New Media Museums

Jakub Frank

This text is an attempt to summarise what preceded the establishment of the New Media and Intermedia Collection at Olomouc Museum of Art, and share experience of handling new media artworks in state museum institutions. On the example of two artworks that were assigned to the museum's collections before the collection was established and two works that the museum acquired already for the collection, this article tries to outline specific issues that arise within the pre-acquisition process, the documentation and evidence of these artworks and their components, the restoration/conversation processes as well as storage and backup of the works, and finally their appropriate display at exhibitions. The article is based on practical experience, it was written with help and after consultation with colleagues from different departments – restorers, documenters, curators, IT workers – and thus includes some personal accounts of people who were part of the processes at the time of acquisitions.

The establishment of a collection must be based on the institution's long-term strategies, its internal configuration and ambitions, as well as the curators’ professional interest and preferences. On the other hand it must be corrected by the real possibilities of the institution, its acquisition potential and the availability of artworks, its technological background (restoration workshop, technical staff, storage and depository conditions), professional support (curators, inter-institutional communication) and the ability to take proper care of the artworks and to keep them operational. In the case of new media and intermedia, this often depends on the ability to anticipate the turbulent development and rapid obsolescence of the technologies these works use. And while the digital footprint of contemporary art grows hand in hand with the technological developments, the works of the pioneers of new media become obsolete, and if they are not handled according to their specific needs, they are doomed to extinction. This results in the critical loss of a substantial part of the evidence of progressive artistic thinking in the second half of the 20th century as well as of contemporary artworks. Provision of quality facilities and extensive research in this field are therefore a duty for a 21st century memory institution devoted to collecting modern and contemporary art.

In recent years the Olomouc Museum of Art (OMA) has moved closer than ever before towards systematic collecting of new media and intermedia art. Media artworks have become a regular part of thematic exhibitions, interventions in temporary exhibitions are a common practice and they have become a regular part of the pre-acquisition selection processes. OMA initiated an intensive research project New Media Museums based on prior research that focused on digital platforms and databases and brought together professionals from different institutions in V4 countries. All the afore-mentioned has led the museum to consider founding a new collection. Although it may seem as a reverse process of founding a collection without proper artworks to include, we see it on the contrary as an opportunity to develop functional methods and to set satisfactory conditions for acquisitions, evidence, preservation and display of the artworks.

Olomouc Museum of Art consists of three parts – Museum of Modern Art + Central European Art Forum and two archdiocesan museums – Olomouc Archdiocesan Museum and Kroměříž Archdiocesan Museum. Museum of Modern Art with Central European Art Forum focus on art of the 20th century with an extension to the late 19th century and contemporary art. The Archdiocesan museums on the other hand care for archbishops collections and other assets from romanesque times to the 19th century and they possess art objects, but also archival materials, books, maps and other artefacts.

The focus of OMA is thus split between modern art and old art. Until recent years though, the museum had not acquired the most recent works of art nor did it concentrate on the younger generation of artists. This was always justified by the long-term values the museum stands for and a rather conservative approach of the curators whose interest lied mainly in the progressive art forms of the unofficial scene of the 60s, 70s and 80s and the transformation period, but not so much in the progressive tendencies of the artists whose careers emerged after 2000.

When the project of Central European Art Forum – SEFO – arose in the year 2008, its idea was to transform the modern art museum into a contemporary museum with focus on the art of the 20th century concluding in the year 1989 (with the main interest in the period of totalitarianisms). Since the project has developed following the current needs and potential of museum institutions, its disregard of the most contemporary art as well as the art of the preceding periods have become a drawback and a limitation for a contemporary institution. This concluded in the adaption of the conception and subsequently in acquisition of artworks from the 90’s and also post-2000 artworks. But although the museum collections grew and expanded with new artworks, other gaps in the collections became more apparent since the curators’ interest in traditional media (mainly painting and sculpture) outweighed the already rapidly expanding field of new media and intermedia art. It should be noted that this situation was and still is common at most museum institutions in the Czech Republic and is similar in the Central European region.¹⁾

This was the main reason to start the project New Media Museums dedicated to reflecting collections of art with ambition to use the experience gained in different types of organisations and share it to support qualified acquisitions and efficient care for artefacts of not-so-permanent nature. Before the beginning of the project an internal research was made in the OMA collections to find out what may the most relevant artworks with reference to new media and intermedia be. Although there was only one piece in the collections that could be identified as a “new media” artwork at that time,²⁾ there were several artworks that required similar complex treatment, be it in terms of acquisition, classification and evidence, preservation or exhibiting. The first issue to address in this project was the reasoning behind the restraint of acquiring new media artworks. After several conversations with curators who were working at OMA in the years after 2000, three main arguments that discouraged the museum from acquiring new media artworks arose.

