Since the June 2006 opening of the Musée du Quai Branly in Paris, the Jean Nouvel-designed museum of non-Western art has been a consistent source of controversy both for its architecture and exhibits.
“The place simply makes no sense,” wrote New York Times art critic Michael Kimmelman in July 2006. “Old, new, good, bad are all jumbled together without much reason or explanation, save for visual theatrics.”
Then there is the whole question in this time of globalism and multiculturalism of whether it makes sense to separate or, as critics charge, ghettoize art from Africa, Asia, Oceania and the Americas.
Stéphane Martin, the museum’s president, will present a lecture on the institution at 6:15 p.m. Wednesday at the Denver Art Museum as part of a 10-city tour organized by the New York Alliance Francaise.
In advance of his visit, Martin spoke via e-mail to the Denver Post about the museum and the response to it:
Q: For people unfamiliar with the Musée du Quai Branly, could you explain its mission?
A. The Musée du Quai Branly is the result of a political desire to see justice rendered to non-European cultures, to recognize the place their artistic expressions occupy in our cultural heritage. The museum is conceived as a cultural center, offering, alongside its permanent display of 3,500 works of art, a dozen temporary exhibitions per year, live performances, scientific conferences and an open university.
Q. Some critics and others have questioned the wisdom of segregating non-Western art. Why do you think this approach makes sense?
A. The national and international reaction at the museum’s opening was 95 percent positive. France already had numerous museums dedicated to Western art. But there was also the need for a place to present the arts and culture coming from other parts of the world that are usually quite unknown to the wider public. The Musée du Quai Branly is at the same time a school of listening and of respect due to others and a kind of instruction manual on life in a 21st-century society.
Q. Jean Nouvel’s design has drawn mixed opinons. Do you think it succeeds?
A. I wish to underline again the fact that the reception by the public has been very largely positive, notably in high ranking international media. Furthermore, the number of visitors since the opening – more than 2.1 million – greatly exceeded our initial predictions. It is this popular acclaim which seems to me to be decisive in the evaluation of the museum’s success, both in terms of architecture and content.
Q. You have said elsewhere that the museum is attracting a new audience. Who makes up that audience?
A. It is indeed remarkable that the museum has succeeded in attracting a new type of public, less used to going to museums. Our goal, in particular, is to interest people who have an intimate link with the countries represented here. Studies show that it is the case for close to 20 percent of our visitors.
Q. Given the seemingly increasing religious and ethnic tensions in the world, do you think a museum such as yours has an increasingly important role to play?
A. Without a doubt! The core mission of an institution such as the Musée du Quai Branly is to help people understand the evolutions and main issues at stake in today’s world. But I also wish to stress that this project was initiated in the mid-’90s, in a geopolitical context that was quite different. The museum is thus not the result of current events, of the fears and tensions of the contemporary world.
Its creation was needed because of the importance of promoting dialogue between cultures. If an institution such as the Musée du Quai Branly has a role to play in current debates, it is notably because it helps to fruitfully question today’s identities.
Kyle MacMillan: 303-954-1675 or kmacmillan@denverpost.com
