Locating the Function of Theory in New Institutionalism: The Case of MACBA

自20世纪70年代以来，批判性学术揭示了博物馆在为特权阶层提供培养品味的机会，同时教化和约束大众方面的作用（Hooper-Greenhill, 2000; Bennett, 1995； Mc Call和Grey， 2013）。在20世纪90年代末的“博物馆热潮”中，以“新制度主义”（Ekeberg, 2003）的名义，首次在当代艺术机构中共同努力构建这种模式的替代方案。在所有这些所谓的“新机构”中，规模最大、影响力最大的是由Manuel borja - ville馆长（1999-2007）领导的实验时期的巴塞罗那当代艺术博物馆（MACBA）。MACBA创建了第一个公共项目部门，负责为博物馆提供整体方向，而不是次于展览。这项研究将集中在“理论”在这个项目中所起的作用。在这一时期，borja - ville对MACBA的愿景是无与伦比的。他试图将一个全新的旗舰机构改造成一个机器，以培养具有抵抗性和政治活跃的公众。对此至关重要的是机构、激进团体和“从属社区”之间的团结，这是通过公共计划培养的（borja - ville, 2010, 29）。MACBA的项目规模与其他较小的“进步机构”完全不同，“MACBA模式”为泰特相遇（Tate Encounters, 2007-2010）和诺丁汉当代艺术学院公共项目部门等项目提供了借鉴。然而，在实践中，这并不总是产生一种新的公众参与形式，而是创造了一个生产和传播公众批判性话语的平台。高度专业化的“理论”话语的使用——现在在艺术机构中普遍存在——引发了对MACBA对非专业公众参与的开放性的质疑，质疑这种模式的预期目标在多大程度上实现了。

Since 1970s critical scholarship has unveiled the museum's role in offering opportunities for the privileged to cultivate taste while civilising and disciplining the masses (Hooper-Greenhill, 2000; Bennett, 1995; Mc Call and Grey, 2013). The first concerted effort to construct alternatives to this model in contemporary art institutions emerged in Europe in the midst of the 'museum boom' of the late 1990s under the label of"New Institutionalism" (Ekeberg, 2003). The largest and most influential of all these so-called "New Institutions" was the Museu d'Art Contemporani Barcelona (MACBA) during the experimental period led by director Manuel Borja-Villel (1999-2007). MACBA created the first Public Programmes department charged with providing an overall direction to the museum, rather than being secondary to exhibitions. This research will focus in the role that "Theory"played within this programme.Borja-Villel's vision for MACBA in this period was unparalleled in its ambition. He sought to transform a brand-new flagship institution built with the intention of gentrifying a red-light district into a machine for producing resistant, politically active publics. Crucial to this was the solidarity between the institution, activist groups and "subordinate communities" which was fostered through the Public Programme (Borja-Villel, 2010, 29). MACBA's project was on an altogether different scale to other smaller 'progressive institutions' and the 'MACBA model' has informed projects such as Tate Encounters (2007-2010) and the Public Programmes department at Nottingham ContemporaryIn practice, however, this did not always generate a new form of public engagement but often created instead a platform for the production and dissemination of critical discourse on publics. The use of the highly specialised discourse of 'Theory' - now prevalent across art institutions - raises questions as to MACBA's openness to the participation of non-specialist publics, calling into question the extent to which the intended aims of this model were realised.