Over the past few months at ICI we've been having a series of internal conversations about what it means to be an independent curator. These conversations have acknowledged that the term is shifting meaning today, both in relation to the material dependencies of the freelance curator on art world infrastructures as well as the innovative practices and groundbreaking exhibitions deriving from curators in institutions. Our unofficial motto for 2010 has become "independent thinking," which encourages the the notion of the independent curator as a fluid position that can be located within and across different institutions and contexts.
Independent curator Nat Muller is remarkable for her ability to intelligently and creatively frame contested terrains of art, politics, and media in her exhibitions. Through a nuanced understanding of the deep complexities, even antinomies, in displaying contemporary work from the Middle East/North Africa in Europe and resisting the hegemonic, narrativizing gaze so prevalent in the Western interpretation of such work, she has produced dynamic exhibitions that challenge dominant readings of art from that region. Her curatorial strategies, which she has developed over a number of years, range from being sensitive to how work travels both logistically and conceptually from one context to another; discussing work in specifics and narrowing projects in terms of strategy, language, and scope; and perhaps most saliently, determining the necessity of working around official mandates- going so far as to produce new artistic identities- to curate an exhibition, or understanding when to pull out of curating an exhibition altogether.
I hope Nat's discussion gave much food for thought about how to work with and around official expectations to create spaces for more complex understandings of art (and culture and politics) for the viewer. Her seminar spurred many questions for me about how to creatively address and work around the expectations and constraints of funding infrastructures and institutional mandates. How can Nat's methodology as an independent curator, particularly her definitions of elasticity and resistance, be thought about in relation to your own practice? How can we start thinking about ways to negotiate sanctioned meaning through exhibitions- taking into account artistic intent and the knowledge base of our audiences? Or is there something else you took away from Nat's seminar that you'd like to discuss here?
