As monolithic as the institution of the art museum can seem, its role in society and culture can, at times, be particularly ambiguous. Sharpening the focus, an art museum’s relationship with the surrounding art community is often no clearer. An excited buzz recently flowed through much of St. Petersburg upon word of a new museum, the Museum of the American Arts and Crafts Movement, set to open there in 2016. Local artists, gallerists, art bloggers (including myself) seemed especially pleased with the news. I wondered, though, if this stemmed from anything other than the excitement that accompanies new exhibits in a new venue and a potential positive economic impact on the arts.
Really, it brought a larger question to mind. The local arts community and nearby art museums seem to share a special relationship. That said, does one actually exist based on some sort of cultural interchange and should it? Do better/more museums somehow make a better local art scene?
So it might now become clear that the “trickle” in this article’s title is not an economic one (and certainly not a biological one – nasty!) Rather, it refers to a flow of cultural value from art museums to local art makers. I’ve given this idea quite a bit of thought in preparation to host the next #TwitterCrit. I’ve since realized I’m not one of those quick-tongued critics that can form an unassailable opinion in the flash of a moment. Thinking about this ‘Museum trickle down effect’ has, in honesty, only left me with more questions. Still, maybe these questions in themselves are noteworthy points.
Why Trickle Down?
I initially made the assumption that art museums should somehow influence and, to a point, shape the local art community. Really, if a local art community informed a museum’s practice, I would likely call that “trickle up“. But why up?
Museums are generally thought of as centers of influence. Consider the generally accepted pinnacle of an artist’s career is the museum retrospective. Think about the MoMA’s role in defining the idea of Modernism. Note museum architecture old and new. Scrutinize museums bolstering of “cultural capital.” During the twentieth century art museums have inhabited a role somewhere in between “taste maker” and “history writer.”
Believe me: I don’t want to address why or how museums are vested with this power. Rather, does this model of Museum-as-taste-maker-slash-history-writer still work for us in the twenty-first century? I’m not sure, but I doubt it.
In a Wikipedia world, art museums do feel a bit like a stack of leather-bound encyclopedias. That isn’t to say the institutions should adopt the elsewhere ubiquitous practices of populism and crowdsourcing. I can only imagine how terrible administration-by-‘like’-and-‘retweet’ would be. Still, there seems to be a certain sense of pluralism that is missing. I’m not saying that everyone’s opinion should be included – we’d end up with a museum aesthetically similar to Pier 1. What I am saying is there should be mechanism to undermine the institutions’ tendency toward a meta-narrative of art and its history.
I’m sorry: I’m not really offering any specific alternatives, and in the end this might be as much an issue to be taken up with institutional curation as the art museum itself. To be fair, I did say that considering the issue “only left me with more questions.” If you have any ideas, however, I’d love to see it as a comment below.
Should there be a Trickle?
Perhaps the most basic question on the topic is “Should there even be a trickle down effect?” It may be that a creative interchange between local visual arts and art museums locally is not beneficial. I doubt this also, but I feel like I should play devil’s advocate with myself.
There are well-known stories of the Abstraction Expressionists and their near-desperate endeavour to exhibit within the MoMA’s already hallowed halls. No doubt, to this end ambition served as some sort of impetus for their art making – personally, a relatively unsavory thought. Of course, few local artists entertain hopes of exhibiting in the Museum of Fine Arts, St. Petersburg or Tampa Museum of Art. Yet, I suppose, it would require little for aspirations of museum inclusion to overtake nobler goals. That said, I’d like to clarify that this is a dumb reason to suppress a creative interchange between local artists and art museums – this sort of ambition seems to be an unshakable aspect of the art world regardless.
The second reason against a creative interchange that comes to mind is the possibility that both the local arts community and art museums operate better independently – a sort of separation of powers. Obviously, this would retread what was spoken about under the previous subheading – what really privileges one to exert an influence on the other?
An arts community is unhampered by the expectations of a board, donors, the public, and general bureaucracy. A museum has wide-reaching resources and concerns that spread far beyond the local community. It may be that mixing the two weakens some of each’s greatest strengths.
Is ‘Trickle’ the Wrong Word? (It’s definitely an Annoying One Now)
The word ‘trickle’ implies movement, and maybe that’s an imprecise way to illustrate the potential relationship between an art museum and surrounding art communities.
It has been wonderful watching the visual arts community in Tampa Bay grow. Perhaps an inevitable effect of this growth is that the larger nebulous community divides and again coalesces into smaller groups. St. Petersburg’s art community becomes the 600 Block, Warehouse Arts District, Gulfport, and so on. Tampa’s art community becomes Seminole Heights, Ybor, USF.
Can museums act as centers that enjoin the manifold scenes into a singular and stronger community? With some effort and cooperation, museums can be the fulcrum that allows composite art communities to achieve common goals and meet common needs. Beyond the potential of being a resource for its venue space and organizational support, museums can act as a visible representation of the larger arts community. This sort of arrangement would also be beneficial to the museums.
It is certainly in any museums interest to foster an environment of cultural literacy and art appreciation. Advocating surrounding arts communities can concurrently work as a grass-roots effort to nurture and expand a community that produces future patrons.
* * *
So what should the relationship between museums and local art communities be like? I’m still not sure. But I am pretty sure, though, what it might involve: A spirit of cooperation with a focus on shared needs and goals, a manner of operating that reflects a modern sense of pluralism, and a partnership that benefits the larger community we share.