‘Art on Tyneside’: Redeveloping a Permanent Display about Art, Place and

Identity at the Laing Art Gallery, Newcastle.

Dr Rhiannon MasonDr Chris WhiteheadDr Helen Graham

International Centre for Cultural and Heritage Studies, Newcastle University

The project:to contribute to the redevelopment of an important permanent display - Art on Tyneside - at the Laing Art Gallery and to study how people construct identities in reference to place (North-East of England) and its visual representations.

funded through the AHRC's Museums, Galleries, Libraries and Archives Research Grants. Value: £345,637.

Aims of the project

Our research will explore the relationships between art, identity and place in order to develop audience-generated content in various media for display purposes.

This content, and insights derived from the research, will be integrated within, and add value to, the redevelopment of an important permanent display at the Laing Art Gallery.

Research Questions1. How is the relationship

between people’s identities and sense of place performed, produced, and negotiated through, or in response to, art (with specific reference to the Laing’s collection)?

2. How is sense of place represented and constructed in a display like ‘Art on Tyneside’ and what role can audience perspectives play within this process?

3. How can the polyvocality of audience perspectives be represented in a coherent and engaging display?

4. Can the use of digital technology within the redeveloped display fulfil the Laing’s objective to work towards the democratisation of curation?

The project (2008-2010)Has involved working with:

• families and young people• local, regular visitors already familiar with the Laing • specialist interest visitors (Friends of the Laing)• non-visiting members of specific, local community groups• artists and representatives of the regional and national

arts community (artists, critics, curators)• older people• people with disabilities • refugee and asylum seekers living locally but new to the

area

The project (2008-2010)Has involved working with:

• museum and gallery practitioners, • curators, • learning and outreach staff, • designers, • audio-visual experts and creative professionals

(artists, film-makers, sound-specialists, photographers),

• youth workers, • carers, • plus local organisations like Nexus Transport and St

James’s Park Football Stadium

Photography

Digital Stories

Film

Sound

Other forms of content

• Talking Heads• Archival images• Flickr

Flickr in Gallery

Projection and Touchscreens

Interactive touch-table

Reasons for Partnership Working

• Using cultural resources to ask questions about visual culture, society, identity, behaviour, knowledge production, representation, role of public galleries, sense of place etc.

• Opportunity to be involved in practice

• Creating interaction between cultural resources and communities to lead to theorisation

• High visibility project with societal impact; contributes to the social and cultural life of the region

• Availability of grant funding

Challenges faced in establishing or maintaining the partnership and how these were overcome.

Distinct research and gallery aims (research outcomes vs display outcomes)

Quality plan; project board, interpretation workshops; show and tell sessions; summary documents

Practical management issues e.g. finance, FEC, procurement, IP, contracting/commissioning,

One person designated to oversee. Partnership arrangement at outset specifying relationship. Close liaison with uni Grants and Contracts team and TWAM management; attention to detail

Communication between various parties (project board, curators, education staff, outreach, public, artists, designers, community groups, gatekeepers)

Difficult! Requires continuous effort to keep all relevant people in the loop. Designating specific responsibilities to team members. Needs a full-time Research Associate. Needs full support from senior staff.

Challenges faced in establishing or maintaining the partnership and how these were overcome

Different working methods/styles between academic and practitioner teams

Recognising each other’s professional practices and working preferences; regular meetings; co-chairing of meetings; joint agenda setting

Timetable – different working speeds at different times; need to balance with timetable of other responsibilities e.g. teaching

Planning and reviewing GANTT chart; regular research team meetings; being flexible and responsive; support from institution

How the experience compares to your expectations

• Very positive and beneficial• Learning all the time – feeds into teaching and

research • Developed project management skills/confidence• Helped us to reflect upon how we do our research• Refreshed understanding of curatorial practice• Created other opportunities for collaboration• Had to let go of some control• Time intensive

Benefits of the partnership

• Generating new research and providing us with answers to our research questions

• Access to new resources – gallery, staff, building, audiences

• Providing insight into the experiences and subjectivities of community members

• Greater awareness of museum professionals’ working environment, constraints, drivers etc.

• Complicates distinctions between research and practice; university and museums; academics and gallery professionals – more nuanced understanding of ‘research’

Further information

• Visit us at: Flickr: Northern Spirit

• http://artontyneside.wordpress.com/about/