Doing it in groups

This particular story comes from the Guggenheim in Bilbao, but the location is not important. The Guggenheim Bilbao is merely representative of the “Big Museum” that has funding, ambitions and a long history as a museum. Perhaps you haven’t been there? Just change the name to some other famous museum you know. The story applies almost anywhere.

On account of a general scepticism I have avoided guided tours but I should like to believe in their purpose and uses. Their capacity for reaching us visitors, of opening those doors, of doing things together as a group. So I determined to join guided tours wherever possible and one of these was at the Guggenheim Bilbao.

A range of views in the group

“When you see this, what do you think, what do you feel?”

“Terrorism, I see terrorism.”

We are standing in front of Cai Guo-Qiang’s “Inopportune: Stage One” at the Guggenheim Bilbao and the elderly Americans in my group are thoroughly convinced that this work is not laudable. Eight white Chevrolet motorcars hang from the ceiling like an exploding arc. Flashing rods of light emanate from the windows and the chassis. The impression is of still pictures from a car-bomb sequence but without the bloody reality. “But it is beautiful too”, I try to suggest, “a bit like fireworks…?” “No”, they exclaim appalled. “It is horrible, very unpleasant. Terrorism!” Our guide, Alberto Fernandez Martinez tries to placate them by wondering whether the work may not be both beautiful and dreadful, or what does the group think?

This is art!

It is the tourist season and there is hardly room for all the groups. Besides the 23 people in our group, there is a Japanese group and two Spanish-speaking groups at the exhibition. Alberto waves a yellow card, signalling us to follow him. We get through the exhibition in just under an hour. This is all the time available. A little information, an attempt to interest the group, and then on to the next work. Now and then one somebody comments – “I wouldn’t hang that above my sofa”, or “this is art”.

A mobile relic from the 1990s

Joining a group is not the only alternative. The solo version is also on offer to all proper visitors. At the entrance each visitor who has paid their 13 Euros is offered an audio guide to hang round their necks. Each visitor can listen to the information that interests them after ploughing through the obligatory introduction that names the sponsor at least three times. Wandering around in Frank Gehry’s magnificent hull, with something that looks like a cell-phone relic from the 1990s pressed to one’s ear, makes one feel and seem very lonely.

“My job is to make people think”

After our guided tour, Alberto explains to me that he is not allowed to give his own opinions during the tour but tries, instead, to get the group to ask questions.

“I’m only here to open doors, not to have opinions. My job is to make people think, or at least to try to do so.”

There must be more

This sounds all very well – that the guide should communicate the exhibition and the artist’s intentions and that his task is to gently educate and direct his flock. Get us to look and, in the best instance, to think. This sounds all very well, yet I have a feeling that it is a bit stiff. That there must be something more; that there must be different ways of doing this. Together. It is not that the guides are bad, either here or elsewhere. True, I have listened to very dull and pompous lectures while perched on an uncomfortable camping stool but in almost all cases the guides have been both knowledgeable and committed. Yet something important is still missing.

An evident need for change

Is this all? Tourists love the Guggenheim Bilbao and the local inhabitants are beginning to approve of it. The museum has fantastic art in a fantastic building and numerous visitors. Everything is innovatory yet why does this approach not spread as far as the guides and their guided tours? Somewhere there is a lack of communication; the educational step is hesitant. Are not the flock of sheep version and the antique cell-phone rather one-sided solutions? Basically designed to make visitors behave, let themselves be led and seduced? There must be alternatives to this. The need for change is evident – in attitude, meaning and expression.

Why not have guides one can exchange views with in each room?

The guide’s style and aims need to be reshaped. Why not encourage more discussion? Let guides have opinions, personal commitment and their own approaches. In some way see both the group and the individual. There must be many different possibilities. Perhaps one might concentrate on some specific work in the gallery with regular groups? Or create space for multidimensionality with democratic hanging? Why not have guides that one can exchange views with in each room rather than security guards? Create a proper space in which to sit and talk; rooms that include both contradictory views as well as biographical and contextual information. Work towards active knowledge-creation and real engagement rather than passive sitting.

Somehow one needs to puncture sententiousness and hypersensitivity. To open up for the dialogue and improved communication that every museum with serious pretensions strives for today.

Emelie Ekenborn

Student in the Curating Art International Master Programme at Stockholm University

Illustration Annette L´Orange