[curatorial.net] FW: beginning on line discussion

Tue Oct 23 22:29:05 BST 2007

Hello everyone, 

Thank you all for starting up this discussion with so many interesting points. I would like to add something as well, particularly in response to Judit’s post, but I shall first introduce myself as I only joined this list couple of weeks ago and have been lurking since. But I was very happy to join at the start of the online discussions which Joasia started.  

I am based in iRes Research Cluster (www.ires.org.uk) at University College Falmouth.  I work there as a research assistant administering the events organised in the context of research undertaken by the cluster leader Kate Southworth. During my time at iRes I have been also developing my research which is interested in the issues around new media curating and what new models of curating develop in relation to new media and network society. For that reason I was especially interested to read about the idea of “anti-curation” and “critically self-aware curation” from Paul’s book (which one is it?) cited by Judit. I certainly have to read the correspondence you mention.  
As I am in the process of curating an exhibition at the moment (Participation, which opens on Thursday in Falmouth at the Poly, www.ires.org.uk/participation) I have been engaging with similar ideas. Earlier this month I presented a paper titled “New Models of Curating? Possibility of non-curating in the Network Society” at 9KLab in Lancaster. This paper was in fact a form of work-in-progress notes and my observations and ideas related to the research which I have done in iRes and for my MA in 20th Century Art and Design: Histories and Theories. As there is not at the moment a definition as to what non-curating is, it is possible for me to share with you the theoretical and philosophical positions which inspired my thinking on non-curating as a practice which I see as part of the process of curation or curating. My points of reference here are Jacque Rancière’s "Politics of Aesthetics" and work of Hardt&Negri, which I can briefly describe further for those interested.   

Sorry for diverting a discussion and not really responding to Paul’s questions in this post.

Best, 
Magda

-----Original Message-----
From: curatorial-bounces at curatorial.net on behalf of Judit Bodor
Sent: Tue 23/10/2007 15:38
To: A list for people involved in the Curatorial Network project athttp://www.curatorial.net/ ann at artprojects.fsnet.co.uk
Subject: [curatorial.net] FW:  beginning on line discussion

Hi Paul, hi everyone,

I really enjoy the discussion. I though I would also send something,
specially after Geoff's letter, with which I agree.  Recently I have been to
Milan in an international curatorial course that made me feel very
uncomfortable of who I was in the world of 'curators'. The group of people
who were the participants we mostly people practicing curating in very
diverse ways, while the organisers and the visiting curator were
well-established curators of exhibitions/biennials/instiutions and were very
defensive about "who we curators are and how we supposed to work"...

I think there is a difference when we look at being a curator it as a
profession/job within an institution or when we look at curating as a
creative, and many times collaborative process (by professionals or
amateurs) taking very different forms of dissemination.  I also think that
roles are separated between making and framing/managing/contextualising the
making, but not necessarily separated between artists and curators. Curating
can and - I think - should be critical/creative act and not only an
applied/facilitating role to creation. Curating of course has different
function from making art (even when the artist and the curator is the same
person) but similarly creative process.

I also wanted to say that I really like Mark Hutchinson and Dave Beech¹s
correspondence in your book when they talk about 'anti-curation'
(transforming the curator by infecting the curator with that which is other
to the curator) and 'critically self-aware curation' (that enters to a
mutual and dialogical relationship with artists and therefore has doubts and
conflicts). I like their thoughts cause it lets people thinking about
curating  in ways that 'curator as a profession/job' does not.  I would like
to see more Oanti-curating¹ and critically Oself-aware curating¹, even
though, as Hutchinson also say: a critically self aware curation (not sure
of itself) as a practice might not even be curation at all...

All the best,

Judit

Judit Bodor

Lecturer: Art
Dartington College of Arts
Totnes
TQ9 6EJ
UK

T: 01803 861 672
E: j.bodor at dartington.ac.uk
W:www.dartington.ac.uk

On 23/10/07 13:42, "geoff cox" <gcox at plymouth.ac.uk> wrote:

> Dear Paul et al
> I thought I would try to respond to some of the issues briefly. I too
> am concerned that the terms are a little ill-defined.
> One could begin to define what curating refers to descriptively and
> etymologically - taking care of objects and souls for instance - but
> also how the term has begun to be used quite differently
> historically. Clearly in 1987 (the date your research takes as a
> point of departure), the term was used differently than it is now
> where almost all arts practice or cultural production (even everyday
> activities) can be loosely described as involving curatorial
> concerns. So on the one hand, blogging or tagging can be seen as
> curatorial endeavour (where everyone is a curator of sorts - the cult
> of the amateur, if you like) and on the other, curating has become
> deeply institutionalised and professionalised - perhaps as a
> defensive reaction against its popularisation. The power relations
> around participation and expertise seem to play off eachother here -
> along vertical and horizontal axes - and with respect to
> individualised and collective production.
> Post-duchamp, the distinction between artist and curator makes little
> sense either. If the term curator is substituted for commissioner or
> producer then a set of other issues are foregrounded that highlight
> the political economy but also the symbolic capital invested in the
> role.
> I am left wondering whether the term itself makes much sense these
> days. Perhaps its use can only ever be tactical, and needs to respond
> to historical conditions.
> This is a bit rambling but I though I'd send it anyway.
> Geoff
> 
> 
>> 
>> [curatorial.net] - mailing list of the Curatorial Network
>> curatorial at curatorial.net
>> http://www.curatorial.net/mailman/listinfo/curatorial
>> 
>> List Archive
>> http://www.curatorial.net/pipermail/curatorial/
>> 
>> Curatorial Network website
>> http://www.curatorial.net
> 
> --
> geoff cox
> gcox at plymouth.ac.uk
> 
> 
> 
> [curatorial.net] - mailing list of the Curatorial Network
> curatorial at curatorial.net
> http://www.curatorial.net/mailman/listinfo/curatorial
>  
> List Archive 
> http://www.curatorial.net/pipermail/curatorial/
> 
> Curatorial Network website
> http://www.curatorial.net
>  
> 
> Email has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email management
> service - www.altman.co.uk/emailsystems

------ End of Forwarded Message