The Public Historian, the major quarterly journal of public history, featured an exhibit review of Art+History in the Fall 2009 journal. The reviewer praised the curators for
[hitting] upon a central question regarding creativity in historical and artistic processes that could be explored with success. They nurtured truly imaginative work with collaborating artists and devised public presentation and education strategies to support it.
Of Import/Export, the reviewer noted
Slosburg-Ackerman engaged the house as physical space; she used the china and photographs in ways that made me imagine a range of family and servant relationships within the building—who was getting those teacups from the pantry shelves, drinking tea in the library, organizing children’s activities and so on. Her arrangement of contemporary Asian art im- ages served to underscore the colonial wealth and mother country relationship (conscious or not) that the dining room paneling suggests.
The reviewer also appreciated the methodological questions raised by Keep the word vanishing until the end.
The review ends by praising the exhibit:
[T]he Art + History project goes far to meet the standards Henry Glassie suggests for public history projects: “ . . . [to adhere] to a standard of excellence . . . to be oppositional on behalf of . . . complexity against simple argument. [Projects] ought also to be beautiful . . . because that’s the way you catch someone and bring them in.”
This post will also be included in the Critical Perspectives portion of our website.