http://www.vimeo.com/38662398In early February, curators, conservators, and other specialists from across the United States convened at the Pulitzer for a two-day Buddhist art symposium. The participants discussed issues surrounding the original appearances of older Buddhist objects and how they might influence the conservation, interpretation, and display of Buddhist art in museums. Each session was held within a different gallery space and featured three to four presenters, each of whom introduced new data and perspectives on works featured in Reflections of the Buddha.

A couple of weeks ago, I attended a symposium titled, “Breaking the Rules of Engagement: New Perspectives on Thinking about Art,” at the Denver Art Museum, or DAM, as it is so lovingly called. The weekend included art, culture and new ideas about museum goers and supporters. I explored the museum and city, but  I was there particularly to meet with other museum professionals and discuss the future of docent programs.

The symposium centered on new ideas in docent presentations. Three interesting speakers at the conference were James Chung, Michael Cassin and Shelly Casto. They talked about tapping into proven trends and integrating new and creative ways to actively engage a visitor’s quest for the visual. Many discussed that the old ideas about tours were not the way to entice audiences. Instead, engaging in interesting conversations surrounding the work of art is the preferable method. Read the rest of this entry »

Courtney holds up lost Reebok sneaker.

A single shoe. I picture either a perfectly content one legged man or a rather upset runner contemplating trashing his solo sneaker. Either way, lefty remains.

Sometimes strange things get left at the front desk of the Pulitzer. Cups of coffee, half eaten apples, earrings; little pieces of life we shed from time to time. The shoe first appeared after a symposium several months ago. The shoe was brought in by the driver who transported the participants to and from the hotel, so I assumed that we would hear again from one of the scholars eventually. Read the rest of this entry »

Academic discussion on Old Masters has been echoing throughout the Pulitzer for the past two days. The student symposium Visual Cultures and the Reception of Old Masters concluded this afternoon, after four sessions of inquiry on the history of art viewing and the effect subjective experience has on art theory and history. Audrey Sands, the Pulitzer’s curatorial assistant and organizer of the symposium, may clarify things for you later.

The colloquy stemmed from the Old Masters’ material existence in the Ando building–the flow of natural light and the surrounding architectural elements–and moved to more abstract topics, as in Esther Chadwick’s segment, “The Fiction of ‘Pure Visual Experience.’” Maggie Taft, a graduate student from the University of Chicago, talks about her segment, “Guided by Ando: Architectural Space and the Specificity of Viewing Experiences,” in the following video:

With the Light Project opening last Thursday, you’d think it would be a little calmer around here this week.  Not even close.  We just finished up a two day symposium on Flavin (videos and photos from that coming soon), and work on the Light Project continues – we’re still updating our web catalogue with new information, finalizing a print booklet to accompany the project, and press continues to roll in.  And that’s just in my department.  Speaking of press, the Beacon has some new material up – a wonderful review by Ivy Cooper and an excellent video from the night of the opening.

But for the most part, there’s been a major shift in focus this week towards the next exhibition, Ideal (Dis-) Placements: Old Masters at the Pulitzer.  It opens in a little over a month – here’s what David Bonetti wrote in this week’s Fall Preview in the Post-Dispatch (click here and scroll down).  Stay tuned for much more to come.

Giovanni Andrea de’ Ferrari, Italian, 1598-1669; Abraham and the Three Angels, 1660-69; oil on canvas; 81 x 94 inches; Saint Louis Art Museum, Museum Purchase 45:1939

Next week the Pulitzer building will resonate with the sounds of intellectual conversation as we host a student symposium for the Flavin exhibition. This private event will pull together graduate students and professors from the Center for Curatorial Studies at Bard College, University of Texas-Austin and Washington University, along with Tiffany Bell and Steve Morse from the Dan Flavin Studio and the Pulitzer’s director Matthias Waschek, founder Emily Rauh Pulitzer and curatorial assistant Camran Mani.Over the 2 days the group will wind its way around the galleries, stopping to talk at strategic points. Camran is organizing the program and does a great job of explaining the intent of the event: “The kind of symposium we are hosting is almost an inversion of traditional academic exchanges: the emphasis is not on presenting findings but posing questions that might generate work later on. The program is primarily a series of open-ended conversations about aspects of art, architecture, and exhibitions with our Flavin exhibition as their point of departure.”

