Curatorial Research Project by Lena Tchibor at the University of Wolverhampton
in February-March 2011 (Exhibition, Website and Printed catalogue).
The Exhibition ‘Art without Theory’ was a part of Lena Tchibor's research on visual arts display.
It is a development of the concept of a Museum without Walls, which derives from Walter Benjamin’s essay ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Production’ (1936) and concluded in the book Le Musée Imaginaire (imaginative museum) by André Malraux (1901 –1976) published in 1947.
In his book Malraux proposed that a catalogue of printed reproductions of world heritage artefacts creates a Museum without Walls, which could be brought to the audience’s homes in opposed to the method of the traditional museum where the public needs to physically attend. Indeed, even for the most dedicated art lover it is impossible to attend all museums in the World without even mentioning the ongoing deluge of exhibitions in private galleries. In Malraux’s days his book was criticized on the grounds that a photograph does not convey the scale of an art work and the quality of the work, which can only be examined by actual physical viewing.
Another influence on my project is the famous book The Society of the Spectacle (1967) by the key figure of the Situationist International movement Guy Debord (1931-94). “In this book Debord draws upon the work of Karl Marx and subsequent Marxist thinkers to argue that the production and consumption of commodities have developed, in modern capitalist society, to such an extent that life is lived in, and through, a series of images.” (Edwards, 1999, p.313).
This book along with the Pop Art movement in the USA contributed to the concept of the “role of the personality in history”, i.e. a persona of an artist is superior to his/her art.
By the end of XXth century art professionals were already foreseeing the change that High technologies could contribute to the development of art promotion (assuming that the purpose of an exhibition is the promotion of an artist and his works).
Over the course of the last ten years the Internet activity of artists, institutions and commercial galleries has become omnipresent.
Contemporary Le Musée Imaginaire cannot be criticized for the lack of impression on the quality of an art work lost in reproduction as from the time Malraux’s book was published the quality of photography advanced and digital video emerged, which could be easy located on the Internet.
Another advantage of a Web site over a book is that a book is expensive to produce and therefore the number of pages and photographs are limited, while a Web site can host an unlimited number of images and podcasts (video, audio, etc.).
Also for Contemporary Art today the quality of the art work is not as important as the theory or concept of the artist; today, for assessment of an art work, it is not enough just to look at the work it is important to read the theory and research it is based upon. Biography of the artist, where are all the artist’s achievements are listed, is a very important promotional feature in the public eye. If the artist has some history its makes people to look at his art more seriously.
Taking all that into the account, contemporary museums (perfect example is Tate Modern), have placed lengthy explanations alongside the exhibits, but because the gallery visitors usually have limited time allocated for the gallery visit they would not have time (or even bother) to read each of the descriptions. As a result it has changed public perception and appreciation of the art works on display, usually, in the wrong direction.
Therefore a Web site obviously has a great advantage over the real exhibition. People can look at it any time for as long as they want and to revisit it any time in the future. Internet based culture gives great impetus for art education and the development of a public interest in contemporary art through the explanation of it and to be able to interact with it on a Web site.
I propose that a Web site is an Imaginative Museum of The Society of the Spectacle.
Exhibition ‘Art without Theory’ has three sections: an online exhibition (which is this web site) a physical exhibition in the University of Wolverhampton (Fine Art department) and a printed catalogue.
In the online version of the exhibition we are testing public perception on the fundamental question of contemporary art which is ‘what is the relationship between art and theory?” and what is the difference between artist’s and spectator’s perception of it.
Each of the artists who are participating in the exhibition was asked the question and the answers can be found on the web site menu (on the left). The exhibits are allocated in the albums which also can be seen on the top of the menu under the artist’s names. We deliberately don’t publish the artists’ biographies with the intention that the artists’ artworks will not be judged by quantity and quality of exhibitions, age and academic status. All we display is the art and theory of each artist. We are testing public perception of Contemporary Western art which is, by default, is theory based. Can you spot does the theory spoken by artist belong to the art works represented or doesn’t? Are those answers helping you to understand the artists’ works better? What is more interesting to you – artist’s work or his/her theory? Did you read the theoretical section of this site at all or did you just look at art works? Is it necessary to attach the artist’s theory to his/her works or let the work of art speak for itself? Please feel free to comment on the artists’ works and you can share them on facebook, twitter, etc. Any comments are welcome.
