Vanessa Garcia: Artists have always been curators, in a sense. Historically, they were often the ones who curated their own exhibitions. But now artists are becoming curators in the sense that they are organizing events or exhibits for others. Artists are not just making things anymore; they are also curating them. The third and fourth industrial revolution has been significant, particularly for artists. Artists have always been able to produce their own work, but the development of modern technology has allowed artists to produce and share their work more efficiently than ever before. As a result, many artists now choose to exhibit their work themselves rather than rely on galleries. Could you tell me, in broad strokes, about the path you took into curating, how long you have been practicing, and what motivates artists to curate?
Rhys Himsworth: I think it’s approximately 19 years now that I’ve been curating . I actually began as an art student who was interested in organizing my own shows rather than waiting for a gallery to take notice of me. I came after a generation of British artists who really had a sort of punk mentality in their approach to things and they would organize a lot of their own exhibitions – they had taken over warehouses and done exhibitions and got the notice of dealers and curators and and so on, and that was very much encouraged when I was at art school – they would get a lot of notoriety that way. In a way I had been inspired by that previous generation who curated their own shows; the way it came about, those shows had an immediacy about them and were a great way of saying something about the then current times. It was collaborative, and through involving other artists more could be said straightaway than if one were just operating on one’s own practice. I started curating shows, because to begin with, curating was a way of talking about issues that were prevalent. In addition to that, I was very young, and at the time I didn’t have an extensive body of work nor did I necessarily have the means to create an extensive body of work. However, I could, by collaborating with other artists, generate a body of work and put on an exhibition relatively quickly. That was certainly the beginning of how I came to curating: I was an artist and it was as a means to get my peers and my own work out there.
VG: So, as a student at that time, did you know that what you were doing was part of the curatorial practice, or was it more of the drive to make work, exhibit, and not necessarily having to wait to get picked-up by a gallery or agent.
RH: I think it was more of the latter, but curating certainly in my mind hadn’t become the kind of profession that it is today where many curators are very famous and many of them are highly influential in the art world. When I was working, it certainly seemed to me that they were often working in the background and I was probably a little naive and a little unaware as to the exact details of the profession. There was this mentality at Central Saint Martins of giving anything a go; that you didn’t necessarily need experience, you could simply try and do things, and so I didn’t feel inhibited by not having a great deal of academic background or professional experience in curating. I didn’t study curating, or art history, but that didn’t put me off. It was a case of just rolling up my sleeves and doing it. It really helped that there had been examples of artists who were doing the same thing.
VG: Curators have been increasingly seen as gatekeepers in the art world. What is your perspective on how curators fit into the system of the art world at present? What kind of power do they wield and what might be the consequences of their increased influence?
RH: I don’t really see them as gatekeepers. I see them and institutions as almost one of the same. Institutions are ultimately made up of people and if you want to work with institutions that means working with curators.I do think curatorial gatekeepers exist, but it has not been my experience. I have spoken to artists in Brazil, for example, say, that if you want to work with institutions in Brazil then you need to have gallery representation and that means they feel a lot of pressure to move to Sao Paulo and find a gallery to work with. They commented that in Berlin, for example, curators from institutions will work with you regardless of whether you are represented or not. So, I think gatekeepers exist differently in different cultural contexts. I think it can also be an issue in communities that are very small. If there are a small group of curators who often represent a whole group of people then whether or not you get to be a part of that conversation depends on your relationship with those curators.
VG: Would you describe yourself as both an artist and a curator in equal measure, despite coming to the curatorial practice after your artist practice began?
RH: I definitely see myself as an artist who curates, but not both equally. I know people who really see themselves as having a hybrid practice. I consider myself, first and foremost, to be an artist and then I do these things on the periphery which inform my practice and help benefit my practice, but are not necessarily the practice itself and so, for example, I’m writing a book chapter at the moment, in the past i’ve been curating and teaching and doing these other things, being on panels and so forth, but there are others who see themselves as very much having this hybrid practice, that they are a curator and artist in in sort of equal measure or that they are a writer, a curator, and an artist in equal measure. Whereas I consider myself to be an artist and then these other things that I do on the periphery. Curation has become something that I do out of service to the institution and community I move through.
