Contemporary Art: Public and Institutional Perceptions Philip
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Contemporary Art: Public and Institutional Perceptions Philip Aubrey MacLeod A Capstone in the Field of Museum Studies for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University Extension School March 2021 Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 What Is Contemporary Art? ............................................................................................................ 7 Contemporary Art and Audiences ................................................................................................ 16 Fundamentals of Exhibition Design .............................................................................................. 21 The Museum of Fine Arts Boston ................................................................................................. 26 The Institute of Contemporary Art/Boston ................................................................................... 34 The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum ......................................................................................... 39 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................................. 42 Works Cited .................................................................................................................................. 48 i List of Figures Figure 1: Mark Dion, American, born 1961. Neukom Vivarium. design approved 2004; fabrication completed 2006. Artstor, library-artstor-org.ezp- prod1.hul.harvard.edu/asset/ASEATTLEIG_10312599207 ......................................................... 14 Figure 2: Lord, Barry, and Maria Piacente. Manual of Museum Exhibitions, 2nd ed., Rowman & Littlefield, 2014 ............................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 3: Gallery View, Nishida Jun. MacLeod, Philip. Photograph of Nishida Jun Gallery at the MFA Boston. 15 November 2020. Authors Personal Collection. ................................................ 28 Figure 4: Annotated Map of MFA. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston Map. Museum of Fine Arts Boston, https://d1nn9x4fgzyvn4.cloudfront.net/2020-11/mfa-map_2020-12.pdf . Accessed on 15 December 2020. Annotated by Philip Aubrey MacLeod. ............................................................. 29 ii Introduction Views about the nature of Contemporary Art vary greatly from individual to individual be it scholar or a person entering a museum for the first time. Academic attempts to pin down a notoriously nebulous subject can be full of art historical terminology and technical jargon. What Contemporary Art is can be a contentious and tricky thing to define. The more casual viewer might be put off by the often confrontational and conceptual nature of Contemporary Art and form gut reactions. It is not uncommon for viewers to feel lost or overwhelmed when looking at many of today’s museum’s collections of Contemporary Art. While these two views of Contemporary Art by no means represent the full spectrum of ideas on the subject, they do highlight an often-persistent problem in the world of Contemporary Art. It is important for museums to understand how the display and collection of works of Contemporary Art, a movement that is itself often hard to define, bridges the gap between academic knowledge and public reaction and interpretation. The following research and investigations into museum exhibitions aims to provide a series of useful insights meant to guide museums in how they navigate the collection and display of Contemporary Art. Firstly, the research will define what is meant by Contemporary Art in the context of this project. Secondly, it will look at how exhibitions are put together and how audiences perceive Contemporary Art in a broad context. Finally, the project will analyze three specific museums and demonstrate how they treat their Contemporary Art collections with differing modes of interpretation. Through defining Contemporary Art and analyzing how this manifests in the three museums a more holistic approach to Contemporary Art exhibition will be brought forward, as well as a better way to engage audiences within this framework. 1 A museum has the power through its exhibition design, collecting practices, and other institutional functions to not only preserve and interpret art, but to impart new meaning into it or emphasize certain aspects to highlight meaning. The museum must use this to their advantage and take a proactive stance in the meaning produced in works of art, rather than being a passive vehicle for the Contemporary Art on display. By observing and analyzing how three current museums are collecting and interpreting Contemporary Art one can better understand how museums do and do not do this successfully. The answers provided will not only shed light on the state of Contemporary Art and Contemporary Art collecting as it exists today but will also create a context for better engaging with today’s social issues, as much of Contemporary Art does in one way or another. While museums have changed and evolved over the years their mission statements show an indication that they exist to not only collect and preserve art, but to serve the public as well. The Museum of Fine Arts Boston (MFA) states, “The Museum of Fine Arts houses and preserves preeminent collections and aspires to serve a wide variety of people through direct encounters with works of art (“Mission Statement”).” The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum (ISG) adopted its current mission statement in 2014 which in part reads, “to engage local and global audiences in a sanctuary of beauty and the arts where deeply personal and communal adventures unfold (“Mission statement and Board of Trustees”).” According to the Institute of Contemporary Art/Boston (ICA) its mission is in part, “public access to art, artists, and the creative process (“Strategic Plan: Radical Welcome”).” All three of these museums have provided a commitment to serving the public as well as the art they collect. The phrases “engage,” “direct encounters,” and “public access” ring out in these statements. But how does the museum affect these public engagements with their collections of art beyond simply 2 providing access to them? Engaging with art, contemporary or otherwise, by either making or observing it, can often be viewed as entering a grand historical conversation. The project then for the museum must be to the best of the institutions ability to make sure that all the parties involved in this conversation, the art, the artist, the viewer, and the ghosts of history, have an equal footing. While seemingly a daunting task, it is one that most museums will find themselves already engaged in, a task that can be observed at work in different aspects of numerous museums to various degrees of success. Using three museums as case studies, each with wildly different methods for collecting or exhibiting Contemporary Art, this research will aim to establish a better understanding of how museums create meaning in their collections as well as how to better serve the public with these new meanings and interpretations. As mentioned above, the MFA, ICA, and ISG are three museums with similar goals about serving the public. They are also ideologically different collecting and exhibiting institutions. With these three museums as case studies and guides, by observing what and how they collect as well as how they interpret it, it should become clear that where and how a work of art is displayed has an impact on the meaning that is imparted to it through the museum. This impact can not only work to help the public better understand and comprehend a work of art it can also work with the museum’s broader public goals. By making a statement of service to the public the museum should be committed to addressing contemporary and historical social injustices. In her book Curatorial Activism: Towards an Ethics of Curating curator and arts writer Maura Reilly observes: Despite decades of postcolonial, feminist, anti-racist, and queer activism and theorizing, the art world continues to exclude ‘Other’ artists—those who are women, of color, and LGBTQ. Discrimination against these artists invades every aspect of the art world, from 3 gallery representation, auction-price differentials, and press coverage to inclusion in permanent collections and solo exhibitions programs. In most mainstream museums, visitors are still required to actively search out work by them. (17) Issues like discrimination of artists within a collection, representation and better reflecting the actual make-up of the public at large, are ongoing projects that most museums are already publicly engaging with. The issue then is how they can not only work with the community proactively but also make sure their collections and exhibitions do not adhere to older models, so dependent on the western canonical view of art history. An institution can better address its stated goals by having a clearer understanding of how their own collections and exhibitions of Contemporary Art are affected by the decisions of the museum. Not only is diversity and inclusion of collections a deliverable outcome from this analysis, but the museum will also be better poised to engage with