like a "high powered" art museum, but of course some of that feeling rests solely on the architecture of the spaces, Bard having a very contemporary feel to the exhibition spaces, while the Tang seemed smaller and more broken-up (easier to teach multiple groups at once?) Of course, the focus that Bard puts on the artist and his or her art production, versus the Tangs mission to "teach" the art of the artist, or integrate them into a thematic show, leaves me wondering how many artists are good fits for the Tangs program and weather art which resists "teachability" (or readability for that matter) would suffer in the context of the Tangs wider mission. Of the two I think the Tang has the potential to curate far more interesting shows, there is something in the professionalism and "vetted" quality of Bards collection that makes it feel very "safe" even if the work is not (confession: I liked Rachel Harrisons WORK far more than the concept of the exhibition or it's installation, as far as SHOWS go I liked the Tang far better). As for the question of which i would rather show work at........context, context, context.
We often think of art school as “training grounds, places where students can try and fail.” Did you find the Hessel Museum to model an experimental approach for its students? Does this translate to the artist's side of the coin? Bard has recently hired highly renowned curators in the form of Tom Eccles and Maria Lind, whom ambitious students want to work and learn from. Is this how interesting art schools are built as well, through an all-star faculty?
Ben Peterson: Having spent a few days working in the Hessel Museum, I have to say that "experimental" is not the word I would use. "Pedagogical" might be closer to the truth, because while the art is radical (often in intent and execution) the display, and perceived "permiability(sp)" of the museum itself leaves something to be desired. Are star artists and curators the way to make an interesting school, sadly..... probably.....yes....you can't build a good team with lousy players, and I would rather have had Mike Kelly for a prof. than Hans Hoffman....I feel sad even writing that...where was my Black Mountain College?
Thinking specifically of Mass MoCA’s massive Building 5 Gallery, which is the size of a football field, can so much space be intimidating to an artist? That space aside, the museum contains a number of large galleries that can swallow-up smaller works. Do you, personally, find such raw, cavernous warehouse galleries to be stimulating to your own way of thinking about making and showing your work or simply overwhelming?
Daniel Heyman: I have visited the Building 5 Gallery three times now, so being asked this question as an artist certainly interests me. Like everything else in this country, art was super-sized over the last number of years, as if it was a natural progression. It’s not. Good art carries its weight whatever its size because the form and the content illuminate thought. The idea is large, the work can be of any size. Elephants are always impressive, and so the space (and probably most objects in that space) will always be impressive, but this doesn’t make it great art. Fireworks over central park, man-made water falls ringing Manhattan, big highly polished steal “atoms” at Mass MOCA, blown up photos, acres of paintings, none of it means much unless the art experience trumps the size experience. I don’t find the space intimidating because I can’t imagine I would ever be interested in doing something in that kind of space. Moreover, there is certainly room for a multitude of art experiences in the world, but the available funds are short, and it irks me when hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent to put school busses or ranch homes into a space such as Gallery 5 when there is so little funding available for the making of art works in general. America is obsessed with size; I wish it was more obsessed with the quality of experience. But what of the artist whose work is made in the solitude of a small studio – without the flash of production assistants an ocean away. I am not sure that this kind of work, the kind that I do, has a place in the large raw spaces of places such as Gallery 5. To answer your question, I don’t think these kinds of cavernous spaces are good for work such as mine, even though I think they are glorious in themselves. They don’t intimidate me because I can’t imagine working in them. Maybe one day I will be invited to do so, and then I will be intimidated. Ben Peterson: For the last question...both, neither, and maybe. Have Mass Mocha give me a call, we'll set up a show, and I'll blog about my feelings, all the while being secretly thrilled to even have the chance.Philadelphia Exhibitions Initiative Professional Development Trip to upstate New York and Western Massachusetts
Welcome to North Adams!
Curator Susan Cross gives us a tour of Simon Starling in Gallery 5 at Mass MOCA.
Porches. Glorious Porches.
The Stone Hill Center expansion by architect Tadao Ando, at The Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 
The energetic Tom Eccles, Executive Director of the Center for Curatorial Studies at the Hessel Museum of Art. 