VG: Could you speak a little more about your approach to curating?
RH: I try to be very light and invisible. I believe curating should not be heavy handed and should be in service of the artist. For me it’s not about directing the artist in any way but instead selecting artists you think are appropriate and then letting them be themselves and giving them full autonomy.
VG: In his essay ‘The Author as Producer’ , Walter Benjamin describes the shift from the author as producer; he argues that the role of the artist has changed from being a creator to an operator. As an artist-curator treading a very delicate intersection, what does this shift mean for the future of art?
RH: Actually, that reminds me of Duchamp, when he said that the artist in the future wont make art, they will point at things and they will become art. I think that you can see that with the history of the readymade and how that still dominates art today. You also see it in social practice, how art moves into spaces not previously considered the domain of art, such as Rikrit Tirivanija working with Food. I think in these times when many disciplines are changing and merging it will be inevitable that there will be these spaces between art production and curation that can prove difficult to define.
VG: In recent years, a parallel has also been drawn with the curatorial practice and the shift from curator as producer. If curators are also producers, is the artist still necessary? And if yes, then what kind of work should he or she produce? Hans Ulrich Obersit talks about curators having ‘authorship’. Therefore it is possible to see curators as artists. Would you say, as an artist who curates, that it’s possible to see curators as artists well? How do you view Oberist’s statement?
RH: I think we have to be very careful about authorship when it’s in the service of others. I think curators have authorship the way in which critics and historians have authorship, however for me the authorship is primarily about revealing the vision of the artist and supporting that. I think the opportunity for authorship really comes with these larger shows that have a distinct issue they wish to explore which is really an opportunity for the curators’ authorship to shine. However I think that, even then, the curation should not dominate the work of the artists.
VG: Does that create friction with the artists, who are arguably the primary stakeholders of the work?
RH: The friction that arises usually relates to the practicalities of what can be done. Artists will want to realize projects that may be too ambitious for what we can produce given the restraints we might find ourselves under and sometimes that can cause some friction.
VG: You have this duality of experience, because on the other hand, as an artist, you have also had to navigate working with curators. Have there been occasions where curators have attempted to shift the meaning of your work?
RH: Thankfully not, however there will be occasions where they have a curatorial suggestion that I just feel is not appropriate and that can be awkward. I have to be comfortable with the way my work is hung, the type of display, and so forth. Sometimes there have been suggestions that I just don’t feel comfortable with and I feel that takes away my authorship. Therefore, on occasion, I have had to stand my ground. In recent years, for example, most of the residences that I’ve been on have thankfully have not been heavy-handed when it comes to the curating. I recently did a residency at Künstlerhaus Bethanien, then had a solo show there as a result. The curating was very light in the sense that we had a free reign as artists to work with the space how we saw fit and the curators were there to organize and facilitate and to provide advice. Then a couple of years back I was also a resident at the International Studio & Curatorial Program. The way it worked at ISCP was that it was open to artists or curators to apply to. ISCP had their own curatorial team who would engage with the artists and have studio visits with them; they would also bring in visiting curators every couple of weeks or so. We had curators from the Guggenheim and from The Kitchen which is a gallery space in New York. The scope of what you could do there was really much determined, by yourself, you were selected to be there and then, once you were there, you really decided on your own direction of where you wanted to go. These experiences really informed me in my own curatorial work, wearing my curator hat with artists and residents, for example. I see my role as being there to support them because that’s how it’s tended to be on the residencies that I’ve done. I do know of artists who’ve taken part in residences where there has been some conflict between them and the curators in terms of which works are going to be selected and maybe the curators leading the artists in a certain way, the kind of work they should make and so forth, and they find that frustrating. I thankfully haven’t had too many negative experiences like that. There are times when I’m doing an exhibition and the curators make a suggestion and it’s difficult to be able to embrace that and sometimes have to resist and that can make for an awkward conversation.
VG: If the goal is to allow the work to speak for itself, how do we ensure the curator does not distort the original meaning of the work?
