By Ngaire Blankenberg

“Why are we always the only ones worried about the pens and paper”? This morning, my colleague and I were discussing our often obsessive focus on the detail of a meeting. We griped a little bit about how, in a team, we (the Lord consultants) tend to be the only ones ever worried about these kinds of things. Does our preoccupation with making sure there are markers that work, flip chart paper, a proper, timed agenda, a clock, drinks, and sticky notes position us subconsciously as the ‘drones’ in a process – leaving the more glamorous ‘thinking’ work to other consultants or partners such as the architects, exhibition designers, engineers, and programmers?

No! We decided. It does not! Or at least it should not. And what’s more–it’s time for us to assert the Value of the Little Things- for these are at the heart of effective consulting.

Gail Lord, co-president of Lord Cultural Resources is the best consultant I’ve ever seen (and I’m not pandering here- I mean it!). She has an uncanny ability to grasp a challenge faced by a client, unpack it, hone in on the critical stress factors, find parallels internationally to others who have encountered and met a similar challenge, identify innovative, tailored and do-able solutions and communicate it all back in ways that the client will relate to. She is a Big Thinker often called on to address mayors and city planners, scholars, conferences and other forums about the State of Culture in the World– but she is also a Small Thinker, a detail Thinker. Despite being the president of an international company, she still worries about the temperature in the room, and the pens- not because she’s a woman (although I’m sure our socialization as women probably has something to do with it), but because through over 30 years of experience, she knows how something as seemingly small as a bad seating plan can mess up an entire process.

I know in the earlier years of my consulting career, I didn’t spend much time thinking about these things. With the arrogance of youth and education, I thought that the responsibility for the stationary and the room set up should be given to those further down the worker chain. I believed I had more important things to worry about. I soon learned – when a couple of key meetings fell apart because no one had paper- that ignoring these things was a big mistake. Without understanding the people in the room and what they need to feel comfortable, trusting, and communicative- no big ideas or super solutions would be born, or would stick. The little things are what make the big things possible.

There are parallels here with the feminist movement and its attempts to have the world recognize the value of domestic work, and ‘relationship’ work and all the other female dominated work- as equal to the ‘male’ work which tends to dominate the value chain. We now recognize how a 21st century creative economy is powered by soft skills- emotional and cultural intelligence, communication, interpersonal skills, team building, strategic thinking and so on. Like ‘women’s work’, soft skills are about a person’s ability to interact effectively with others. Facilitating effective interaction is about providing the right tools (pens and papers, flipcharts), the right environment (a comfortable, spacious room), and the right ‘rules’ and parameters for what is expected (meetings that start and finish according to schedule, an agenda that tells people why they are there and what is expected of them).

For consultants like us, soft skills are our core skills, and the little things- the details that show we pay attention to how real people work and think and collaborate- are not an irrelevant detail, they are what makes us good.

By Ngaire Blankenberg

During a magical late night walk a few weeks ago in Barcelona- amidst the Roman ruins, the weird and wonderful Gaudi buildings, the secret lovers, the street vendors selling beer to the underage teenagers- I found myself confronted by a church in an almost hidden square that made me catch my breath.

The walls of the Sant Felip Neri church (built in 1752) bear the marks of a cruel attack during the Spanish Civil War.  In the aftermath, it wasn’t repaired like other buildings around it. Rather it was left as it was- a memorial to the 20 children seeking shelter inside the church who were killed during the conflict.

I was unprepared by how much I was affected by the scarred and battered walls of the church- bearing the evidence of a war that happened over 70 years ago. I read the graffiti (‘always remember the victims of fascist regimes’) and the commemorative plaque. As I touched the deep grooves and holes, I felt sick. I felt the violence – I did not imagine it.  It was incredibly powerful.

I was reminded of how rare it is to see such stark public evidence of historical violence. In public, violence from the past is recalled most commonly through history books, films, TV, documentaries and oral histories.  Museums preserve bits of material evidence but no matter how powerful, they are mostly out of context- behind glass with mediating text or audio. 

In images of more recent wars we see ravaged cities and bleeding people and blown up buildings, as ‘news’. Then, when the war is over – either the city is cleaned up (in richer countries) or it gets worse (in poorer countries). Walking through rubble you can rarely tell what has been destroyed through violence or through neglect- the stark evidence of violence disappears. Human beings may bear the evidence of violence on their bodies, and communities may remember through graveyards and memorials but they repair the world around them. Life does go on.

This little church with its battered walls quietly marking its place in a peaceful square showed a way to help people understand the violence of war. I think we are saturated by the pervasive images of violence in the media- it’s sometimes hard to distinguish between what is real and what is fiction- we become removed.   But the evidence of violence on the facades of buildings, on landscapes- is somehow irrefutable.  It was an experience I am not likely to forget.

by Chris Lorway

“Museums are a constant work in progress and are constantly changing and transforming. That is the definition of contemporary arts today…Contemporary art is performance, projection — we need to provide spaces for events, live arts, time-based arts, as well as small events such as lectures, symposiums and films.”

Chris Dercon, Director, Tate Modern

In today’s museum world, we are seeing increasing examples of institutions incorporating live performance into the visitor experience. From performance art in contemporary art museums to re-enactments on a small or large scale at historic sites, the lively arts are now becoming integrated into an overall institutional program strategy. While some institutions are building or enhancing designated spaces for music, dance and theatre others are using performance to animate foyers, exhibitions and gallery spaces.

The two examples below illustrate how dance companies in England and Germany were given raw architecture space in two of the world’s leading museums to make new work.

In March 2009, acclaimed German choreographer Sasha Waltz was invited to create a “choreographic exhibition” in David Chipperfield’s renovated Neue Museum in advance of it opening. The empty galleries, staircases and hallways gave the dancers and musicians who participated a chance to make their mark on the space though allegorical vignettes on human nature. In addition, the company created an interactive website that documented the work.

The video excerpt below illustrates the confluence of movement and space.

This was the second time the company was had been invited to choreograph a new opening for a museum in Berlin. In 2000 – one year before its official opening – they were invited to make a new piece in Daniel Libeskind’s new Jewish Museum.

In the summer of 2010, the Michael Clark Company was in residency at the Tate Modern in London. The company set up a rehearsal area in the immense Turbine Hall where they experimented and practiced with core company members and a group of 75 non-dancers. Visitors to the Tate were able to observe the creation process from the balconies and terraces overlooking the hall. At the end of the residency, there were a number of public showings of ideas developed to date and the following year (June 2011) a new site-specific work entitled th was premiered in the space.

As the quote above from Chris Dercon suggests, this trend is likely to continue as museums explore innovative ways to get more visitors through their doors as the competition for consumer leisure time increases. We at Lord think it is also an exciting opportunity to explore ways in which a variety of artists can animate these community spaces.

The examples presented are just two of many such examples. We would love to hear from you about other successful illustrations of partnerships between museums and performing artists in their communities.