Anthony Campuzano does his best imitation of Cher in a Rachel Harrison installation.
And, of course, The Frances Young Tang Teaching Museum and Art Gallery at Skidmore College was also wonderful, but due to the diligent work of the security staff no photos were allowed!
Monday, October 26, 2009
Center for Curatorial Leadership Announces Fellows for 2010
Former Brooklyn Museum curator Elizabeth Easton’s Center for Curatorial Leadership (CCL), launched in 2008 with Museum of Modern Art patron Agnes Gund and designed to give participants an intensive study in management skills at Columbia Business School, has announced its fellows for 2010, according to Artnet. The program, which begins next January, includes consultation with museum directors, administrators, and trustees; all costs are paid by the CCL.
Participants this year include Christophe Cherix (curator, prints, and illustrated books, Museum of Modern Art), Deborah Cullen (director of curatorial programs, El Museo del Barrio), Malcolm Daniel (curator, photographs, Metropolitan Museum of Art), Kristina van Dyke (associate curator, Menil Collection), Kathleen Forde (curator of time-based visual arts, Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center, Troy, NY), Alison de Lima Greene (curator, contemporary art and special projects, Museum of Fine Arts, Houston), Frederick Ilchman (curator, paintings, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), Chiyo Ishikawa (curator, European paintings and sculpture, Seattle Art Museum), Alisa LaGamma (curator, arts of Africa, Oceania, and the Americas, Metropolitan Museum), Lisa E. Rotondo-McCord (curator, Asian art, New Orleans Museum of Art), Trevor Schoonmaker (curator, contemporary art, Nasher Museum at Duke University), and Stephen Wolohojian (curator of paintings, sculpture, and decorative arts, Harvard Art Museum/Fogg).
If you have visited the Resources page of PEI’s new site you might have seen the link to the CCL.
Participants this year include Christophe Cherix (curator, prints, and illustrated books, Museum of Modern Art), Deborah Cullen (director of curatorial programs, El Museo del Barrio), Malcolm Daniel (curator, photographs, Metropolitan Museum of Art), Kristina van Dyke (associate curator, Menil Collection), Kathleen Forde (curator of time-based visual arts, Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center, Troy, NY), Alison de Lima Greene (curator, contemporary art and special projects, Museum of Fine Arts, Houston), Frederick Ilchman (curator, paintings, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), Chiyo Ishikawa (curator, European paintings and sculpture, Seattle Art Museum), Alisa LaGamma (curator, arts of Africa, Oceania, and the Americas, Metropolitan Museum), Lisa E. Rotondo-McCord (curator, Asian art, New Orleans Museum of Art), Trevor Schoonmaker (curator, contemporary art, Nasher Museum at Duke University), and Stephen Wolohojian (curator of paintings, sculpture, and decorative arts, Harvard Art Museum/Fogg).
If you have visited the Resources page of PEI’s new site you might have seen the link to the CCL.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
A New Monthly Curatorial Talk Series:
The Curator's Perspective
This fall, iCI launches a new monthly curatorial talk series. Each month an international curator distills the current happenings in contemporary art, including the artists they are excited by, exhibitions that have made them think, and their views on recent developments in the art world.
This month’s speaker was Lars Bang Larsen
This fall, iCI launches a new monthly curatorial talk series. Each month an international curator distills the current happenings in contemporary art, including the artists they are excited by, exhibitions that have made them think, and their views on recent developments in the art world.
This month’s speaker was Lars Bang LarsenAn independent curator and writer based in Barcelona, Lars Bang Larsen is known for his seminal writing on the new generation of artists that emerged from Scandinavia in the 1990s, and subsequently his exhibitions and books that offer a fresh approach to considering artists’ engagement with social activism and counter cultures from the 1960s on. Born in Denmark, Bang Larsen has spent the last ten years predominantly looking into artists’ practice across Europe, the U.S and the Middle East. Recent exhibitions include Fundamentalisms of the New Order for the Charlottenborg in Copenhagen; Populism, presented at the Frankfurter Kunstverein, CAC Vilnius and the Stedelijk in Amsterdam; The Echo Show for Tramway in Glasgow; and currently he is working on a show for Raven Row in London, entitled Art, Activism and the Archive. Bang Larsen is a regular contributor to Frieze, Afterall, and Artforum. In 1998 he was the co-curator for the inaugural Nordic Biennial, and in 2004 he was the curator of the Danish participation for the São Paulo Biennial.