RH: This is a difficult question to answer but ultimately I feel that this will be best achieved by always having this issue in mind. If we are aware of what some of the problems can be then we are more aware of when we are in danger of making these mistakes.
VG: Do the same principles stand or do they change, whether we are dealing with a historical artist or genre compared to a contemporary, living artist?
RH: If we are dealing with a living artist then they can to some extent, defend themselves, So there can be this dialogue between the artist and curator and if the curator over steps, the artist can say so. This can’t happen with a dead artist so the question then becomes very pertinent. Having said that, a curator can add something to the work of a dead artist, or rather reveal something previously overlooked, that makes the work relevant for contemporary audiences.
VG: Circling back for just a second, do you then think that seeing curators as artists takes away from the authorship of the artist?
RH: Let me put it this way, I think that I’ve seen some shows where the curation is very heavy handed, that the work of the artist is lost and cant be separated from the curators vision; it appears, like the work of the artists are working in service of the curator’s goals and ambitions. I think that kind of curation can be problematic. I believe curation works well when, it’s a little bit like the metaphor of a theater production, the audience sees what’s happening on stage, and there’s a lot happening behind the stage that remains unseen to the audience and unaware of its significance, but when it works well the audience is focused on what’s happening on stage. Curating is like that for me. I think it works well when we’re not so aware of its presence and it allows the artwork and individual artists to shine.
VG: That really speaks to the kinds of power relations that exist between artists and curators, and how these relationships have changed over time. I suppose this is particularly evident in the ways in which the role of the artist has been transformed through the development of the art system. This puts artist-curators in a curious middle. That being said, that also gives you a really good vantage point on the dynamic between artists and curators because you walk between these two worlds. Would you describe the relationship between artists and curators at present as a partnership between two equal collaborators?
RH: I think a hierarchy still exists; that is my personal opinion. When we look back at history we look back at the biennials, for example, the most significant and probably the most curated of exhibitions, I think ultimately, it’s the work of the artists that should be remembered. That’s not to say that the role of the curator isn’t important, I believe that it is important. However, perhaps by definition, curating is a supportive role in the way that teaching is a supportive role. When students go out there into the world it’s significant who’s taught them and what they’ve been taught. At the end of the day, the individuals are the most responsible for their successes in whatever field they go on into; their mentors and teachers have acted in a supportive role in them achieving that. I think that there are some parallels with curation – not that it doesn’t have creativity or authorship, not that it isn’t incredibly important – in the sense that it is in support of something that’s larger.
VG: I suppose this is the same position you take when you are wearing your curatorial hat?
RH: Well, I have also been teaching, so there are a couple of streams that I have in terms of curating. My most recent role as Director of the Painting and Printmaking program at VCUQatar saw me curating primarily when working with students; so my role is very much as an advisor, and taking on those aspects of the project management that maybe they don’t have experience of and being there for them when they run into difficulties. I worked with my students in the curation of their exhibitions. The other aspect that I am involved in is curating a number of different programs. We set up the artist-in-residence program at VCUQatar, which I then oversaw. We also set up Fanoon: Center for Printmedia Research, a printmaking publishing program that would work with local, regional, and international artists for the realization of projects in print. with ‘Fanoon: Center for print media research’, which is the publishing program, it was really about selecting artists and then really letting them do their own thing as much as possible. I would sometimes guide artists, introduce and recommend different mediums or other materials and processes that they would find useful or interesting, but they always had the final say and do what it was that they wanted. I didn’t want a lot of control over that as a curator because, unlike curating in a more traditional sense, where you’re selecting objects and you’re selecting artworks and you know what you’re working with, we don’t know what it is that they’re going to produce and we’re not giving them a brief, there isn’t a topic or theme they’re responding to, we select the artist based on their body of work for them to engage with print. It’s really open; we don’t really know what they’re going to do. So my approach is quite invisible and I am very careful to let the artists be themselves. Within the local community, I also acted as an advisor and selector for an artists residency program run by the Qatar Museums Authority, which involved the selection of resident artists. I have also curated panels of international artists to speak in conferences. For the Tasmeem Doha art and design conference, a conference hosted within our university, I was responsible for curating a number of student, faculty and local practitioner exhibitions. The exhibitions of local practitioners included many galleries from Doha and architects practicing in the region such as Rem Koolhaas. In 2013, I wrote a report for the Qatar Foundation that looked at artists communities in an international context. While it was not a conventional curatorial project, it involved selecting and interviewing approximately 150 different institutions across approximately 30 international cities in order to understand why some cities or places are more successful at building and sustaining artists communities.
