Part of my year-old job at the Idaho Falls Arts Council is to plan, curate, and install 8-10 visual art exhibitions every year in two galleries at the Willard Arts Center.
I was a little intimidated by this at first. Curators at the Smithsonian Institution typically have PhDs, are required to regularly publish scholarly articles and books, and take their work very seriously. I wasn't 100% sure I was qualified to "curate" (albeit on a much, much smaller scale), and I've never been great at being intellectual, academic, or even serious about art.
However, it quickly became the best aspect of my job. I enjoy finding artists and planning exhibitions. I LOVE seeing new works in person for the first time and deciding where they should go in the gallery. I'm less fond of patching/painting, unpacking, hanging, and lighting, but the end result typically makes up for the hours of physical labor. I still don't know if I'm doing it correctly though. I select artists because I like their work.
I might like something because it displays craftsmanship in a particular medium or an unusual approach to subject or technique. I might just like it because it's pretty, which I'm sure is a giant sin in the world of real curators. I'm a big fan of visible, expressive brushstrokes in painting and I love scenes of wilderness, particularly mountains. I put artworks next to other artworks because the subjects are similar or the colors complement each other. Sometimes I put works together because they contrast one another, such as a panoramic photograph of mountains next to an expressive painting of a dancer.
Most of all, I don't worry about it. I play with the artworks until they work together to me and then I hang them and call it done. Some artists who have come in to help with the installation of their work have been surprised at my laid-back approach to curation. Am I doing it wrong? I don't know. Fortunately, unlike the curators at the Smithsonian, I do not have to worry about a major art critic tearing apart my choices. I've had artists in group shows unhappy with where I placed their work, but I think that is unavoidable when each gallery boasts prime locations as well as less favorable corners that all need to be filled. At the end of the day, I enjoy the opportunity to highlight the kind of artwork that I think should be highlighted, and that's what I think being a curator in this kind of setting is all about.
However, it quickly became the best aspect of my job. I enjoy finding artists and planning exhibitions. I LOVE seeing new works in person for the first time and deciding where they should go in the gallery. I'm less fond of patching/painting, unpacking, hanging, and lighting, but the end result typically makes up for the hours of physical labor. I still don't know if I'm doing it correctly though. I select artists because I like their work.
I might like something because it displays craftsmanship in a particular medium or an unusual approach to subject or technique. I might just like it because it's pretty, which I'm sure is a giant sin in the world of real curators. I'm a big fan of visible, expressive brushstrokes in painting and I love scenes of wilderness, particularly mountains. I put artworks next to other artworks because the subjects are similar or the colors complement each other. Sometimes I put works together because they contrast one another, such as a panoramic photograph of mountains next to an expressive painting of a dancer.
Comments
Post a Comment