Page 53 - Studio International - April 1971

An introduction to with the materials that only industry could it would typically take six phone calls and two
provide—such were the concerns of these schools letters, over a period of six months, to effect a
`Art and of artists, and they were announced in words and meeting, and even with such protracted efforts
in works. few interviews were arranged. When I did get
Technology' studying the nature and location of corporate past the front door, the response from
During late '66 and early '67, I began
Maurice Tuchman resources in California. In November 1967, I corporation executives was usually encouraging,
but the overall rate of progress was much too slow.
went to the Museum's Board of Trustees, In June 1967, an article in the Los Angeles
The Senior Curator of Modern Art at the Los members of which were significantly involved Times mentioned my plan to 'bring together the
Angeles County Museum, Los Angeles, outlines the with over two dozen West Coast companies, to incredible resources and advanced technology
progress of the programme which leads up to the outline my proposal and to elicit advice and of industry with the equally incredible
Art and Technology exhibition opening at the support. As individual entrepreneurs, the Board imagination and talent of the best artists at work
Museum on 11 May, when the work of eighteen members were rather indifferent to the today'. Mrs Otis Chandler, wife of the Times'
artists 'taken into residence' by industrial experiment, and as Trustees they resisted publisher, was intrigued with the story and
corporations and given opportunities to explore having the Museum commit itself, and me, to telephoned me about it. I asked Missy Chandler
advanced technology in relation to their creative such an undertaking. The proposal appeared to for her assistance in arranging appointments
expressions, are to be shown in and around the them too vague and open-ended, and the budget with corporation executives. She asked whether
Museum. The exhibition is to run for four months. almost impossible to predict. I argued that I the Museum's Board was not the appropriate
In a later issue, Jane Livingston, Associate would raise personally the great majority of vehicle for this operation. Informed that no
Curator of Modern Art at the Museum, will funds to get the project underway, and that if I Trustee had shown much interest in
write on 'Thoughts on Art and Technology'. failed to do this, we would then simply drop the participation when I had presented the Board
scheme before it was made public, avoiding any with my idea, she agreed to help. Mrs Chandler's
In 1966, when Art and Technology was first embarrassment or significant financial loss to the intervention proved immediately effective. She
conceived, I had been living in Southern institution. Other than on a practical level, I became primarily responsible for the
California for two years. A newcomer to this maintained that this project was a proper under- involvement of over a dozen corporations in the
region is particularly sensitive to the futuristic taking for a Museum, and represented an now accelerated programme.
character of Los Angeles, especially as it is opportunity to play an innovative role. It would In late 1967, we began the process of
manifested in advanced technology. I thought of draw attention to the acknowledged need in the contacting over 25o companies, of which
the typical Coastal industries as chiefly US for institutions responsive to the interests of eventually thirty-seven joined the programme
aerospace-oriented (Jet Propulsion society—in this case, the interests of artists, and in various ways. As encounters with corporation
Laboratories, Lockheed Aircraft); or geared perhaps even businessmen. The Board gave me executives took place, the logistical guidelines
toward scientific research (The Rand tacid consent to go ahead and study the and the scope of the programme were gradually
Corporation, TRW Systems); or connected possibilities, with the programme still subject clarified. I soon realized that, for practical
with the vast cinema and TV industry in to their approval. reasons, the programme would have to be
Southern California (Universal Film Studios). I prepared a case with which to solicit limited to companies located in the state of
At a certain point—it is difficult to reconstruct corporation involvement, centred on three main California. (Much later, we were able
the precise way in which this notion finally lines of approach which I calculated to be of financially to extend outside the state, and
emerged consciously—I became intrigued by the interest to the business community. I argued companies located in Indiana, Illinois, Ohio,
thought of having artists brought into these that corporate donations to the arts, which were and New York State joined Art and
industries to make works of art, moving about infinitesimal compared to support of medical Technology.) We could not, in the beginning,
in them as they might in their own studios. In and educational facilities, should be enlarged. know how much money a company might
the beginning, as I was considering this idea as This would benefit them, as much as the donate to the Museum's general fund on Art and
just an abstract concept, I had few concrete recipient museums, operas, theatres, etc., since Technology, before an artist took up residence.
visions of what might actually result from such business benefits from proximity to thriving We discussed various figures from three to
exchanges. Indeed I was not certain whether cultural resources in attracting talented fifteen thousand, before settling on $7000 as the
artists of calibre would desire such involvement personnel. I also pointed out that the companies' amount we would request as each corporation's
with industry. And if they did, and an organized collaborations with artists might well result in initial financial obligation. This somehow
programme could be instituted to give them major works of art, and I decided that one work emerged as the optimal sum, beyond which
such opportunities, I had no idea how to go of art made with any significantly co-operative very few companies would commit. Later, we
about persuading corporations to receive corporation should be offered to that learned that many corporations calculated their
artists into their facilities—nor for that matter, corporation. (It became clear very early that a pledge in a ratio of two to one : the $7000
why they should want to. high proportion of the companies would view donation to the Museum suggested to them an
In reviewing modern art history, one is this possibility as a salient motive for expenditure of $14,000 to the artist. There was
easily convinced of the gathering aesthetic urge collaboration.) Most importantly, I argued that also the question of how long the companies
to realize such an enterprise as I was envisioning. companies might benefit immeasurably, in both would agree to have artists in their facilities.
A collective will to gain access to modern direct and subtle ways, merely from exposure to We realized that most companies, before signing
industry underlies the programmes of the creative personalities. a contract, would want an escape clause in writing
Italian Futurists, Russian Constructivists, and These arguments may have been substantive, to which they could refer should they desire early
many of the German Bauhaus artists. Within but there remained the problem of presenting termination of the project. It would have been
these movements, no intensive effort was made them to the right people. I had drawn up lists of preferable to keep this open, allowing the artist
directly to approach industrial firms in order to corporations I felt should be solicited, but it was and company to themselves decide when to end
harness corporate machinery or technology, or difficult to obtain appointments with their the relationship. Unfortunately we were forced
systematically to expose artists to their research presidents. (I realized then that it would be to see that no company would initially agree to
capabilities. Still, the impulse to do this is well fruitless to see public relations people, or anyone have an artist in residence for longer than three
documented. A need to reform commercial other than the man at the top who could sign the months. Many executives, however, indicated
industrial products, to create public monuments cheque and delegate authority.) In spite of the that if the collaboration developed interestingly,
for a new society, to express fresh artistic ideas aegis of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, they would allow it to continue naturally. In fact
173