VG: As an artist who curates do you think you have an advantage over curators in how you approach working with artists?
RH: Perhaps. I curate a series of artists to engage with print to make editions and projects. Being an artist myself I am aware of the technical limitations and possibilities in a way that is perhaps more tangible than a curator who is not an artist. I am also more acutely aware of what is practically possible within a certain timeline and this awareness is particularly useful in the type of curating I am involved in where the work has not yet been conceived or produced. I would say that, whilst it may not be an advantage, I do appreciate the way in which curating informs my practice as an artist and vice versa.
VG: How about inversely, as someone so involved in their own work, does curating the work of others pose a challenge to you?
RH: I suppose it gives me an opportunity to live vicariously and that reduces pressure on my own practice to feel like I should be moving in multiple areas simultaneously. If that makes sense? The biggest challenge it poses to me is on my time as any time spent curating is time I am not spending on my own practice. I think this is probably something a lot of curators who are artists will feel- that at times it feels like they are not doing either thing well because of the time pressures but if it works well the different practices can complement each other.
VG: In the current postcolonial, politically polarized world, identity politics in particular is at a fever pitch in the art world. With that in mind, how do you approach curating, your artistic practice, and your work as an educator for the longest time in the Middle East, a region that has its fair share of postcolonial challenges?
RH: I am originally from Wales, a country that sits in the shadow of its much larger neighbor, England, all part of the larger United Kingdom. My art practice is informed by my experience growing up Welsh in a small rural community, and then having moved and lived in a number of different countries, being transplanted into a very international set of experiences. I feel this gives me a perspective of both the local and the global at the same time. I think this informs my art practice and curating in different ways. In my art practice I make work that stems from an interest in industrialization – Wales was the first country to become industrialized – and how the narratives that stem from industrialization are echoed and play out in contemporary culture, both from the perspective of being Welsh, and in an international context where industrialization has spread across the rest of the globe and manifested in different ways. In terms of my curating I think my identity helps inform the need to understand things from multiple perspectives as well as understanding that there are multiple narratives and metanarratives within a subject and that we as curators can help to bring lesser known narratives to the surface. During my time as Director of the Painting and Printmaking department at VCU Qatar, we developed an artist-in-residency program that brought in practitioners that better represented the region as well as non-western art practices; that’s where curatorially it’s not just selecting artists that we think are interesting but also artists that can fulfill a need in terms of teaching. Because the faculty was mostly Western in origin, it’s an opportunity to bring in artists from more diverse backgrounds and bring in these different perspectives. The artists that were selected for the residency came from varying heritages, including Palestine, Iraq, the Philippines, China, Bolivia, South Korea, as well as the United States. Armed with an awareness that – as an western institution – our mediums and methodologies of reaching out to potential candidates meant it was challenging to build a non-western application pool. It was something we needed to pay particular attention to and make a concerted effort to find suitable candidates who could act as teachers and role models for our students. In selecting residents, our students were also asked to provide feedback on the artists we brought into the program. It is this feedback system that enabled us to together build a cohort of artists-in-residence who were best able to contribute to the student community. We are always thinking about whether these artists are going to relate to our students well and are they going to be interesting teachers and then, from a from an artistic point of view, are they doing something that’s a little bit on the periphery of what we do in the department, so it might be like working with painting as installation or it might be the relationship of printmaking to architecture, or it might be social practice or it might be working with ceramics. So they usually have a foundation within painting and printmaking, which is what our program is centered on, but they might be bringing in these other media and disciplines and way of thinking, so that’s a consideration as well. Then with Fanoon, we have multiple objectives. One is that we’re trying to move the medium of print forward and talk about its relevance in the 21st century. The other is that we’re trying to bring in artists who don’t use print historically within their practice, maybe they’re practice involves drawing or sculpture or painting and we think they could benefit from an interaction with print and we think that printmaking could become more interesting by having them