• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
    • Real Clear Arts
    • Judith H. Dobrzynski
    • Contact
  • ArtsJournal
  • AJBlogs

Real Clear Arts

Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture

Museums

MIA Seeks The Under-45 Set, Part II

Close readers of yesterday’s RCA post (do close readers exist anymore?), which was about a few attempts by the Minneapolis Institute of Arts to attract younger audiences, will note that I allowed one intriguing passage in the remarks of director Kaywin Feldman (pictured at right) to go unremarked by me.

That would be “pecha kucha,” as in: “We recently tried a pecha kucha [Japanese for “chit chat”], where our curators showed 20 images in 20 seconds. It was a way to deliver content but keep it very short and lively.”

We all know that curators and museum directors worry about how little time people spend looking at a work of art — when I first heard a number, the average time was 7 seconds. More recently, I’ve heard people say that has dropped to 2 or 3 seconds.

So why would a museum want to encourage the trend?

Here is a video of the session Feldman referred to, which the MIA embedded in its annual report: Link. It isn’t exactly what I imagined – the video lasts nearly three minutes.

And here’s another, related to an exhibit called In Pursuit of A Masterpiece (which I wrote about in 2009); it’s about 2 1/2 minutes — on YouTube. I especially don’t get the end of this one.

I suppose that these presentations, live and in person, provoke conversation and perhaps questions. That may work for some people. Me? I’d rather just go stand in front of a work on my own, trying to figure it out, even if I miss a lot. Then again, maybe you have to be there to decide.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of the MIA

 

In Minneapolis, Programs That Pump-Prime For New Audiences

When I travel and talk to museum officials, they often ask me to share ideas from other museums.  Recently, one such question put me in mind of something I’d read during Minnesota’s “Museums Month,” when Kaywin Feldman, director of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, and Olga Viso, director of the Walker Arts Center, gave a joint interview to the Star Tribune.

At one point, Feldman says “One area we struggle with is lectures. We offer a lot of great speakers throughout the year, often doing lectures related to the collection, and I notice an older and older audience coming to those lectures. So we’re thinking about how to engage a younger generation in content delivery. We recently tried a pecha kucha [Japanese for “chit chat”], where our curators showed 20 images in 20 seconds. It was a way to deliver content but keep it very short and lively. We also followed a lecture on still-life paintings with a demonstration by a food stylist.”

She comes back later, adding: “I don’t mean to dwell on the lecture thing, but it really worries me, in part because I’m one of those people who really loves a lecture. I think we’re both experimenting with new ways to deliver content to people. We’re still content-generators; that’s the heart of what we do. But the way people receive it and participate has changed.”

So how is the MIA experimenting, with the ultimate goal of course of both educating and — if a museum plays it right – attracting a broader, younger audience. I spoke with Alex Bortolot, the Adult Programming Associate at the MIA. Read more about him here — he’s pictured at left.

He works on several programs, but the most relevant here seemed to be “Cross Talk: Two Experts. Two Angles. Too Interesting.” For Cross Talk, the MIA brings in an academic, who brings historical insight, and someone from the contemporary creative economy to present, for 20 minutes each, his or her angle on the chosen topic. Then, the audience gets its say.

The topics so far: “Manga, Anime, and Pop;” “What Fonts Say;” and “Playing With Our Food.” The art connection? Pop, the MIA’s poster collection, and the visual representation of food, going back to 17th century Dutch still lifes.

Broadly speaking, the MIA got about 25% more people for Cross Talks than for ordinary lectures. At Cross Talks, more than 60% were 45 or younger, while at lectures, about a third were 45 or younger.  The younger generation comes more often in groups, with friends, than as singletons — though older people also come in twos or larger groups.

There’s more: Bortolot says that the 45-and-unders are more interested in local experts than in someone flown in to talk about art. They want the connection to the “creative economy,” and they want to network. They don’t want merely to listen; they want to participate. They want a tone that’s lighter than a lecture.  “It becomes a professional schmoozefest,” he says. Bortolot isn’t bothered by that as long as “we give them a deeper understanding of the collection.”