Stay tuned! We'll let you know when the next speaker is announced.
For further details and to RSVP please contact Mary Derr at derr@ici-exhibitions.org or 212-254-8200, ext. 21
Saturday, October 24, 2009
NEW IN THE PEI LIBRARY
Come on in and READ ‘EM!
The Greenroom: Reconsidering the Documentary and Contemporary Art
This is the publication for the inaugural event of a long-term research project on ”the documentary" that aims to investigate the heritage of documentary practices in contemporary art in relation to the history of film, documentary photography, and television as well as to video art. The project also aims at situating these contemporary documentary practices within current cultural production and exploring their role within mainstream media and activism. This publication was inspired by the idea of a greenroom at a television station--a place where staff and guests meet before and after filming and engage in discussions that often differ from those conducted in the limelight. The research project is a collaboration between CCS Bard and the artist and theoretician Hito Steyerl.
Christian Marclay: Shuffle (Cards)
For this project, a limited-edition boxed card set, Marclay photographed the appearance of musical notation in his everyday wanderings--finding examples on shop awnings, chocolate tins, T-shirts, underwear and in other unexpected places. This body of work reveals Marclay to be an obsessive photographic note-taker with a flair for uncovering musical "clues" hidden in the landscape and adorning our world--musical notes just waiting to be called into action. Each of the 75 images collected here is presented on an oversized playing card. Part Fluxus box, part John Cage-ian "chance operation" or Eames House of Cards, it offers a compelling, serendipity-driven visual experience, as well as the components for a spontaneous musical score: a player need only shuffle the deck and let the cards fall where they may in order to produce a unique, experimental sequence.
The PEI library is available to constituents of The Pew Center for Arts & Heritage, by appointment only, 9am – 5pm, Monday – Friday. To make an appointment call 267.350.4930 or e-mail mailto:pei@pcah.us
Continuing Dialogues: A Tribute To Igor Zabel: The Slovenian curator, art critic, writer and theorist Igor Zabel (1958–2005) was largely responsible for putting Slovenian art on the map of the international art scene. As senior curator of Moderna galerija in Ljubljana, he was engaged in establishing links between "East" and "West" Europe without losing a critical perspective of the ongoing transformations. In this book, which aims to provide an appreciative insight into Zabel’s far-reaching commitment, with contributions by artists and theorists, it will become clear that, despite his unblinking perception of all the apparently unbridgeable differences involved, continuing dialogues played a fundamental role in his practice as both a theorist and a curator.
e-flux Journal Reader 2009: e-flux journal, an online experimental art criticism magazine initiated by the artists Julieta Aranda, AntonVidokle, and Brian Kuan Wood. Writers, artists, and thinkers are invited to write on topics of their choosing, discussing the various urgent concerns being engaged in art today. Initiated in fall 2008, e-flux journal is first and foremost an online publication: free and accessible simultaneously from all parts of the world. Its topics and themes are not shaped by the interests or concerns of one specific center, but are developed through open invitations extended to art practitioners and thinkers as diverse as its readership.
The Greenroom: Reconsidering the Documentary and Contemporary ArtThis is the publication for the inaugural event of a long-term research project on ”the documentary" that aims to investigate the heritage of documentary practices in contemporary art in relation to the history of film, documentary photography, and television as well as to video art. The project also aims at situating these contemporary documentary practices within current cultural production and exploring their role within mainstream media and activism. This publication was inspired by the idea of a greenroom at a television station--a place where staff and guests meet before and after filming and engage in discussions that often differ from those conducted in the limelight. The research project is a collaboration between CCS Bard and the artist and theoretician Hito Steyerl.
