Museum Exhibitions and the Political Economy of Exchange
Temporary exhibitions shared between museums are labour-, capital-, and time-intensive undertakings, and employ increasingly specialised actors, techniques, and infrastructures. They are used to strengthen international diplomacy and generate revenue for museums and their locales. Museum studies has long been concerned with permanent collections, while the exhibition industry—a core part of museum programming—remains undertheorized. Yet a serious structural analysis of how circulating exhibitions are produced can illuminate conditions beyond the museum that determine object im/mobility, the geopolitics of loans, and the power relations that govern shared practices.
This session invites proposals that grapple with the political economy of museum exhibitions, from the nineteenth century to the present. How has international legislation shaped norms for temporarily importing objects (e.g., barriers to entry for new art forms, government indemnity schemes, responses to the climate crisis)? How has free trade or protectionist policies (e.g. multilateral agreements such as NAFTA, EU, or BRICS) impacted object movement? How have geopolitical tensions or reconfigurations of national policies (e.g., the Brexit vote, armed conflict) contoured the design of exhibitions?
What objects circulate through these policies, which actors (beyond curators) determine object itineraries, and which audiences gain or lose access? We are particularly interested in proposals that go beyond the discussion of single exhibitions to draw out relationships between the international norms of museum exhibition-making and external policy, scrutinising the economy of the leisure industry, revealing the asymmetries of global circulation circuits, and challenging established narratives of centre and periphery.
Session Convenors:
Matilde Cartolari, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität / Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte, Munich
Nushelle de Silva, Fordham University, New York, USA
Speakers:
Charlotte Rottiers, ETH Zurich
Producing Belgian Art Exhibitions Abroad (1926-1931): Diplomats and the Association Belge de Propaganda Artistique à L’Etranger
The Association belge de propagande artistique à l’étranger (1926-1931), located within the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, organised a series of exhibitions on Belgian Art abroad, including in Bern (1926), Grenoble (1927); Paris (1928), Rouen (1929) and a travelling exhibition in the USA (1929-1931). Its mission was “to expand foreign trade to the fields of ideas, the arts and literature.”
This paper frames the series of exhibitions organised by the Association as the next step in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ export of national identity abroad to enhance its position as an industrial and economic power. In the first stage (1900-1914), purpose-built diplomatic buildings visualised Belgium through national architectural styles and building materials, targeting emerging regions of economic interest to Belgium as the Middle East and East Asia. In the Interwar period, the focus shifted to art, (a) displaying national art in Belgian embassies and (b) organising art exhibitions abroad. In both, the support and initiative-taking of diplomats were decisive. This presentation unravels the practicalities of producing international exhibitions of Belgian Art abroad by focusing on the agency of the diplomats involved.
Using administrative documents, minutes, inventories, loan requests, catalogues and newspaper clippings, the paper will question how diplomats used their (inter)national network and status to schedule exhibitions and spin-off events like conferences, book venues, secure endorsements from hosts, and navigate logistics in transport and insuring artworks from Belgian private and state collections abroad.
Avigail Moss, University of Kent School of Arts and Culture, Paris
A Politics of Preference: The Empire Loan Exhibitions Society, 1930–1940
In 1930, New Zealand warehouseman and art philanthropist Percy Sargood formed a nongovernmental subscription society with London arts administrators to circulate loan exhibitions from London to British white dominions: ‘The Empire Loan Collections Committee’, eventually renamed the Empire Art Loan Exhibitions Society (EALES). In so doing, Sargood hoped to enable the ‘pioneer peoples of the associated lands […] to share in the art and beauty which were the priceless possession of the Mother Country’.
However, the society’s fundamental aim was to collectivize art risks to paintings and sculptures by sharing insurance, shipping costs, and import taxes between scheme supporters, which included national museums, art dealers, agents, and politicians in Britain, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and South Africa. The scheme emerged precisely when depression-era Britain was in the process of departing from the gold standard and liberal free trade dogma to protectionism, in concert with the 1931 Statute of Westminster and the 1932 Ottawa Conference.
At this juncture, Commonwealth nations sought greater equality and economic independence in the imperium, even as central authorities and business interests sought to draw them ever closer using soft power techniques—the circulation of modern British art collections—underwritten by modern financial risk management strategies. Indeed, the EALES wielded these managerial tactics to inculcate best practices in cultural stewardship in its imperial partners, with mixed (and in one case, disastrous) results. This paper will situate EALES in relation to non-governmental cooperation and economic preference in a fraying world, one bracketed by depression and war.
