Andrew Renton, Goldsmiths College: an interview
Rajesh Punj
A&D: When I consider ‘curating’ as a profession, I am
always prone to consider several disciplines collectively, ‘critical
writing’, ‘facilitator’, ‘exhibition’s organiser’, ‘administrator’,
‘artist liaison’, ‘promoter’, and ‘creator’. Are these curatorial
threads the key elements of curatorial practice in your opinion?
Has it always been such?
AR: I think all of these things are part of it. In a way,
‘curating’ is that portmanteau concept which can embrace
many disciplines. It’s definitely not just shuffling works of art
around a gallery. Once upon a time, a curator simply took care
of a collection. It was a specialised, scholarly activity. Today,
as we know, curating spreads much further afield, away from
collections, or even a fixed space. And there’s a whole other
side to the word now – everything is ‘curated’, the way that
everything was ‘designed’ twenty years ago. Over-hyped and
misused, for sure. But as much as I do think the curator wears
many different hats today, it is a more visible profession than
it ever has been. 
A&D: What are the distinct differences of teaching, curating
and art theory now, as opposed to 1999/ 2000? Are those
differences entirely based on the advancement of information
technologies?
AR: At that time, the job was really to try to define curating
as something independent from the museum and the collection.
The rise of the independent curator, who defined their practice
outside of a specialisation in a field and collection. It was a huge
cultural ‘battle’. Now that everyone recognises this practice is
possible, ironically, curators have renewed their interest in
collections. After all, the past decade has seen the emergence of
many private collections around the world, where we often see
the most telling curatorial interventions.
I’m less concerned with information technologies, but it’s
clear that it’s almost impossible not to rely on the ability to
move images around by email, to google a work of art, etc. A
colleague of the late Harald Szeemann reminded me, recently,
that he never included a work in a show without traveling to
see it in advance. With communication technologies being
what they are, a younger generation of curators might not be so
disciplined! And, by the way, I wonder, for example, what the
impact of Google’s museum project might be on viewers also;
if they feel they can click through our cultures in the comfort
of their home?
