Brett M. Levine - Curatorial Intervention: History and Current Practices

Curatorial Intervention

ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD

Lanham Boulder New York London

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Levine, Brett M., author.

Title: Curatorial intervention : history and current practices / Brett M. Levine.

Description: Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield, [2021] | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: "This book covers the history of intervention theory, initial research including interviews with thirty professional artists, curators, and administrators, working in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States with narratives that reflected both the prevalence of, and the inherent opacity within, curatorial intervention"-- Provided by publisher.

Identifiers: LCCN 2021000810 (print) | LCCN 2021000811 (ebook) | ISBN 9781538128718 (cloth) | ISBN 9781538128725 (epub)

Subjects: LCSH: Art museums--Curatorship. | Art museum curators. | Artists and art museum curators.

Classification: LCC N408 .L48 2021 (print) | LCC N408 (ebook) | DDC 708--dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021000810

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021000811

TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.

In a perfect storythe type you tell at dinner parties, the one that leaves listeners laughing to the point of tearsI would begin the exact moment I first wondered why gallery directors never, everit seemedsaid no. The narrative arc would not revolve around some stack of unsolicited exhibition proposals that had arrived between stiff sheets of cardboard, sleeves of slides included. Instead, every word would float to each listeneron a cloud of sheetrock dust so thick that even a respirator would be insufficient, everyone who entered the space looked as if theyd been caught in an unexpected snowstorm or dustedheavilywith confectioners sugar, and, even weeks later, the light would still seem to have trouble piercing the impenetrable haze. The punchline? That the impetus for the creative cloud had absolutely nothing to do with technological innovation, and everything to do with the fact that the artist in residence had done her drawings on the gallery wallswith a router. Then, rather than pay to have new sheetrock installed, the simpler solution, though far less efficient, would be to have some gallery employee sand and fill the artists fleeting creation.

For more than two decades, Ive questionedand qualifiedjust what the limits of an artists exhibition practice might me. Ive allowed artists to paint galleries floor to ceiling and wall to wall, installed and demolished temporary partition walls, and rooms within rooms. Some ideas seem great in theory, but in practice, maybe less so. Who would have foreseen the time-based performer who injured herselfwhile sitting inside a structure with no door. She would need to be lifted gently up and over a wall. Some years later, I asked the director if they might still happen to have footage of the incident. Every performer was videotaped as part of the artists concept, to be replayed alongside a livestream of the performer the following day. Every experience led to similar questions. Why had I allowed the artist to create the work? Could it, or should it, have been changed? Would they have been open to creative compromises? Would the audience know?

Worldwide, curators and artists engage in similar dialogues every day. Physical, social, legal, and cultural limitations often mean that works have to be altered, or even not displayed at all. But this is not a chronicle of engineering challenges or unanticipated failures. As every curator will have experienced, sometimes the most significant and dynamic issue emerges after a proposal is accepted. Conflicts between plans, perceptions, and realities cause proposals to change. What happens later, if a curator or administrator has to request an artist to do the same? Does a request produce a collaboration? What might I, or an institution, need to say?

From the earliest moments of my professional education and training I saw differentiations between artistic intention and experiential outcome, yet often the causes and considerations remained vague. For audiences, these slight disparities, or small alterations, would likely have seemed insignificant. But for me, every change was vital. How did what the artist mean not quite translate into what viewers would see? And how, if at all, would that diversion be shared?

Over the course of my career, I have been as responsible for making these requests of artists as any other arts professional. That expansive painting? Its height is the largest that will fit through the gallerys double entry doorson the diagonal. The width? Its the exact measurements of the gallerys feature wall. Made to the artists specifications? Not at all. This is not to say that decisions like these occur without consultation, but any dialogues surrounding scale will always be fraught. Why did the artist specify this scale? Answer: they didnt. Why did you want to work so expansively? Hopefully, the artist will respond that creating a work of this size was a unique opportunity.

Experience, reflection, and analysis have all suggested that the artist-curator dynamic is not as transparent as it has always seemed, noreven excluding curatorial authorshipis the curator as transparent as viewers are often led to believe. As a curator, arts administrator, and educator, I have always been motivated by those opportunities that make cultural and structural dialogues more apparent. I believe there are opportunities to redefine curatorial roles. And, I believe, the time for redefinition is now.

I have been fortunate to have worked across three distinct arts and museums communitiesAustralia, New Zealand, and the United States. This work would not have been possible if not for the many friends who have supported me throughout the process. Thank you to Professor Brad Buckley, who has championed my work over the course of my career. Thanks also to my mentors, in particular Tim Walker, who never ceases to combine insight with empathy. Kelly Carmichael, who has been a friend for decades; and Robert Leonard, former director of Artspace Aotearoa, with whom I shared an ongoing, tongue-in-cheek tally of exhibition concepts we categorized as job keepers and job losers, and hosted what could be described as the best contemporary art salon in mid-1990s Auckland. To Ryan Daniel, thank you for your guidance on how best to combine the philosophical and the analytical. And thank you to everyone who, over the years, has always been intellectually available: Jessica Dallow, Mark Kessell, Ruark Lewis, and Ross T. Smith.