All of that makes sense to me — MIA stresses that it is not cutting back on its straight lectures – and is probably transferrable to other museums.

I discovered another idea talking with Bortolot that I liked even better: MIA, which is free, tries to time its Third Thursdays to the opening of special exhibitions, which are not. Then it offers TT attendees (like those making T-shirt, at right) the chance to be members for a day if they sign up and provide contact information. When the time comes for member solicitation drives, those members for a day convert to real members “at a much higher rate,” Bortolot says. Smart.

 

A Moment For Glass: Three Developments Make A Trend

Glass is having a moment. This is the 50th anniversary of the Studio Glass movement, and Color Ignited: Glass 1962–2012, “an enticing ‘coming of age’ look at the medium” that is international in scope, starts next week at the Toledo Museum of Art, which is where it all began. (A piece by Paul Seide is below right.)

In August, the new permanent Rooms for Glass, an exhibition space designed by Selldorf Architects of New York, will be inaugurated in Venice. The opening show is Carlo Scarpa, Venini 1932-1947, more than 300 works by Scarpa. The center will showcase the Venetian art of glassmaking in the 20th and 21st centuries and, eventually, establish a “General Archive of Venetian Glass” that will be accessible to scholars and to used to revive the art of glassmaking there.

And today came word that the Corning Museum of Glass has chosen a preliminary design for its proposed new North Wing, “featuring light-filled galleries for its collection of contemporary works in glass, as well as one of the world’s largest facilities for glassblowing demonstrations and live glass design sessions.” The architect, Thomas Phifer and Partners, has created a 100,000-square-foot expansion that, Corning says, “will dramatically enhance the visitor experience for the Museum’s growing domestic and international audiences.” The cost? $64 million, funded entirely “before groundbreaking” by Corning Inc. The building is scheduled to open in 2014. You can find more details here.

Karol Wight, executive director of the museum (formerly antiquities curator at the Getty) was quoted in the press release saying: “Over the past decade, we’ve experienced tremendous growth: in our collections; in our increasingly diverse audiences; and in the breadth and ambition of our public programs, especially those that allow visitors to experience the energy of artists and designers at work. This is a transformative design that responds to those demands and further enables us to bring glass to life for the 400,000 people who visit our campus each year.”

Until I learned the number of visitors, I was surprised by the scope of the expansion. Attendance of 400,000 puts the Corning Glass Museum, which after all is located a four-and-a-half hour drive from New York, the nearest major city, among the nation’s top 25 art museums by that measure. It puts the glass museum ahead of, say, the Whitney, the Frick, the Morgan and the Newark museums — all of which draw on the huge NYC metro area and more easily on the Northeast corridor — not to mention tourists from near and far.

I was less impressed, though, after I did some digging. That 400,000 is a precipitous drop. According to clips in The New York Times, the Corning museum “expected” 1 million visitors in 1962. In 1980, it had 800,000 visitors. I have no comparative figures for other museums at those times, but the drop probably says more about what interested Americans in those days, versus now, than it does about the museum.

If then glass is having a moment, and people are getting more interested in the medium, Corning is on the right track. I really hope this isn’t another case of overexpansion.

Photo Credits: Courtesy Toledo Museum of Art (top); Corning Museum of Glass (bottom)

 

The Corcoran Needs New Thinking, New Management: Look North

Is this the beginning of the end of the Corcoran Art Gallery? Yesterday, Washington’s oldest public art museum, founded in 1869 and opened in 1874, said it may sell the Beaux Arts building it has occupied since 1897 and move to the suburbs, where it can obtain more breathing room for less money. Besides, it said upgrading the existing building to current museum standards would cost at least $100 million and it would still lack gallery space for displaying its permanent collection.