In the University we are exhibiting not the original works but prints that are produced in a limited edition of 20 and signed by the artists. Original works are also exhibited in the same time in local galleries. The decision to exhibit in University not as original works but as prints is derived from the whole concept of the project that is development of Benjamin’s, Malraux’s and Debord’s ideas. Also such an act is illustrating my discourse on the definition of the difference between curatorial practice as research and curatorial practice as commerce. As curator-researcher I am not involved in the commercial side of the curatorial practice: exhibitions and website visitors can buy the prints and artworks directly from the artists.
Printed catalogue would be available from the British Library, and the Libraries of major Universities of Great Britain and Ireland. It would be published in March 2011 by publishing House Black Quadrat Production, ISBN 978-1-905249-47-3.
As a part of the research project the Catalogue of the Exhibition ‘Art without Theory’ also offers an innovative approach to Art Catalogue production. The educational purpose that conventional art catalogues contribute via the publication of artists’ biographies, lists of exhibitions and bibliography, in our catalogue are not present. All we publish are Artists’ names and reproductions of their works. The preface written by myself as a curator of the Project would include the information listed above and the links to the theory articles (artists’ answers and the visitor’s comments to the exhibition discourse). That approach would encourage the catalogue readers to conduct their own research on the artists who are presented in the catalogue. Therefore such an approach is totally democratic and the opposite of conventional art catalogues with their, quite often, apparent lack of criticism. As commercial Art Galleries and art-dealers are investing money in the catalogue printing mostly not for educational purposes but for advertising of artwork as commodity which are for sale by the galleries. Art catalogues produced by Museums have no commercial connotations but they offer to the reader a defined professional view on the artists’ oeuvre by particular museum curators. Our approach therefore is much more open not only to art professionals and connoisseurs but to the general public who are interested in art. We are inviting a wide audience to participate in contemporary art interpretation as an act of protest against elitism in contemporary art and an act of support for a Revolution of Neo-Modernism.
Lena Tchibor, Curator of the Project ‘Art without Theory’,
University of Wolverhampton, England.
Bibliography
Bann, S., Allen, W. (1991) Interpreting Contemporary Art.London: Reaktion Books.
Barker, E. (ed.) (1999) Contemporary Cultures of Display. Yale University Press, New Haven and London in association with The Open University.
Benjamin, W. (1936) in Durham, M.G., Kellner, D.M. (ed.) (2006) Media and Cultural Studies: KeyWorks. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Debord, G. (2002) Comments on the Society of the Spectacle (Translated by Malcolm Imrie). London: Verso.
Debord, G. (2004) The Society of the Spectacle (Translated by Ken Knabb). London: Rebel Press.
Edwards, S. (ed.) (1999) Art and its Histories: A Reader. Yale University Press, New Haven and London in association with The Open University.
Fernie, E. (ed.) (1999) Art History and its Methods: A Critical Anthology. London: Phaidon Press.
Ferrier, J.-L. (ed.) (2002) Art of the 20th Century: A year-by-year chronicle of painting, architecture, and sculpture. Chene-Hachette.
Gaiger, J., Wood, P. (ed.) (2003)Art of the 20th Century. A Reader.Yale University Press in association with the Open University.
Harrison, C., Wood, P. (ed.) (2003) Art in theory 1900-2000: an anthology of changing ideas. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Hauser, A. (1951) The Social History of Art, 4 vol. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Holly, M.A., Marquard, S. (ed.) (2008) What is Research in the Visual Arts? Obsession, Archive, Encounter. Williamstown: Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute.
Honour, H., Fleming, J. (1999) A World History of Art. 5th ed. London: Laurence King.
McCorquodale, D., Siderfin, N., Stallabrass, J. (ed.) (1998) Occupational Hazard: Critical Writing on Recent British Art.London: Black Dog Publishing.
Murray, C. (ed.) (2003) Key Writers on Art: The Twentieth Century. London: Routledge.
Perry, G., Cunnungham, C. (1999) Academies, museums and Canons of Art. London: Yale University Press, New Haven & London in association with Open University.
Pluhar, W. S., (ed.) (1987) Immanue Kant. Critique of Judgement. (Translated by Werner.S.Pluhar.Hackett). Indianapolis: Indianapolis Publishing Company.
Richard Cork, R. (2003) Annus Mirabilis? Art in the year 2000.London:Yale University Press.
Solomon, M. (ed.) (2001) Marxism and Art: Essays Classic and Contemporary. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Sullivan, G. (2005) Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in the Visual Arts. London: Sage Publications.