Just finished reading Canadian O.G. Michelle Kasprzak's "For What and For Whom?"
I'm not convinced on all the points, but that doesn't mean it is not a great read. She intertwines what two of my fav people, Kottke and Shirky, are doing and thinking about quite nicely.
"There is no doubt that there is value to opening up and demystifying
the editing and selection processes most typically known to be domain
of the art curator. If this strategy is properly applied, it is
possible to encourage anyone who is interested to develop a deeper
aesthetic sense, to feel more closely linked to culture and heritage
institutions, and to develop stronger ideas of what culture means to
them. But if this is how the common use of the word curator is
evolving, what is lost?"
