I agree completely with your take on the matter. I have long maintained that the “white cube” of the gallery space strips away most or all of the contextual clues that originally informed an artwork’s creation–the artist, the time and place in which he/she worked, the issues that mattered to him/her, the works by the same artist that led up to the piece or that followed it, the works by other artists to which it may have responded–even the discourse that has grown up around the artwork since its making. Technology can help restore those threads, and reconstitute the semantic constellation that endows the work with much of its meaning. This is not to say that artworks have no expressive power on their own, but simply to acknowledge that many artists have developed conceptual projects far removed from the everyday experience of even educated visitors, and not immediately apparent in the physical manifestation of their work. The link below leads to some of the many multimedia contextualizations we have published over the years both in the galleries and online at SFMOMA.

Having said that, technology is not the only way to convey this broader context. We have also been experimenting lately with “learning lounges” in the galleries that augmenting computer kiosks with video clips and good old fashioned analog media: wall displays of photos, texts, and FAQs about the artist and his/her symbolic universe. Our research shows that visitors love seeing videos of the artist most; they also spend time looking at the wall graphics that explore an artist’s oeuvre. So while we often think first and foremost of technology because that’s what we make, it should be considered but one of an array of interpretive strategies that include brochures, docent tours, wall labels, etc.

I have been a member(at times)of the WAC, and a consumer of its offerings over almost 20years. Even tho I bring to the museum a higher-than-average amount of cultural information and art training (being an active visual artist, continously gathering info from worldwide sources), I found my experiences at the Walker to be sometimes frustrating, as if the doors were somehow closed altho the exhibits and events were open.

Lately, tho, my perceptions have changed. With the advent of the Walker Channel, the interactivity of the blogs and their rich links to other online sources, the accesibility of ArtOnCall, and the WAC-supported mnartists.org, as prime examples, I now feel much more invited to be a part of the museum itself. This is highly rewarding to me personally and, as participation grows, must be even more rewarding for the institution. The experience extends way beyond the museum walls, via the internet’s growing interactivity. I can now “visit” and contribute to the museum from anywhere in the world!

Looking at other museum websites from around the world, I find the Walker is at the forefront of this movement. Another reason to be proud of Minnesota!

PS - PLEASE PRESERVE THE OLD GUTHRIE - IT AINT TOO LATE! IT WILL BE A JEWEL IN THE WALKER’S COLLECTION IN 30 YEARS, AND CAN BE A GREAT PART OF THE MUSEUM’S SPACE, NOT NECESSARILY AS A THEATER>>>LETS BE IMAGINATIVE!!!