Leandro Leão, École des Hautes Études, Paris / University of São Paulo
Brazilian paintings in London and the birth of a cultural diplomacy during the post-war
From the second half of the 1940s, Brazil’s international policy goes through major changes. At the country, the period will be marked by the end of the Getúlio Vargas dictatorship; in a global panorama, by the end of the Second World War and the establishment of the United Nations.
One of these changes consisted of the promotion of Brazilian culture abroad, with the new national Cultural Affairs Department in April 1946. The first action of this diplomacy was the Exhibition of Modern Brazilian Paintings, held at the Royal Academy of Arts of London, in 1944. This collective exhibition was the first one of modern Brazilian art in the United Kingdom and in Europe and was intended to donate the sales profits to the British Air Forces. The list of participating artists were more than sixty names, from different professional groups, ages, and art styles, from to Tarsila do Amaral, Cândido Portinari, Lasar Segall to Flávio de Carvalho, Athos Bulcão and Djanira.
The exhibition was also as a gateway for Brazilian artworks to museums and private collections not only in UK but also in continent. This episode marks the alignment of Brazil on the anti-fascist front in World War II.
It is the different professional networks of these artists that are the object in this paper. Where they were before that and how they were invited? The research is looking for the social and professional hierarchies but also the process of selection for this event that highlights the Brazilian period overseas.
Agnieszka Pindera, University of Warsaw
A Contested Exchange: International Route of the Polish-American Exhibition
Officially opened on June 24, 1982 the Polish-American exhibition at the the Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris was a tangible manifestation of the barter exchange between artists representing both countries and two museums, each on one side of the Iron Curtain divide. From Paris the exhibition went to Edinburgh (Republic of Ireland), and Belfast (Northern Ireland). Thereafter the artworks reached their final destinations. The Muzeum Sztuki (Lodz) received pieces by Dan Graham, Douglas Huebler, Barbara Kasten, Les Levine, Helen Pashgian, Alexis Smith, DeWain Valentine, and the Museum of Contemporary Art MOCA (Los Angeles) accepted donations from Tadeusz Kantor, Edward Krasiński, Henryk Stażewski, among others.
The event at the time exemplary of international relations, modeled by Stażewski on an historic exchange in which he participated in the late 1920s and 30s., in different geopolitical contexts of 1980s and involving Western capitalist economy, disappeared without a trace for many decades. Another exhibition organized in 1983 by LA MOCA erased “the gift from Eastern Europe” narrative as conflicting with the pursued image of the new museum.
In my presentation I will analyze how the Polish-American traveling exhibition collided with MOCA’s The First Show, putting on display approximately 150 works by European and American artists from the private collections of e.g. Giuseppe and Giovanna Panza di Biumo of Italy. Soon MOCA purchased a substantial part of the collection of these aristocrats. Two exhibitions are shedding light on the politics of collecting in the early years of MOCA.
Lou Jacquemet, University of Geneva / Technische Universität Berlin
A “model legislation for museums in Africa”? UNESCO and ICOM standardization efforts in the age of political independence 1960s-70s
In the early 1960s, the International Council of Museums (ICOM) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) advocated for the integration of “developing countries” into global exhibition networks, aligning with the principles of the Florence Agreement.
Governments in newly independent African states, inheriting colonial legal frameworks and institutional structures, reformed their policies to safeguard national heritage as a component of state-building. Investments were directed toward expanding cultural institutions and professionalizing museum personnel. These heritage development strategies, shaped by economic disparities, facilitated regional rather than global circulation of cultural materials.
Simultaneously, shifting geopolitical dynamics revitalized the “salvage paradigm” within international museum circles, emphasizing the preservation of material heritage as both a national priority and a universal obligation. This framework justified international collaboration in a coordinated program involving ICOM, UNESCO, and the Nigerian government. Through the Pilot Project for Museum Technicians in Jos, museum personnel were trained according to Western museological standards.
However, this technical, object-centered approach only partially aligned with the priorities of African museum institutions, leading to a reconfiguration of international networks among actors in national heritage policy. Challenging the UNESCO ideal of a “universal model” for museum, African governments, under the aegis of the Organization of African Unity, sought to articulate a unified heritage strategy. New avenues for exhibition showcased collective heritage, like the 1969 All-African Cultural Festival in Algiers.