For those of you who are nosy and want to know what is discussed during these closed door sessions: never fear, the conversations will be recorded and portions will be posted on our website for your voyeuristic pleasure.

Last week we had our first of two symposia during the Water exhibition.  It included graduate students of art, art history, and curatorial studies from Ohio State, University of Delaware, and Bard College.  The students are going to provide written responses reacting to the discussions that took place.  These will be posted on our website.  Our second symposium during Water happens next week.  This will be recorded, and clips from the participants will be posted online.

We’ve just begun to document our symposia on the website, and I’m always looking for new ways to make our programs interesting and interactive online.  I’m open to suggestions — let me know if there’s any method that would be interesting to you!

First off this Monday afternoon, I wanted to report that last week’s film night was a huge success.  It didn’t rain (YESSS), there was a big turnout, and it was exciting to watch unfold.  This program was unlike anything we’ve done in the past, and I think it’s safe to say it’s something we’d definitely like to repeat.   Film students from Webster University are currently working on the videos they created of the event — we should be getting these within a week or two, and I’ll be posting them online.

Also, in other web update news, we’re going to be posting responses and audio from the symposia held here during the last exhibition.  That should be featured on our website soon too — I’ll keep you posted.  We’re currently re-thinking ways to capture these symposia online (I’m thinking video, but that’s because I’m hooked on that idea now…) however, if there’s something you’d be interested in, let me know.  We typically get really fascinating curators, directors, professors, etc. at these events, and it would be wonderful to be able to share their insights and discussion with our web visitors at large.  Let me know if you have any ideas…

Monday and Tuesday, June 11 and 12, the Pulitzer hosted an experimental symposium in relation to Portrait/Homage/Embodiment. It was essentially a series of conversations with professors and graduate students from five schools: Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Wash. U. (departments of art history) and Ohio State (the department of art). The program–determined by students–allowed for some great moments of dialogue between art historians and artists. Not least among them: a discussion on “the performance of portraiture” followed by a kind of performative conclusion by Ann Hamilton.

We should have some textual and visual documentation in the “events and programs” section of our website in the coming weeks. Check back soon. In the meantime, I recommend you take a look at the documentation of our Sugimoto symposium on September 30, 2006. The interesting “reflections” on the symposium, written by four graduate students in attendance, had a considerable influence on our decision to invite so many more graduate students to this recent symposium.

This past Friday I was lucky enough to participate in a discussion about our current
exhibition with a number of people in the St. Louis area who have been engaged with
issues related to portraiture. It was an all day event and there were a lot of highlights (a summary will be posted on our website soon!), but there was one conversation around the four sculptures in the Lower Corridor that I found especially interesting. Had it happened before our visitor handouts were printed, the section devoted to those sculptures would probably look very different!

Prof. John Klein (author of Matisse Portraits) set the record straight: of the four sculptures in the Lower Corridor, which we have been calling “busts,” only one (Portrait of Georgette Dalou) properly qualifies for that designation. Why? Because each of the other three lacks a chest and shoulders (aka a bust)! Whoops! How did we miss that?

From there Prof. Klein went on to point out the importance of where and how each
head was cut off. In particular he dwelt on Lipchitz’s Gertrude Stein. Turns out the cut, which preserves more of the front of her neck than the back, evokes Antique medallions. And the lack of chest and shoulders? It might just be a pointed omission! One virtue of including a sitter’s bust is that it allows the artist to render her clothing and thereby indicate her status. Here, Prof. William E. Wallace added, it could be that Stein doesn’t need all that because her most important “attribute” is her brains. Sounds likely to me!