Frida Rusnak

In 2022, 41 contemporary art curators, researchers, and museum directors from 24 different countries were awarded to attend the CIMAM 2022 Annual Conference. The CIMAM 2022 Annual Conference, titled "The Attentive Museum. Permeable Practices for a Common Ground", was held in Mallorca (Balearic Islands), Spain on 11–13 November, hosted by Es Baluard Museu d'Art Contemporani de Palma.

Frida Rusnak's Conference Report

The topic of this conference is timely: Creating more attentive and inclusive art spaces is important to ensure that museums become and remain important in our societies. In my practice, I have found the most challenging and genuine initiatives that push for more inclusive and attentive art spaces often start outside the art institutions, through artist-run initiatives or collaborations with smaller art organizations. I was interested to see how these topics were tackled within the museums themselves.

I found the second day of the conference the most useful, as the speakers on the topic “Unlocking History and New Narratives” all challenged museums to rethink their purpose and role in society: From archives and spaces of presentation to places where history is acted out. In such a museum history is not only retold or critically examined but also created for the future. The talks by Clémentine Deliss, and especially artist Sethembile Msezane left me hopeful, energetic, and eager to explore alternative models.

On the third day, titled “Learning from the Community: Collective Actions in the Face of Emergency”, Emily Jacir (Dar Jacir for Art and Research) discussed the importance of adapting to the needs of the people you work with, whether they are artists or neighbours. I found Meenakshi Gopinath’s (Women in Security Conflict, Management, and Peace) talk on the ethics of care insightful and useful. Filmmaker Philip Rizk spoke about how art institutions function as channels of attention and called for urgent action. His powerful statement, which I agree with, is that we must take responsibility for social and environmental justice – because we can.

I wish the topics raised in the morning sessions had been followed up on throughout the day. In the afternoon visits to artists and galleries, I would have loved to meet local artists or art spaces who work with collective or collaborative approaches, social change, new narratives, institutional learning, or in other ways aim to challenge the established art world structures. This could have served to connect local specifics to the universal topics that were being addressed. Instead, the organized visits seemed completely detached from the conference topic. At no fault to the artists and galleries that generously opened their doors, the sudden change risked undermining the programme. It was also a missed opportunity, as I am sure there are local curators who could take on the task of organizing more relevant studio visits, perhaps even connecting artists and curators with similar fields of interest. As this is something we do for visiting curators at Oslo Open, I realize it requires substantial effort, but with potential benefits to the local arts scene.

Working in Norway, where museums are publicly funded and are allowed to exist at an arm’s length from both the government and the commercial market, I appreciated the chance to hear from artists and art professionals working in very different contexts, such as Bethlehem, Cairo, Addis Ababa, and Hong Kong. I also appreciated the chance to talk to delegates from outside Europe and understand more about the different contexts we work in. The organizers were exceptional hosts and created an atmosphere where it was easy to connect with new people, from the coffee breaks to the evening events. However, social arenas are not places for tough discussions or conflict. Aside from one workshop session on day 2, which was cut short, there was no space to explore disagreements around the role of the museum, or the arguments put forward by the speakers.

As a museum outsider, I wish there had been more space for finding out what museum directors and museum curators think about the issues that were raised and what actions they wish to take. The conference was a place to network, and listen, but it could have also been a place to share ideas and discuss different approaches. I suppose I could have taken more responsibility for the conversations I participated in, asked more of the questions I have been pondering out loud (and done more research on places and people so I would know what programme sessions to skip). But the conference format tends to make one passive, lean into the crowd, and follow the pace of the group, in the same way, small talk often seeks out consensus and common ground. Knowing how different views there are on what a museum intrinsically should be, I would have liked to see more constructive disagreement come to the surface.

I do believe that there is a common feeling of urgency among the delegates – that there is much at stake. When we go back to our jobs it is easy to get lost in the day-to-day activities, the business as usual. How can we find a better balance, that allows us to work for the changes we wish to see? A conference can certainly not give all the answers, and I have found new questions that I will bring into my work.