A new generation is taking over the world’s leading museums. In the past six months, more than 50 institutions—including some of the world’s largest—have hired new directors.
Italy’s ministry of culture appointed 20 new leaders for its state museums in August. In London, the British Museum, the National Gallery, the National Portrait Gallery, Tate Britain and Tate Modern have appointed or are searching for new directors. In the US, the Brooklyn Museum and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, are among around 20 institutions welcoming new chiefs this autumn.
Although some things remain the same (many of these directors are white and male), the next generation will face new challenges, including shrinking public funds and changing visitor demographics.
We spoke to four directors about their vision for the future, and will publish a new interview each day. — Julia Halperin
After 22 years at the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) in his native Toronto (first as chief curator, then as director), Matthew Teitelbaum returned to Boston in August to become the new director of the Museum of Fine Arts (MFA). Teitelbaum started his curatorial career at the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston, where he worked from 1989 to 1993—the year before his predecessor, Malcolm Rogers, was appointed director of the MFA. “Any time I can be called the new guard, I’ll jump at the chance,” he said in a phone interview.
The Art Newspaper: You said that one of your first tasks would be to walk around the collection with the curators. Has anything surprising come out of that?
Teitelbaum: In an institution of this scale there are some spaces that have been gloriously attended to and some that have been lost to time—there was a greater variation than I expected. And the curators are hungry to get into the older spaces and rethink them.
Having walked through with the curators I’ve been amazed—again not surprised but amazed—by their commitment to the objects and their understanding of what is in the collection. There are people with extraordinary expertise throughout the whole building. It’s very exciting to be with “content people” in that way.
One of the things that I’ve noticed—I’ve seen it and felt it—is how really extraordinary the collection is. I marvel because I don’t think I’ve gone to a single room where there isn’t a group of works that I thought were just truly extraordinary.
So there hasn't been a point where you've thought, “Oh, we could switch that work out, put something else in”?
Now that’s different. One [question] is about the quality of the collection, and the other is about the quality of the presentation. So yes, on the second point, I’ve had a number of moments where I’ve thought, “Boy we should rethink how this part of the collection is displayed”.
There is inconsistency in how we communicate with our visitor. Some of the galleries are very much attuned to creating a narrative, a conversation with the visitor about the importance of the works of art, and others are maybe a bit more academic and closed in their communication. What is the display strategy to create real engagement with our audiences? That’s where we need to work.
How has the role of the museum in the community changed?
That is the question you have to ask yourself when you come into a new situation: What is the role of THIS museum in THIS community. There are two ways to answer that. One is generally: how have museums changed? And the other is how is the relationship between your NEW museum and its community different from the previous museum to ITS community.
The reason I make that distinction is because I’m thinking about both. I start with the assumption that every institution grows out of its local conditions. The MFA grew out of Boston in the 1870s, and the AGO grew out of Toronto at the turn of the century, 1900 to 1910. Their position in the world, their links to commerce, their relationship to immigration—all those things that create a city made them very different. The MFA Boston from the very beginning had this ambition to be an institution of the world and the AGO in Toronto was created for its community. In Boston, I think about how we can be both—an international museum and an institution of its community, because we have to find a balance.
My own personal view is that museums must become places that have points of view and ideas, because people are hungry for that. They want places to be with each other to experience and share those ideas.
Do you mean that museums should take a specific stance on issues?
Audience are coming to museums much more knowing and curious than ever before, and we need to anticipate what some of their questions are. We need to be able to answer: “Why should they be interested in this?”
I’ll give you a hypothetical, because it’s not something we’re actually engaging with yet: I don’t think we need to take a position on the refugee crisis, we don’t need to have a point of view about every issue that comes before us. But the refugee crisis reflects on issues of identity, of migration, of many of the experiences of the visitors who we want to come to the MFA Boston, people who bring different ideas of what home is. So we have to be an institution that engages actively with that.
Do you have a favourite place in the museum yet?
My pilgrimage work of art is Turner’s Slave Ship. It was before I joined the MFA and it still is, I often take a route that takes me past the painting when I go from the front door to my office.
What is it about that work that keeps you coming back?
It’s very alive and it’s filled with contradictions. And that’s sort of life isn’t it?
