The Title Is Not the Argument: Writing a Curatorial Rationale
An SL candidate submits a 400-word curatorial rationale for an exhibition of five works titled 'Unfixed': two self-portraits (one oil, one digital print), a single-channel video, a hanging textile and a photograph of a family archive. The draft opens: 'I have always been interested in identity. My exhibition includes artists who influence me, such as Jenny Saville and Anselm Kiefer.' It then describes each work in one sentence and lists its medium. The rationale does not explain why the five works are together, why they are in that order, or what the viewer should notice. The exhibition space is a corridor with two facing walls and no natural light. The teacher has one week to give feedback before upload. The candidate thinks the title does the explanatory work and that 'the viewer should make their own meaning'.
1. What is the difference between a curatorial rationale and an artist statement or a list of works?
Read the worked answer
A curatorial rationale explains the exhibition as a constructed experience: why these works, in this order, in this space, for this viewer. An artist statement explains the maker's interests and intentions; a list of works inventories media and dimensions.
The draft is closest to an artist statement with a list attached, and the title 'Unfixed' is asked to carry an argument it has not made. 'The viewer should make their own meaning' is a valid artistic position, but it does not remove the curator's responsibility to frame conditions of viewing.
The rationale should state a claim - for example, that identity is shown as unstable across media - then show how selection and sequencing support it, then describe the spatial effect of the corridor's facing walls and lack of natural light. It should mention at least two specific works as evidence, not just name influences. Influence names belong only where they explain a curatorial decision.
2. Draft a replacement opening paragraph of about 80-100 words that makes a curatorial claim and connects it to the space and at least two works.
Read the worked answer
The paragraph must make a claim, name the space and connect works without listing all five. It should sound like a curator arguing for a particular viewing experience.
Sample: 'Unfixed treats identity as something performed and revised rather than possessed. The exhibition is hung on the two facing walls of a corridor, so the viewer meets each work in passing: the oil self-portrait faces the digital print, setting the slow surface of paint against the instant reproducibility of the image. The video is visible from the far end, drawing the viewer through the sequence, while the textile and family photograph hold the turn. The title describes the viewer's movement: each work fixes an identity only to release it again.'
This works because it converts the corridor from a limitation into a structure, pairs two works by contrast, and gives the title a job beyond labelling.
3. With a 400-word limit, the draft has used about 180 words on influences and 120 on one-sentence descriptions. How should the remaining words be allocated, and what should be cut?
Read the worked answer
Cut the influence list unless an influence explains a curatorial decision. Saville and Kiefer may be relevant to the candidate's own practice, but the rationale is about the exhibition.
Allocate roughly: 60-80 words for the claim; 160-180 for evidence from two or three works and their relationships; 80-100 for space, sequencing and viewer effect; 40-60 for a conclusion that returns to the title.
The one-sentence descriptions can be compressed into relational sentences - 'the oil portrait faces the digital print because...' - which saves words and does curatorial work. If a work cannot be given a relational role, question whether it belongs. The candidate should draft the claim first, then test every sentence against it; sentences that only describe medium or biography can go. At 400 words, omission is the main tool.