Continued from page 1
Underpinning these moves is a sense of urgency within the fine arts world to respond more directly to audience desires. As the chief engagement officer at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts (MIA) observes in The Wall Street Journal: “It’s really a culture shift in museums for the curators to pay attention not just to what’s significant art historically, but also what’s perhaps on trend.” Data-mining tools like beacons and visitor surveys are shaping decisions on everything from exhibit design to donor outreach to curatorial decisions.
But this approach also has been controversial. Some museums, like the Frick Collection in New York, are opting out of technological upgrades, maintaining that galleries should be “places of quiet contemplation.” Another popular objection is that an audience-first approach dumbs down the material. Responding to the idea of crowdsourcing in The Wall Street Journal, one curator says: “You’re left with 10 paintings that may or may not make sense together… or may or may not teach anything about the history of art—it’s not the stuff of knowledge or scholarship.”
In the end, however, the question may not to be whether to include 21st century enhancements, but to what degree. Art galleries have it harder than most brick-and-mortar venues, since in many cases, there is no difference between what people can view in person and from home. Consider the Mona Lisa: The only reason to see it in person is to prove you were “really” there.
The second major challenge that arts leaders must confront is generational. From the American High through the retirement of the G.I. Generation, admission revenue from these events grew steadily fueled by rising attendance numbers. But beginning in the 1970s, the arts entered a new phase: Admission revenue kept rising briskly—but now due mainly to higher ticket prices, which concealed a deceleration in attendance. Since 2000, price hikes have not been able to compensate for a shrinking pool of ticket buyers: Annual revenue growth has halved from about 5% in real dollars per year to 2.5%.
The ‘70s-era slowdown coincided with the ascension of participatory forms of entertainment like rock and folk music. Younger generations, starting with Boomers, have thrived on a pop culture that invites audiences to join the fun—making the formal distance that characterizes the fine arts feel alien and outmoded by contrast. Nowadays, adults don’t patronize galleries to see a certain exhibit, but rather to socialize. As the efforts to increase engagement suggest, it may be that the only way the fine arts can revive enthusiasm is to lose the very trappings that set it apart.