I am sitting on a plane after having seen a group of exhibitions over the past few days and got to thinking that if I did not step onto my soapbox and rail at the cultural winds I would never be able to sleep for the rest of the flight. So at the risk of coming off like the Andy Rooney of the photo world, I would like to vent about the current state of exhibitions….not so much about WHAT is being shown (though that may be the fodder for subsequent missives), but more about HOW things are being shown.

To begin with, let me say that I learned the theoretical and practical ins and outs about mounting an exhibition from some amazing curators. From my graduate-school days at USC to the 14 years I spent at LACMA, my colleagues were never-ending sources of thought-provoking approaches to how—and in some cases, how NOT—to present objects so as to advance a thesis, clarify the understanding of an historical sweep, and contribute to the dialog of culture. Always true professionals, the examples they set made me a better curator and, more importantly, they made me a better AUDIENCE. So, you can imagine how hard it is for me to observe the poor use of exhibition space by curators whose “work” does a disservice both to the objects entrusted to their care and to the public.

It seems we are going through a time of extremes. Objects are either straight-jacketed into a one-dimensional programmed interaction with those in proximity, or they are place as if in some sort of vacuum. Don’t get me wrong, I am not asking for complete reverence to the objects and to the places in which they are exhibited….far from it. But, I am expecting a sense of restraint from intellectual hubris at one end of the spectrum and simplistic illustration at the other; in other words, I expect exhibition organizers to strike an appropriate balance between gilding and gelding the lily.

As curators, we are as duty-bound to present objects in the best manner possible in order to honor them for what they are on their own terms, as we are to maintain the utmost respect for the audiences we serve. The objects we are given to display and the places in which we display them must be approached on their own terms each time we approach a new idea and opportunity. It is our responsibility as collectors, organizers, and presenters of objects to never waiver in our respect for them. To tart them up and parade them around as if they were Astor’s pet goat does not do them justice. By the same token, to strand them in a dessicated wasteland of non-context strips them of their richness.

I must also note that I expect a refined skepticism from those who attend and critically view exhibitions—myself included. As audience, we also have a duty to the objects. On one hand it is our responsibility to approach them with an open mind and generosity of spirit coupled with our unique intellectual understanding and experience. We are charged with asking questions as well as learning from the objects and the environments in which they are placed

It is either a devious pandering or a dismissive priggishness on the part of exhibition organizers that has resulted in the current proclivity to impose trendy intellectual, conceptual, or educational models upon audiences. When trends tyrannize the richness of the objects we present and arrogance drives the use of exhibition spaces it is time to strike back. Perhaps it is time curators in ALL venues, large or small, were required to hold “office hours” in the spaces during the run of their shows in order to personally gauge the success of their endeavors. Moreover, perhaps they should be made to hold forth from the precarious seats of carnival dunking-tanks placed at the end of their exhibitions.