Klaus Biesenbach Thinks the Word ‘Curator’ Is ‘Overused’

biesenbach Klaus Biesenbach Thinks the Word Curator Is Overused

Klaus Biesenbach at the Marc Jacobs spring 2013 fashion show. (Courtesy Patrick McMullan)

A bit of refreshing news for all of you on this decidedly bleak Monday comes from the WSJ magazine’s Soapbox column, this week featuring MoMA PS1 director Klaus Biesenbach:

“I remember in the 1990s, ‘curator’ sounded a bit odd, then it became incredibly fashionable and now I think might be overused.”

Candid thoughts from a man who, in addition to his directing duties at PS1, has the title of “chief curator-at-large” at the Museum of Modern Art. We couldn’t agree more!

Here are a few other insights from Mr. Biesenbach (the piece, written in his own words, was edited from an interview with The Journal‘s Kelly Crow):

I think the challenge is to understand this completely media-saturated society while keeping up the criteria for what ultimately should go on the time shelf…Museums have to realize that the influential images that might change our lives are not necessarily paintings, drawings and sculptures.

We’ll direct you to a fine counterpoint by Choire Sicha in Bookforum, an essay about Mr. Biesenbach’s foray into social networking called “Klaus Werk.” Referring to MoMA’s Kraftwerk retrospective in the spring, Mr. Sicha writes:

As a proposal, it had all the signs of being a brilliant moment of curation . . . and then all the tickets sold out immediately. It’s tough for a curator to rightsize when his work is really about the conflicts of commerce, cool, and aspiration.

As a kind of rebuttal, here’s Mr. Biesenbach, arguing for the place of commercialism in the realm of art, when it’s appropriate:

[M]useums have to embrace contemporary practice as something as wide-spanning as a German band like Kraftwerk—along with visual performance, music, synesthesia and fashion, and all these possible articulations of boundless creativity whenever they reach a certain innovative excellence.

Hey, it ain’t easy being a curator, which is the word we’ll continue to use until we think of something better.

Article continues below
More from Politics
STAR OF DAVID OR 'PLAIN STAR'?   If you thought "CP Time" was impolitic, on July 2 Donald Trump posted a picture on Twitter of a Star of David on top of a pile of cash next to Hillary Clinton's face. You'd think after the aforementioned crime stats incident (or after engaging a user called "@WhiteGenocideTM," or blasting out a quote from Benito Mussolini, or...) Trump would have learned to wait a full 15 seconds before hitting the "Tweet" button. But not only was the gaffe itself bad, the attempts at damage control made the BP oil spill response look a virtuoso performance.  About two hours after the image went up on Trump's account, somebody took it down and replaced it with a similar picture that swapped the hexagram with a circle (bearing the same legend "Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!"!). Believe it or not, it actually got worse from there. As reports arose that the first image had originated on a white supremacist message board, Trump insisted that the shape was a "sheriff's star," or "plain star," not a Star of David. And he continued to sulk about the coverage online and in public for days afterward, even when the media was clearly ready to move on. This refusal to just let some bad press go would haunt him later on.
Donald Trump More Or Less Says He’ll Keep On Tweeting as President