Tuesday, September 20, 2011

In Case of World War III

            The Nineteen Seventies was a time of turmoil for America – the Vietnam War, the Iran hostage crisis.  It was during this time that Andrew Robinson, curator of prints, watercolors, drawings, and rare illustrated books at the National Gallery in Washington, DC was approached by his boss and asked to fill a container with the works in his collection that had the highest value.  This was all in preparation for, perhaps, World War III.  Robinson still has a “top-priority” list of 74 works which fit into 7 boxes – only 27% of the works on the list today are what were in the original container.  It seems that Robinson is not the only curator who plans for emergencies; Brent Glass, the outgoing director of the National Museum of American History, admits that his curators also have these types of lists.

So, this begs the question: what are the qualifications for a work to receive top honors and get placed in the ‘to be saved’ box?  The merit system Robinson and his team use is as follows:

1)      Aesthetic – is this work well made in both concept and execution?

2)      Historic – does this piece fully explain when it was made and by whom?

3)      “Power” – does this work have a pronounced psychological impact? 

The criteria of power seems to be synonymous with resonance so, then, should wonder not be a fourth criteria?  And what about quality?

4)      Wonder - does this object have the power to stop a view in his or her tracks? Does it command attention? 

5)      Quality – is this the best example of this artists/genre’s work?

Maybe, like a dinner menu, fewer criteria make it easier for a curator to choose what should be included in the box.  What is of note is that Robinson does not rely on the art market to decide what should and should not have a spot in his boxes.  Instead, this list helps Robinson discover the value of the works in his collection. 

It had never occurred to me that curators would make this type of preparations.  However, now that it has been brought to my attention it seems quite logical.  I would be interested to know the criteria of Brent Glass’ curators’ lists and also if other curators have similar lists for, perhaps not World War III, but at least for a catastrophe – fire, natural disaster, etc.

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011308210014

1 comment:

  1. Andrew's last name is Robison, but spelling notwithstanding you ask an important question: how do curators make choices for acquisitions? Is there a formal set of criteria (as you point out, quality, aesthetics, power) or is that just a smokescreen for the ultimate criterion of all: taste. Collections change as curators come and go. What seems to be the most powerful, most important, most innovative might be completely abandoned--indeed become an orphaned collection--when the next curator comes on board. Still, it is important to have guidelines when building a collection, which is where having a collecting plan (not to be confused with policy) in place.

    ReplyDelete