Dear _____,

I was asked to reflect on my six years serving as director of the Centre d’art contemporain – la synagogue de Delme, but I will also look beyond this specific period.

Located in the rural countryside of Lorraine, between Metz and Nancy, this art center is the perfect example of what it means to curate and exhibit contemporary art practices far from cultural “centers.” This has generated all sorts of situations with the local audience which, eventually, often made us to wonder if we are really doing this work for others, to bring them the best of cutting-edge art, the art of our time? Or are we doing this for our own pleasure? More and more, we hear that institutions should exhibit what people want to see, instead of what curators wish to propose. In a time of instant availability and easy access, art—like everything else—should be easily accessible and not too difficult to understand. Although I agree that art discourse can sometimes become absurdly unfathomable, art should still be presented the way it emerges from the artist’s mind. Operating a selection between what is immediately understandable and what remains deeply opaque is scary. And I saw this happen. Not in Delme, though, because I have always believed that in a society where the mass is generally led toward the bottom—especially through mainstream culture consumption—contemporary art institutions of this scale stand as the last, though imperfect, bastion of criticality, free thinking, and open-ended propositions for the future. I feel stupid writing this sentence because I have read it so many times and it always gets on my nerves. And yet, it is only in such spaces that we have the possibility of creating these new narratives that are dreadfully lacking and slowly disappearing throughout society. “Not for much longer,” a pessimistic mind might say, but what do we know? I agree that this will be hard to keep resisting as long as the current form of capitalism persists.  We are helplessly weak and hate ourselves for that, but I want to hope for a better way to share all art—not just the decorative or entertaining.

Being appointed the director of this venue came as a blessing for me. When I was a student in the late 2000s, I fantasized about the challenge of programming in remote French art centers such as CIAP Vassivière, Centre d’art de Pougues-Les-Eaux or CAC – la synagogue de Delme. No doubt, it was the last moment of the golden age of art centers in France. The contrast between the rural atmosphere and the most avant-garde forms of art was deeply inspiring to me. I was genuinely driven by the idea of presenting art to a public that never goes to galleries or even contemporary art museums. The beauty of the synagogue’s building—its awkward and unexpected presence in this small village—was also very attractive to artists. This gave me the opportunity to invite some of what I believe to be the best artists working today, some whom I otherwise would not have dared to invite. Consequently, the art exhibited there was at times generous, complex, and challenging—radically conceptual but always connected to the reality of our time, whether in Delme or elsewhere.

The late 2000s and early 2010s also marked the glory days of the curator. As a student in a curatorial program, I thought it would be the best job—after studying art history—to work with living artists, participate in the making of art and contribute to what might become historically significant in the future. This was the moment when Anton Vidokle wrote “Art Without Artists”, [1] curatorial study programs blossomed and Texte zur Kunst published its “The Curators” issue [2], featuring an amusing portrait of Massimiliano Gioni on the cover. In discussions, art professionals were deeply concerned about the possibility of curators replacing artists. Curating was a serious trend, I think most of us secretly wanted to become HUO (Haha!). Luckily, things didn't turn out that way—probably because everyone could be a self-proclaimed curator, there were simply too many on the market, and it remained a precarious job for many. Of course, the profession didn’t disappear, but it no longer feels as central as it once did. Surprisingly, this gradual lack of interest in the figure of the curator went largely unnoticed. I did not read anything about it until last summer, when Spike published Daniel Baumann’s “What Happened to the Curator?” [3]—an interesting short text on the struggles of a curator today. Whereas a curator of his standing should have been in an even better position after leaving Kunsthalle Zurich, Baumann speaks of not having plans within the system of public institutions, and suggests this may be for the best: “No wonder we are curators on the verge of a nervous breakdown.” He also observes that the new generation of curators cares little about institutional positions, choosing instead to follow different paths in curating. I think he summed the situation up very accurately, and this was the mindset I had when I left Delme—thinking that institutions might no longer be the most rewarding places for curators. But isn’t it still our duty,  to fight for the freedom of creation in public institutions that belong to the common good? To guarantee the general public free access to the creation of their time, whether or not they enjoy what is exhibited? And not leave this to the privileged audience of private foundations? Sometimes, I feel like giving up and focusing only on curating small shows in underground project spaces, as was done behind the Iron Curtain, in Prague or Zagreb, when official art was the only accepted form of art. But how does that help on a larger scale, beyond the artists’ community? Perhaps the future will tell.

Best,
Benoît Lamy de La Chapelle