I am currently reading 'Exhibition-ism', the catalogue of an exhibition held in 1994 at the Museum of African Art in New York. This was one of a series of controversial and innovative exhibitions that were held at the Museum at that time, including ART/Artefact and Secrecy: Objects that Conceal and Reveal. Each of these exhibitions, and others at the same kind of time in other museums, focussed more on conceptual ideas and the repositioning of African art rather than on the objects themselves. This was also apparent in some of the academic literature of the time that was questioning the value and/or nature of African art more generally. The Exhibition-ism instillation looked specifically at the role of the Museum itself and aimed to question the visitors about the museum context, allowing them to see behind the scenes as well as at the objects being displayed. The catalogue suggests that the instillation came about because all those involved sat down and began to ask themselves how they would like to see African art displayed.
In some ways the presentation of African art has moved on since the early 1990s, although there have been a number of good exhibitions that I have seen in the last few years that are still engaging with controversial and provocative ideas (focussing mainly, if my memory serves me well, on questions of commercialism, forgery and the trade in art at different points in its life). There has, however, also been a reversion toward the presentation of objects in isolation, allowing them to 'speak for themselves' and, in a recent Swiss exhibition, a move back towards the idea of 'masterpieces' and the question of the artist in relation to African art. Perhaps none of these alternative modes of presentation ever really went away. The contemporary trend that I tend to find most exciting, however, is that of interspersing traditional African items with other objects, whether contemporary African art, or art from other traditions; allowing the objects to speak to each other across space and, perhaps, across time does something that I, personally, find stimulating.
The problem, of course, is that so much of what is appreciated, or not, comes down to personal taste (although I am very aware that there are specialists who can tell us what the majority of visitors might want for the majority of the time). For me it is the object that matters. I have no real interest in text, and very rarely read text when it is presented within a museum instillation. Using other objects or images to provide context, and occasionally a well chosen video, does work and does attract my attention, but if I think of which exhibitions (both in museums and in commercial galleries, at Parcours for example) really grab me, then it is those that consist of individual objects, well mounted, well lit and positioned within a space that allows them to talk to each other. The overall design of the gallery or other space is as important as the presentation of the specific objects themselves. That, however, is a personal preference.
If, on the other hand, I were to ask myself how I would display, for example, some of our own Dogon objects, then, interestingly, I would immediately tend towards context and perhaps even an excessive use of text. If I am showing my own pieces, or any other collection, then I would want to inform people, to help them understand. If I am visiting another exhibition then I simply want to be hit by the power of the objects themselves. I cannot square that circle, it is probably the basic dilemma of many museum curators the world over: information or power, context or isolation?
I have often reflected on the possibility of exhibiting our own pieces in relation to the work I am currently writing on the Dogon. I would want to take each piece and set it within a context (of other objects, of photos, perhaps with videos, but also text) that draws out a specific element of the complexity of the whole area. So one object would be displayed to highlight the question of authorship and the construction of the object. Another would emphasise movement, multiple uses, transfer to the West and so on. Another would highlight something of the history, the role of the caves, asking about the Tellem and perhaps the inferences of Carbon 14 dating. Each, within its own display would be designed to ask a different question, some more mundane, others perhaps more challenging (how did the objects reach the West, who should be owning them, how do we define authenticity?). At the core of the exhibition would be the black monkey mask (that is my personal photo-image for Facebook and Google) and perhaps a touchtable that allowed individuals to interrogate all the issues further should they so wish.
The problem, of course, is that such an exhibition would have to be really good, really well thought out, all the images carefully chosen and so on, if I, personally, would actually want to spend time searching through all the many different layers. It is possible... I am sure it is...
No comments:
Post a Comment