This paper examines how UNESCO and ICOM engaged with strategies of cultural heritage reappropriation, reshaping international relations and the organization of exhibitions in the process.
Kathrin Grotz & Patricia Rahemipour, Institut für Museumsforschung, Prussian Heritage Foundation, Berlin
From Compliance to Collaboration: The Role of CITES and the Nagoya Protocol in Museum Exhibitions
Our paper explores how recent regulatory frameworks impact the circulation of museum objects that include genetic or biological materials, from herbarium specimens and artifacts originating in indigenous communities to musical instruments, furniture, and artworks containing ivory or rare woods. With the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), established in 1975 to control trade in endangered species, and the Nagoya Protocol, introduced in 2014 to ensure equitable benefit-sharing from the use of genetic resources, museums face significant new responsibilities.
These regulations require museums to navigate complex procedures for the international exchange of materials containing genetic or biological components. While CITES mandates permits to manage the trade of endangered species, the Nagoya Protocol requires that museums obtain prior consent from countries of origin and agree on fair benefit-sharing with indigenous communities. As museums increasingly incorporate biodiversity-rich and culturally sensitive items into their exhibitions, they must adapt to new demands on loan agreements, permissions, and benefit-sharing practices.
Through case studies of exhibitions involving such materials, this contribution examines how CITES and the Nagoya Protocol influence museum practices, affecting everything from object mobility and access rights to loan negotiations and exhibition logistics. The paper also considers the evolving role of source communities, who gain a stronger voice in determining how their cultural and biological heritage is shared internationally. By assessing these regulatory impacts, the paper offers insights into how museums can meet international policy requirements while developing more ethical, inclusive approaches to preserving and exhibiting global heritage.
Jennifer Udell, Fordham Museum of Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Art, New York
International loans and museum-donor philanthropy: The Fordham Museum of Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Art
University museums of ancient art are presented with unique challenges in keeping visitors engaged and their collections relevant. Introducing new material into academic collections is hampered by small budgets and, even more importantly, by ethical considerations that question the wisdom of acquiring ancient art from an art market that is rife with objects for which there is little documentation and almost no provenance information.
This paper describes how the antiquities museum at Fordham University is creating and strengthening relationships with source nations – that is, countries whose ancient material culture is often looted and illegally exported- for the purpose of acquiring loans on a long-term basis. These relationships are mutually beneficial. For the countries of origin, attention is brought to their material culture and to the problem of antiquities trafficking itself. For the gallery at Fordham, new objects from far-afield keep the collection fresh for students and visitors. Although these arrangements are a constructive and responsible way for Fordham to add to its collection, the costs associated with transporting fragile objects overseas are considerable. Thus, this paper also explores how fund-raising priorities for the museum have shifted to supporting loan exhibitions. This has necessitated a change in the development narrative presented to donors, who are still tied to an older conception of museum philanthropy centered on capital improvements and problematic art market acquisitions.
Jeiran Jahani, Columbia University, New York
Endangering Yet Fortifying Loans: Contradictory Limits of Museum Responsibility
This paper discusses the British Museum’s decision to loan the Cyrus Cylinder, an emblematic object of joint Iranian and Iraqi heritage, to the National Library of Israel in Jerusalem during the ongoing regional war—a reckless decision that endangers this valuable artifact by transporting it to a war zone in contravention of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.
Focusing on this loan allows us to discuss the larger geopolitical conditions and power relations that this loan plays into, along with the ongoing history of misrepresentations of this artifact, which has effectively bolstered these geopolitical conditions. Starting in the 1950s, the Cylinder was first anachronistically misrepresented by biblical scholars as echoing Cyrus’ policy of religious freedom. It was consequently rebranded and exhibited as the first charter of human rights and employed in the nationalist discourse of the Shah of Iran and his Aryanization policy, echoing 19th century pseudosciences of race and Nazi racial ideology. Scholars of Achaemenid history have continuously objected to the ongoing politicization of the Cylinder, and the Museum tasked itself with the responsibility to protect this artifact from abuse and harm on the occasion of its exhibition in Tehran in 2010.
This loan, given the Cylinder’s short exhibition history, testifies to the Museum’s asymmetrical commitment to the safeguarding of this artifact, and how geopolitics plays into such calculations. It also highlights the discursive contribution of such loans to maintaining certain power structures out of which the Museum was born.