It may be said that curating is not an art form because it lacks original creation. Traditionally art has been understood as the expression of creative genius rendered in outstanding works. The meaning of art could validly be broadened to include curating as the process of integrating elements into meaningful experience. In practice, it is equally creative and belongs with other art forms.

The dichotomy between artist and curator can be misleading because both work to integrate parts into compelling wholes. Analogously, it is well understood in music that the particular sensibility and sensitivity of any conductor alters the interpretation of a musical composition for better or worse. Any comparative listen of a score demonstrates that a conductor leaves his creative imprint on the work he directs. A curator has greater discretion with the “orchestration” of any given exhibition plan than a conductor with a score.

The idea that some human could curate a show without leaving some personal imprint is naive. No automaton could go through the sheer quantity of decisions required in curating an exhibition because criteria such as “consistent,” “meaningful,” “beautiful” are subjective.

Drawing upon my experience making art and curating shows, I embrace the view that each activity requires deep creative engagement to reach people with a message.

30 July 2005