It always surprises me when people say, or write, that museums are intimidating and must be made more visitor-friendly, as if a Beaux Arts building or grand staircase were too formidable for the average person, who braves far scarier things at a sports event, club or rap concert, to tackle.
Nevertheless, many museums have accepted this and are striving to change their ways and even (sometimes, sadly) their architecture. Last week, in this context, the Cincinnati Art Museum introduced what’s believed to be the first of a new kind of introductory gallery. Other museums, I know, are either planning or contemplating something very similar.
An article in the Cincinnati Enquirer (there’s no press release on the museum website as I write) described the effort as a “greatest hits” gallery; it’s also talked about, at other museums, as a “taste of” the collections gallery. The point is to show people, as soon as they arrive, what kinds of treasures lay before them, so they may choose what they really like.
This one has another purpose, as you will soon see; it’s quoted below.
In Cincinnati, curators selected 18 objects from an initial list of 150, ranging from ancient Egypt to Andy Warhol. Chosen for their beauty and their power, the museum put them in a long gallery connecting the lobby with the museum’s Great Hall as an introduction to its collections. Then it went further:
Except for two sculptures in the lobby, each piece is encircled in tall, black, fringed curtains so visitors see only one piece at a time. Text panels made of self-illuminating engraved acrylic explain each work….
“We have been working for the last several years to rethink how we bring people and art together, which is our mission,” said museum director Aaron Betsky. “What we need to do is create moments where people could have intense encounters with unique works of art while being part of a social atmosphere, a community where people gather around art.
“Having done that, we’ll then encourage people to see the rest of the collection.”
The article provided two positive reactions from visitors, although one said she thought the darkness of the installation was related to Halloween at first.
A commenter to the article cited one obvious flaw — the lack of guidance in the display: “Give some sort of “If you like this than check out _______” that directs visitors to other parts of the collection that share some characteristics with the piece they are looking at.” Surely, the museum did not think that would be too authoritarian, did it?
Here are the selected works (two illustrated here):
- Statue of a Greek God or Hero, mid-1st century AD (marble, in lobby)
- “Eve Disconsolate,” Hiram Powers, designed 1858-1860, carved 1872-1877 (marble, in lobby)
- Human Figure, mid-20th century, Nigerian (wood) [above right]
- “The Whistling Boy,” Frank Duveneck, 1872 (oil on canvas)
- “Blue Hole, Flood Waters, Little Miami River,” Robert S. Duncanson, 1851 (oil on canvas)
- Mummy of Adult Male, 332 BC-30 BC (linen, painted decoration in tempera over linen and gesso)
- Reclining Female Figure, 2500 BC-2400 BC (island marble)
- “Soup Can (Cream of Mushroom),” Andy Warhol, 1962
- Commode, Jean-Pierre Latz, 1745 (oak marquetry of tulip wood and other woods, breche d’Alep marble, gilt bronze)
- Vase, Albert Robert Valentien, The Rookwood Pottery Co., 1893 (earthenware, mahogany glaze line)
- “Portrait of a Man in Armor,” Anthony van Dyck, circa 1621-1627 (oil on canvas)
- “Ann Ford (Later Mrs. Philip Thicknesse),” Thomas Gainsborough, 1760 (oil on canvas)
- Dancer Fastening the String of Her Tights,” Edgar Degas, circa 1885-1890 (bronze)
- “Fourth Position Front, on the Left Leg,” Edgar Degas, circa 1883-1888 (bronze)
- “St. Christopher” and “St. Stephen,” Hans Memling, circa 1479-1480 (oil on panel) [St. Stephen illustrated, above left]
- “Romanian Blouse,” Henri Matisse, 1937 (oil on canvas)
- Shiva Nataraja, 16th-17th century (bronze)
- “Bill Curry, Drifter, Interstate 40, Yukon, Oklahoma, June 16, 1980,” Richard Avedon, 1980 (gelatin silver print mounted on aluminum)
The Enquirer as slide show at this link.
I’ve been to the Cincinnati museum, but don’t know the collection well enough to weigh on the choices. They certainly seem well-rounded. From afar, the installation also seems to be ok, though I worry about that darkness problem. And maybe the fringe. (Much scarier than Beaux Arts architecture, don’t you think?)
Photo Credits: Courtesy of the Cincinnait Art Museum via the Enquirer