Christian Marclay: Shuffle (Cards)For this project, a limited-edition boxed card set, Marclay photographed the appearance of musical notation in his everyday wanderings--finding examples on shop awnings, chocolate tins, T-shirts, underwear and in other unexpected places. This body of work reveals Marclay to be an obsessive photographic note-taker with a flair for uncovering musical "clues" hidden in the landscape and adorning our world--musical notes just waiting to be called into action. Each of the 75 images collected here is presented on an oversized playing card. Part Fluxus box, part John Cage-ian "chance operation" or Eames House of Cards, it offers a compelling, serendipity-driven visual experience, as well as the components for a spontaneous musical score: a player need only shuffle the deck and let the cards fall where they may in order to produce a unique, experimental sequence.
The PEI library is available to constituents of The Pew Center for Arts & Heritage, by appointment only, 9am – 5pm, Monday – Friday. To make an appointment call 267.350.4930 or e-mail mailto:pei@pcah.us
Friday, October 23, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Walter Hopps
As of late I have been devouring any and all articles I can find on Walter Hopps. Perhaps it’s Hans Ulrich Obrist’s one man march to keep the legacy alive, or maybe it’s just this photo I found online of Pharrell wearing the “Back in Twenty Minutes” button. Who can say?
If you are interested, here are several links to more interesting articles about Hopps:
Paul Richard for The Washington Post
David Ebony for Art in America
Hans-Ulrich Obrist for ArtForum
Daniel Fuller is the Senior Program Specialist of the Philadelphia Exhibitions Initiative
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
PEI October Exhibitions Picks
Exhibition Picks, our monthly feature highlighting exhibitions of exceptional interest, makes its debut on the new PEI blog! Be on the lookout for more of your favorite monthly PEI emails—coming soon to our blog.
CCA Wattis Institute for Contemporary ArtsMoby-Dick
Sept. 2 - Dec. 12, 2009
Moby-Dick is the second show in a trilogy of Wattis Institute exhibitions that are based on canonical American novels. The first, The Wizard of Oz, was presented in fall 2008; the third will be Huckleberry Finn, in fall 2010. All three stories have major themes related to exploration and (self-)discovery, and the corresponding exhibitions function as metaphorical journeys through which the audience experiences various notions of America's reality, both contemporary and historic. Established and emerging contemporary artists from around the world are invited to address the key themes of the books and the historical moments in which they were written.
SculptureCenter A Voyage of Growth and Discovery: Mike Kelley & Michael Smith
Sept. 13 - Nov. 30, 2009
A Voyage of Growth and Discovery centers on Baby IKKI, a character that artist Michael Smith has been performing for over thirty years. Pre-lingual and of ambiguous age, Baby IKKI is both comedic and melancholy. The six-channel video follows the existential journey of the Baby over several days at a festival of "radical self-expression," famous for its presentations of large-scale displays of fire, held in the remote Black Rock Desert of Nevada. The Baby, alone in his journey despite being surrounded by thousands of revelers, negotiates the rave-like festival environment while also exploring the primal natural elements of fire, water, earth, and wind.
co-presented with Live from the New York Public Library
October 23 - 24, 2009
The conference kicks off Friday night with the first CT Prize for Art & Social Justice, and the inaugural prize is being given to The Yes Men. All day on Saturday, 42 artists from around the globe will give short presentations about the experimental social justice art practices they are developing. The goal is to inspire a broad understanding of diverse practices developing around the globe. The Summit is expected to be a highly engaging, thought provoking, even inspirational event.
November 1–22, 2009
Tickets are going on sale and moving fast! The third edition of the internationally-acclaimed biennial of new visual art performance will showcase new work by more than 150 of the world’s most exciting contemporary artists. Over its three week-run, Performa 09’s innovative program will break down the boundaries between visual art, music, dance, poetry, fashion, architecture, film, television, radio, graphic design, and the culinary arts, presenting over 110 events in collaboration with a consortium of more than 80 of the city’s leading arts institutions, 40 curators from around the world, and a network of public and private venues throughout the city.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)