Costs aside, that’s crazy. Why leave all those tourists to the District behind? Didn’t the Newseum try to get visitors to come to Arlington and then decide it had to move to the city?

You can read the full statement from the director/president and chairman of the board here.

An article in the Washington Post has more on the current situation and on the Corcoran’s sad history in recent years, which have been marked by mismanagement and poor leadership. And it provides more on how the board came to this decision, with help from a strategic consulting firm named Real Change Strategies, whose website is not operable as I write this. Real Change Strategies is owned by Martha Blue, a former employee of McKinsey & Co. and Goldman Sachs with an MBA from the University of North Carolina. (Not that I’m blaming her…) According to the Corcoran’s 990, it paid her $609,691 for her advice.

The obvious fact here is that the Corcoran has had no workable, believable vision to sell to potential funders. It has been unable to raise money because there’s little reason for philanthropists to give. Its 990 forms, for fiscal years ended June 30, show a decline in contributions and grants to $4.4 million in the year to June 30, 2010, its most recent filing. That’s the lowest for the past ten years, down from $4.9 million in FY 09; $8.2 million in FY08 and $12.9 million in FY07. The number hovers around $10 million for a couple of years before that — and in FY02, it was $20.4 million (or $26 million in today’s dollars).

You can’t blame that record on the recession. We’ve been through several cycles since then, and in 2002 we were barely out of the 2001 recession (not to mention the impact of 9/11).

The Corcoran has gone through umpty-ump changes in directors, to no avail. Maybe it should simply hand over its management to the National Gallery of Art.

New York had a similar situation recently, when the Museum of the City of New York took over the South Street Seaport Museum at the behest of city government. It’s too recent a move to call it a success. But the Seaport museum too had been clueless, and the city was able to intervene because the museum owed it money.

Memo to whoever can knock heads in Washington: look north; this may be a model.

 

Toledo Museum Calls Out “Hey, Baby, Wanna See My Paintings?”

Art museums everywhere are searching for and trying to appeal to younger audiences, but the Toledo Museum of Art may just have everyone beat. It’s offering “baby tours” designed for parents or caregivers with infants up to 18 months old — one baby per adult please. And no strollers.

Now, many art museums have family programs, but this is the first time I’ve seen one offer an initiative like this. (Do let me know if I’m wrong.)

I learned of these baby tours in the TMA’s ARTMATTERS May-August magazine and they seem noteworthy.

The article about them cites the TMA’s director of education, Dr. Kathy Danko-McGhee, a former professor of early childhood art education, as someone who has studied how babies respond to art. Noting that the visual system of humans develops during the earliest days of our lives, it says newborns as young as nine minutes old prefer to look at photographs and pictures resembling the human face; that newborns can see color; that a one-month-old can distinguish between red and green, and that at 12 weeks old, infants prefer colors over white.

So the TMA is offering baby tours of its Jules Olitsky exhibition (his Purple Golubchik, right), on five Friday afternoons at 3:30 p.m. The Pitch: “Watch your baby respond to large colorful paintings and learn ways to facilitate early visual literacy skills.”

Looking at art “promotes early neuron connections in the brain. And for the verbal toddler, interacting with an adult in naming images and describing different characteristics in a work of art lays the groundwork for visual, cognitive and language development,” the TMA says.

Surprisingly, the magazine invites people to learn more by calling Danko-McGhee and printing her phone number.

Kudos to the TMA.

Photo Credits: Courtesy of the Toledo Museum of Art

 

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

About Judith H. Dobrzynski

Now an independent journalist, I've worked as a reporter in the culture and business sections of The New York Times, and been the editor of the Sunday business section and deputy business editor there as well as a senior editor of Business Week and the managing editor of CNBC, the cable TV

About Real Clear Arts

This blog is about culture in America as seen through my lens, which is informed and colored by years of reporting not only on the arts and humanities, but also on business, philanthropy, science, government and other subjects. I may break news, but more likely I will comment, provide

Archives