An evening spent at Modern Art Oxford with three of the brightest sparks in organisation of exhibitions across England revealed a great deal about the power of the curator and the elitist nature of the art world. Open to all, this discussion on the task of the curator in a modern gallery raised many issues with the varied audience of artists, visitors and other members of the public. Suzanne Cotter, Senior Curator of Modern Art Oxford (MAO) and one of next year’s Turner Prize judges, spent much of the night defending ‘The Oxford Open’, currently showing at MAO. An exhibition open to submissions from everyone living or working in and around Oxford, ‘The Oxford Open’ comprises 533 works which have not been judged or selected by anyone, and have been hung en masse. The sheer number of pieces gives the gallery spaces a very crowded feel and, arguably, compromises the works. Indeed, the number of entries was far beyond that expected, and the curatorial team had a hard job finding space for all the pieces. Sometimes placed by size, media or content, the hang demonstrates the complex role of the curator in controlling the reception of the individual artworks. With over five hundred artists, giving equal importance to each work was particularly hard given their varying size, the repercussions of which we were to hear over the evening from the artists who attended the discussion. Nav Haq and Bruce Haines, both successful curators with a range of famous exhibitions under their belts, talked about the different responsibilities and roles of the curator. Haines announced that he felt ‘like a shepherd’, likening sheep to the pastoral care of the works and their artists by encouraging them to shine in the closed pen of the art world. The conflict of ideology was evident as the curators debated with the audience. Organising a ‘successful’ show in terms of reviews, the financial aspects, attempting to try new and experimental approaches and also furthering the artists’ careers, are sometimes mutually exclusive goals; it seems it is hard to find an acceptable balance. Nav Haq spoke of making a collaborative exhibition and research project that is currently on tour, ‘Lapdogs of the Bourgeoisie’, as though it gave him a sense of release. It breaks away from conventions with the socially outlandish and adventurous theme of examining the role of class in the dissemination of art. The pressures of the institution were evident too; Haq, the ‘young flâneur’ as Cotter referred to him, by curating a touring exhibition, has less of the weight of a single institution on him. Cotter evidently feels that the reputation of MAO and similar successful galleries is a heavy burden, though she acknowledged that the success of a gallery also fuels the success of the curator’s own career. Nevertheless, when asked about equality, she made the point that “there is no democracy in the art world”. It is clear from this awareness of their subtly differing roles within the art world that each of these curators feels a great sense of accountability for their choices, be it content, display or the artists invited to exhibit. For Suzanne Cotter it is part of this accountability that fuelled ‘The Oxford Open’. A clear attempt to move towards inclusivity in an elitist art world, it is unfortunate that it only highlights how much good-chance artists really need to have solo shows in such a renowned location. by Jenny Vass
‘The Oxford Open’ runs until 17th February, free admission MAO continues the theme of inclusivity, exhibiting the work of students from the Ruskin (23rd Feb-2nd March) and from the Fine Art Department of Oxford Brookes (8th -16th March)
‘The Oxford Open’ runs until 17th February, free admission MAO continues the theme of inclusivity, exhibiting the work of students from the Ruskin (23rd Feb-2nd March) and from the Fine Art Department of Oxford Brookes (8th -16th March)
