8/18/2019 2013 Eleanor Nairne ; Curating by Numbers (Frieze Vol. 154)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2013-eleanor-nairne-curating-by-numbers-frieze-vol-154 1/4

Issue 154  April 2013 

Curating by Numbers

CURATING 

How budgets shape exhibitions

Page from Hans Ulrich Obrist, Think Like Clouds, 2013. Courtesy: Badlands Unlimited

8/18/2019 2013 Eleanor Nairne ; Curating by Numbers (Frieze Vol. 154)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2013-eleanor-nairne-curating-by-numbers-frieze-vol-154 2/4

Last September, Badlands Unlimited, the New York-based publishing house set up by

artist Paul Chan, announced a new project. Think Like Clouds (2013) collects 22 years’

 worth of notes, drawings and diagrams by cultural marathon-man and Serpentine Gallery

co-director Hans Ulrich Obrist. Available as a paperback or an e-book (because, as the

Badlands website notes, ‘you can’t publish a .gif on paper’), Think Like Clouds risks playing

into the popular impression of curating as a somewhat opaque profession. After all, if you

type ‘what do curators …’ into Google, the search engine suggests that you complete the

question with ‘actually do’ (the second suggestion is ‘wear’). 

But what do these frenetic sheets of paper actually say about Obrist’s inner workings? The

 book’s title has an echo of 1990s-era ‘blue-sky thinking’, while the anxious lists of names

and themes, many of which are almost illegible (does that say ‘finance’ or ‘trauma’?),

conjure up the rather outmoded image of a curator as the gifted connector of artists and

ideas. Although these qualities might remain important to the practice, I wonder if

keywords are really what predominate in curatorial thought today, especially for those

 working in smaller spaces or outside of major cities, where resources are so limited.

Indeed, ‘Rebalancing Our Cultural Capital’, a report published by Peter Stark, Christopher

Gordon and David Powell last October, indicates that central government spending per

capita on culture in London in 2012–13 was nearly 15 times greater than in the rest of

England. And while this interpretation has been criticized as an over-simplification by the

 Arts Council and others, it’s hard to refute the broader picture of uneven national

investment.

Little has been written in the art world about the calculations that course through a

curator’s mind. Perhaps because the logistical concerns that they represent are seen to

sully the seductive image of the arts as safeguarded from such mundanity. In a

conversation about the proliferation of curatorial studies programmes (published in this

magazine in September 2011), Chisenhale Gallery director Polly Staple pointed out that

‘curating’ comes about ‘through structural decisions about how the institution operates,

how the artistic programme is produced and how you engage with audiences. I also spend

approximately 80 percent of my time fundraising. I don’t think they talk about that much

in curating school.’ This issue is particularly topical in the uk right now, given that the

three-month window for applications to the Arts Council National Portfolio and Major

Partner Museum funding is about to close; many wait with bated breath for the July

announcement of how the five percent cut will be introduced across the organizations that

it supports.

8/18/2019 2013 Eleanor Nairne ; Curating by Numbers (Frieze Vol. 154)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2013-eleanor-nairne-curating-by-numbers-frieze-vol-154 3/4

Of course, budgets account for only a fraction of the numbers that curators have on the

 brain. Thoughts swarm about the details of an art work, its dimensions and accession

number; technical specifications for a projector; image resolution; security requirements

and insurance values; conservation concerns, including light levels and humidity; the

accessibility of facilities, such as the width of doorways or the maximum weight of a stair

lift; visitor numbers – the list is endless. And the problem with numbers is that they tend

to produce a kind of butterfly effect: even relatively small increases in spending can

squeeze an organization’s ability to make the other numbers balance. If an insurance

company requires toughened glass for a display case to be 10mm rather than 5mm thick,

then the weight of the sheet will double from 30kg to 60kg and the number of staff

required to lift it becomes two rather than one. Suddenly you have a dramatically different

installation cost. When relatively minor details can have considerable consequences, how

can curators afford to take their eyes off the numerical ball?

In art- world mythology, the curator’s pedantry is a necessary foil to the artist’s bohemian

disarray – terms like genius or éclat suggest a burgeoning forth of work, but not the details

of its subsequent presentation. A key difference in recent decades has been the elaboration

of security and conservation requirements. Lucy Lippard has noted how, in 1969, her ‘lack

of training and lack of respect for the ubiquitous white gloves’ meant that she could install

her famous ‘Numbers’ exhibitions with ‘as little baggage as the artists’. Nowadays, though,

expectations have become so exacting that the Bizot Group of international museum

directors, led by Nicholas Serota, has been arguing for ‘international guidelines

incorporating a broader range of conditions’. In this context, Khaled Hourani’s  Picasso in

 Palestine (2009–11) project –  a two- year struggle to agree the loan of Picasso’s  Buste de

 Femme (1943) from the Van Abbemuseum in Eindhoven to the International Academy of

 Art Palestine in Ramallah –  made visible the administrative acrobatics that so often go

unseen beneath the network of global loans.

Perhaps the most controversial of the numbers that prey on curators’ minds are those

relating to visitors, not least because of inconsistencies in how such data is collected and

the inadequacy of these statistics when it comes to the nature or degree of audience

engagement. The more arts professionals are forced to gather such numbers (primarily to

 justify expenditure to funders and patrons), the more they risk becoming seduced by their

own data, believing that attendance is an end in and of itself. As Tom Sutcliffe argued last

 year in The Independent , in response to the announcement that Tate Modern had attracted

5.3 million visitors in 2012, the problem is not really the digital sensors that record these

numbers (since most people, including the Department of Culture, Media and Sport,

8/18/2019 2013 Eleanor Nairne ; Curating by Numbers (Frieze Vol. 154)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2013-eleanor-nairne-curating-by-numbers-frieze-vol-154 4/4

recognize the difficulty in achieving accuracy), but the fact that a ‘9.5 percent increase in

the figures doesn’t easily correlate to an enlargement of the national contentment or

refinement or sensibility […] it’s worth remembering that every million extra visitors a

gallery gets may well be accompanied by a matching dilution of the collective looking and

thinking actually done in that building’. 

So what’s the sum of all of these numbers? Collectively, they represent a positive evolution

of the curator’s role, which began with the dismantling of the divide between those who

‘select’ and those who ‘organize’ exhibitions, and has continued with an expectation that

curators should have a holistic involvement in all aspects of their programmes. With

continuing cuts and diminishing staff (a Museums Association survey found that, between

July 2012 and July 2013, 37 percent of respondents had been forced to make

redundancies), the pressure is on. Yet demonstrating creativity in the face of constraint – 

 whether conceptual, architectural or financial –  has long been at the core of curatorial

practice, so perhaps it’s simply time to acknowledge this artful arithmetic. 

In the brilliant trailer for Obrist’s Think Like Clouds, made by the young New York-based

artist Ian Cheng, a digitally rendered image of the curator’s head talks feverish nonsense,

 while jerking against a landscape of old video games, in time to a mash-up of ‘Head Like a

Hole’ (1990) by Nine Inch Nails. About 20 seconds in, the backdrop morphs into a

Minesweeper grid and a cursor begins uncovering the classic 1s, 2s, 3s and 4s that indicate

the proximity of a mine. Freeze the video here and you have a more apt image of the

curator’s imagination: wallpapered with numbers and strategizing against imminent

threat.

Eleanor Nairne 

is Curator of Collection and Public Programmes at Artangel, and lives in London, uk.