collaborate with it and so that’s another one of our objectives. We are also trying to benefit the students, who will be artists in the future; so it was crucial to bring in artists who will inspire them, will motivate them, who can teach them, and that maybe we’ll do projects that could be collaborative in nature, so they might require a number of assistants in their projects realization and then we can bring in the students to help with that. Further to all of that, we were trying to have a collection of works for the university and the broader community, so we have these multiple objectives that we’re trying to achieve. Being based in the Middle East, we put a lot of effort into working with local, regional, and international artists and trying to make sure that we’re balanced in terms of gender, in terms of the places in the world that the artists come from, the issues within the practice that they’re working with. We have all these multiple factors, which go into that process, and so my role as the curator is really about setting the mission of the program and then we have quite a democratic process for how we select the artists so they can be nominated by faculty and by students and then we collect a shortlist and then we present that to the whole department of faculty and students and both the Faculty and the students vote and then we go and try and solicit those artists and invite them to be part of the program, and so my my role is really developing that apparatus and that system. Therefore I would say that for me collaboration is important in curating, especially if it involves serving a community which one is not from. It is tempting to pursue your own agenda but in my role I think it’s important to consult and involve the opinion of local stakeholders. Then in 2013, I was fortunate to be the Lead Principal Investigator for a National Priorities Research Program Award. The purpose of the grant was to design an artists’ studio complex for local artists in Qatar, and more broadly, to study what it is that drives certain places to become hubs for artistic practice outside of a western metropolitan model. Learning from local voices was integral to this project; together with my fellow researchers, we took part in a series of focus groups and interviews with approximately 60 local practitioners in Qatar. The research was further augmented by visiting 25 countries to conduct around 200 field studies. This project highlighted the value of diversity and enabled me to better understand the nuanced needs of the different local communities. In a lot of ways, my global perspective was born of this project; I learned the value of digging deeper and allowing others – be they students, artists, curators, or cultural managers – to take agency over their own narrative and lead the conversation. Therefore I saw my role as curator as to facilitate the voices of others.
VG: As an artist with all these years of and varied experiences in curating, do you still think that curators in the traditional sense still have a role to play in your artistic practice?
RH: I would say that that’s something that I would like, and I anticipate that happening in the future of my artistic practice. I think that when an artist has a body of work over number of years or decades, that’s when it can be really interesting to work with the curator because they can maybe start to see threads within your work that perhaps you were less aware of, and they can help to change the narrative of your of your work in a way that is fulfilling and interesting.
VG: Steffon Davis authored a marketing book called The Rise of the Curator Class where he describes “pairing big ideas in marketing with the popular activity of content curation” and positions the act of curation as a “humanization” movement that is restructuring the internet. These days, everything is curated: coffee beans, towels, you name it. Everyone is a curator now as well, from make-up moguls down to instagram influencers. Curating has become mainstream jargon now, a buzzword of the current times, if you will. This also coincides with – interestingly, while there were formal studies of curating as early as 1967, they were few and far between – in recent years, curatorial studies has gained traction, and more and more institutions are offering formal academic programs in curating. You are an educator yourself, but you have come to curating with practical experiences that have replaced or have stood in place of what is now formal education in curating. All that being said, would you say that formal education is necessary to become a curator?
RH: On balance, I would still recommend the academic route, particularly for curators. Being that I’m involved in academia, it is fair to say that there are so many journals that you can read and so many shows that you can go and see and there’s nothing to stop you from getting hold of a disused shop front and curating a show, particularly in these times of corona where there’s a lot of businesses that have gone out of business and there’s a lot of empty properties that you can take over and do interesting things with. And then with the Internet, there are huge opportunities, but I don’t think it’s a substitute for academia. I think these things should be done in conjunction with academia. But academia is not going to be this magic bullet that will provide you with everything you need. You still need to have that mentality of going out and doing things and making things happen.