What is the role of the curator?

"I look back, in this very old-fashioned way, to the original meaning of the term 'curate': the idea that a curator is someone who takes care of things. To me, the idea of taking care of a work of art means to show it in a context where it's somehow going to be alive, to be allowed to do what it does well."
Ralph Rugoff (1)

The role the curator plays is dependent on the context. Curators were traditionally responsible for reinterpreting collections by "curating" a selection of the work for exhibition. Curators are generally responsible for collections but there are more and more independent curators working on a wide range of projects. When embarking on any project consider what role you will play as the curator and what it means in your context.

"The role of the curator is about structuring access and mediating work – curators by definition have the time to explore work that is not always available to spectators. Curators bring work together from disparate areas and structure it in an accessible manner."
Peter Weibel (2)

Institutional and Independent – the different roles of curators

The role of the curator is related to a collection. This collection can be physical (as in a specific museum collection) or more open and conceptual (as in films by women). To curate an exhibition in any context you will be required to have an idea of your collection or the area of work you will draw from. For instance your collection could be international work available in the UK, or it could be British artists animation. These exist as a collection despite not being housed in a central location. In this way all curating evolves around a collection if it is an idea (an area of practice) or a specific archive (a collection that you will select work from).

In this sense the initially contradictory title "Independent Curator" can be understood. Independent curators working with a variety of organisations and specialisations are increasingly common. Unlike institutional curators they have more freedom to travel, see work and organise shows without being tied down to office hours or other institutional commitments. This role however can lack engagement with the locality of exhibitions and risk losing relevance for different audiences. Despite their freedom independent curators are generally dependent on institutions to host work and support their projects.

In terms of curating artists' film and video, as the collections are limited and rarely tied to an exhibition space, the divide between independent and institutional curators is slim. Most curators of artists film and video draw on wide and varied collections in the UK and abroad. The main distinction between these types of curatorial practice is between curators affiliated with an space and exhibition programme (be it at a gallery, cinema, museum, etc.) and those who work with a range of organisations on a project by project basis.

Programming or Curating?

These two terms are used to refer to presenting film and video and express different ideas of what presenting work entails. Programming comes from cinemas where a programmer would fill up the schedule with works from a distributor. Curating on the other hand comes from the art world where a curator would be responsible for organising exhibitions of work from collections.

These two terms reveal more about the divide between the cinema world and the art world than about the difference in what these two roles involve. There is a status difference between the two terms that refers to the conception that programmers just mechanically fill slots whereas curators actively seek to engage with contemporary debates when choosing work. This lack of respect and regard for programming and its mechanical connotations has seen the introduction of the term curating or curator for people showing film and video. There is an increasing tendency for cinema and festival staff to use the name curator to gain respect for the careful work needed to create a good film and video programme.

The meaning of these two terms merges and there is artistry and negligence in both. But which term should you use? The added responsibility allotted to the term "curating" and its links to notions of making an argument for work can help to clarify what showing work is really about. Especially when showing artists' film or video the term curating brings a useful set of connotations and expectations. These connotations and associations with the term curator convey the type of exhibition the audience is being presented with and the type of engagement required for the work. The term is also universally understood in the art world (galleries, museums, funders, artists, etc.), who don't have much understanding or respect for cinemas and the art of programming.

Curating not filling a programme

What can be learnt by programmers from curators? Both roles involve understanding the audience and the local and broader context within which you are presenting work. Despite the closeness of the two roles and the somewhat superficial differences between the two terms, programmers can enrich their presentation of work and the audience's experience by thinking about how what they do relates to curating work. By claiming the title of curator you also take responsibility for a broader range of issues and concerns that any strong programme will already be aware of.

The key difference lies in the idea of filling a schedule and curating a project. The two roles are closely related and can learn from each other. Programmers can learn from curators to take a more active role in relating to work and the audience to broader social and cultural concerns. The demands on a programmer's time and need for results often make it difficult to concentrate on seeing and curating work, forcing them to take a more distanced position. Curators can learn from programme's the responsibilities and commitment required to deliver a continuous programme that is relevant to their immediate and local audience.