National Museum of Fine Arts of Santiago, Chile: Interview with Curators.
The Unruled Column
By Kekena Corvalán
We interviewed Gloria Cortés Aliaga and Eva Cancino Fuentes, the curators of the exhibition Luchas por el Arte. Mapa de Relaciones y Disputas por la Hegemonía del Arte (1843-1933) (Struggles for Art. Map of Relations and Disputes for the Hegemony of Art, 1843-1933), currently on display at the Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes in Santiago, Chile.
The exhibition Luchas por el Arte has been a hot topic of debate for several months due to curatorial aesthetic decisions, such as removing frames from the paintings and arranging the works to create a sense of continuity among them, which have sparked intense discussions. In addition to removing the frames, the absence of labels identifying the works has raised significant questions and criticism, adding another layer of intrigue to the exhibition’s controversy.
Specifically, claims suggest that the institutional proposal aims to manipulate the works of well-known “exponents of Chilean art.” This contention was sparked by a letter published in El Mercurio (Newspaper) from Matías Mori, the grandson of one of the exhibited artists, Camilo Mori Serrano (Valparaíso, 1896- Santiago, 1973), stating that his grandfather’s pieces are in an “aberrant state, “intended to “establish the ideological curatorial objective“ of the exhibition.
One of the fundamental aspects of this exhibition, which I had the opportunity to experience in situ last December, is its interesting conceptual development, which results from a rigorous research process undertaken by the curators.
Through this publication, we aim to contribute to understanding the reactionary sectors involved, in contrast to more contemporary and revisionist perspectives, by giving voice to the curators, two women with extensive and recognized national, regional, and international experience in the art world.
KC: Your work is always exceedingly enriching, whether viewing this as a case of art/community or art/society interrogation. We would like to know about the historical research process for this exhibition. How long did it take? What difficulties and challenges did you encounter?
GC: The research is deeply connected to our trajectories as art historians. Most of the archives on display are part of my 25 years of work in this field, which we have made available in this exhibition. They have never before been presented together, revealing a narrative not documented in Chilean historiography and highlighting the power dynamics established within the art system during its first 100 years of formation and development.
Moreover, the research stems from an understanding of the museum’s collection. Generally, the collection is idealized as representing the panorama of a grand art history. However, the collection lacks many of the emblematic works described by that same art history, which is primarily written from a male perspective. It contains numerous historical and representational gaps we have attempted to address through recent acquisitions.
Working with these “present” gaps through their absence within a collection of 6,000 works, many of which are unfamiliar to the public, presents significant challenges. What is exhibited, how is it displayed, and in what contexts?
From this foundational reflection on the collection and the archives at our disposal, we set out to approach the exhibition as a workspace—a display of works that engage in dialogue with one another from various perspectives: histories, images, and interconnections, where the archives construct the very narrative fabric.
ECF: As Gloria mentioned, our research converged in the design and development of Luchas por el Arte. I have pursued this study with other colleagues since 2008, aiming to analyze the role of institutions within the realm of Chilean art.
This perspective had not been sufficiently represented in museum institutions, and we felt it was essential to incorporate it into an exhibition that also draws on archives to give voice to the agents of the field from that era, illustrating the nature of relationships among the few individuals who comprised the artistic circuit over a century ago. The exhibition also sought to include individuals who have been marginalized in historiography, whom we have been able to identify and incorporate into the MNBA collection through our research efforts. In this sense, Luchas por el Arte highlights the research that culminates in the acquisition of works for the collection, which reflects gaps in both artworks and artists while also integrating the most recognized pieces according to historiography and the audiences that visit us.
KC: On a personal level, how does this exhibition relate to each of your careers? At what point does it arrive for you?
GC: Important moments are unfolding for the museum under the current leadership of Varinia Brodsky, the first woman to direct this museum in a democratic context and the third in its 140-year history. She is rethinking institutional paradigms, opening up to new territories, and incorporating innovation across various aspects, including editorial programming and the structure of work teams, among other things. It is also crucial to reassess my paradigms; collective work, curatorial practices embedded within specialized and non-specialized communities, and attentive listening are essential while maintaining a critical perspective and exploring the possibilities the collection offers through historiography and cultural studies. I increasingly resonate with the concepts of counter-publics and how we understand the notion of audiences within the realm of cultural institutions, especially museums. Luchas por el Arte emphasizes these notions regarding which discourses occupy the public sphere and whom we wish to include in new debates and narratives without neglecting those communities or audiences already drawn to the museum. This includes digital users, children, youth, dissenting voices, and countless other communities that do not feel engaged by the institution. It is about reclaiming the human scale of the museum.
When we inaugurated (en)Clave Masculino1 in 2016, a similar debate emerged regarding feminist research that disrupted the museum through the study of the collection. An interesting phenomenon was that, following the exhibition, the female counter-public (women and feminized bodies) increased to over 50%. This indicates that our work has immediate effects on individuals and likely long-term impacts, especially on children or marginalized communities. I am interested in pursuing this path ten years after joining the MNBA. It took me another 15 years to reach this point. It has been a long journey, and today is a time of significant personal reassessment regarding how, in what forms, and across which diverse territories I can continue to give substance to my work, both inside and outside the museum.
ECF: I greatly appreciate the opportunity to work and think from the MNBA2 collection alongside Gloria, exploring new ways to exhibit the works. The museum’s collection plays a pivotal role in shaping our research and exhibition process. When two substantial lines of research converge and engage in dialogue, I believe our work and the research developed at the MNBA reflect a sustained process over time, with impacts on our visiting audiences.
The chance to critically examine how the artistic imaginary of the country and its narratives have been constructed is a significant challenge and opportunity. It allows us to revisit the collection in light of its strengths and weaknesses, a process that is crucial for the museum’s continuous self-reflection on its strengths and weaknesses.
I believe the exhibition arises from an attempt to situate critical perspectives, proposing a rights-based approach that has been developing for approximately a decade. This effort has been amplified by Director Varinia Brodsky, who has encouraged and promoted such revisions and new challenges aimed at contemporizing the museum, striving to build an inclusive institution for many of its visitors while enhancing the care and management of its heritage.
KC: Beyond the controversy generated by certain aspects of this exhibition and recognizing a solid connection between your curatorial practices and territorialized policies and epistemologies, what do you believe is the key learning this experience imparts?
GC: Many questions arise. To what extent can we attempt to modify what tradition has established for understanding a fine arts museum? Can the museum unlearn its existing narratives? How willing are audiences, whose acceptance is crucial, to accept a transformation of the museum’s paradigms? Who are we addressing? In light of these questions and the reactions from segments of the visiting public, what strategies should the museum undertake for narrative detachment alongside the diversity of its communities?
ECF: This leaves us with several reflections. In addition to the questions Gloria raises, it is essential to ask: What is the role of visual arts institutions in constructing social imaginaries? What is the significance of the symbolic in our current culture? Moreover, as Gloria points out, who are we addressing from the museum? Which communities should we include in our reflections? And for whom are these discussions meaningful?
All images are views of the exhibition Luchas por el arte, Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes. ©MNBA / Romina Díaz.