1. Lack of expertise
   This does not mean that curators would not be familiar with new media art, rather they were aware of the technical infrastructure and specific requirements that collecting of new media art brings and were well aware that these requirements can’t be met under current conditions.
   
2. Specialised institutions
   Around 2000 there were already other institutions specialising in collecting and preserving new media – Research Center of the Academy of Fine Arts, National Gallery Prague etc. Since OMA's collections are media-oriented, new media were also perceived separately in terms of collecting. The view that contemporary art could be collected according to traditional media division prevailed and new media were thus omitted.
   
3. Act No. 122/2000 Coll.
   Act on the protection of museum collections that obliges the manager of the collection to “ensure the protection of the collection from damage” and “preserve the collection in its entirety as entered in the central register”. Also according to the museum’s collection administrator the law insufficiently defines the treatment of immaterial objects. Since it is the museum who guarantees a proper presentation of its artworks, and above all, preservation for further generations, a considerable responsibility lies on the curators, depository staff, conservators, and other museum workers. These reasons in the end outweighed curators’ efforts to expand the collections of modern and contemporary art with new media artworks.

Although the law has not changed and the technical infrastructure is still far from ideal for handling media artworks, the mindset of the institution gradually evolved. The preferences and experience of the younger generation of curators played a crucial role in the process, following the accelerating transformation of the art scene. Over time, it has become clear that new media works do not belong only to specialised institutions but they become a natural part of contemporary art. And while much of the work (backup, storage, preservation…) can be outsourced to specialized institutions, representative contemporary art collections themselves cannot do without new media works. And although the law remains unchanged for the time being, the way out is to work together on functional methodologies that can be the basis for its future modifications. All these ambitions, however, are always subjected to the management’s consideration of the institution’s capabilities, objectives and long-term strategies. And these have taken place at OMA over the last few years.

With the idea of establishing a New Media collection came the need to revise OMA’s collections in order to find works relevant in the context of new media and intermedia. The largest group of works consisted of kinetic sculptures and interactive objects that are part of the Collection of Sculpture. The selection of artworks does not necessarily represent predecessors of new media nor it includes only artists who later turned their focus to new media, rather the works were chosen on the basis of treatment requirements, be it at exhibitions or depositories. These are mainly kinetic, optical and light sculptures by authors such as Stanislav Zippe, Milan Dobeš, Juraj Bartusz, Václav Cigler, Hugo Demartini, Radoslav Kratina and others. Some of the artworks are not even kinetic or interactive in the true sense, rather they were created as mobile objects or variables, but could not be used as such in the gallery conditions and have been exhibited as static objects.

Among the selected artworks, there are three kinetic light sculptures by Czech artist Milan Dobeš – Kinetic Relief, Pulsing Rhythm, Attraction of Red Buildings – all of them made in the 60’s and belonging to the early period of constructivist experimenting with motion. Another example can be a light sculpture Luminous Point - Ground Glass by Václav Cigler that uses a spotlight placed behind a large glass plate. The characteristic element of these sculptures is their variability that strongly influences the final appearance and effect, as well as conservation treatment of their parts and their storing.

One piece stands out from the Collection of Sculpture; is it a work Sembion by the Czech-Argentinian artist Federico Díaz. Sembion is the only work that can be assigned to new media art and it represents most of the issues and problems connected to collecting and preserving new media. These issues are elaborated upon below.

In addition to the aforementioned, there is a sub-collection of action art belonging to the Collection of Photography. Although these works hardly fit in the field of new media art, some affinities can be found in the character and the problems with their classification as well as in the importance of documentation.³⁾ These issues however are not subject to this article.

A special place in the Collection of Sculpture is devoted to Stanislav Zippe. He belongs to the generation of pioneers of new media and his work Spiral has an unquestionable importance as one of the first installation artworks in Czechoslovakia. Spiral builds on Zippe’s series of Luminospheric variations – environments usually consisting of lights, mirrors and different objects. Spiral is installed in a black box or a room lit with UV lights and black mirrors on the floor. On the mirrors several balls painted with fluorescent colours and a fluorescent circle are placed. Above them, mounted to the ceiling, an engine rotates a hanging fluorescent wire creating spectacular kinetic and light effects.

Zippe created the work already in 1969 and showed it at his solo exhibition at Gallery on Charles Square, but from that year, it had not been exhibited until 1993, when it appeared at the exhibition Poetry of Rationality organised by the curator Jiří Hlaváček at Wallenstein Riding School.⁴⁾

OMA acquired the installation directly from the artist in 2000 while it was on loan at National Gallery Prague. During the exhibition at the National Gallery in Prague the engine rotating the spiral collapsed and damaged not only the glass parts at the bottom of the installation, but also the engine itself. During the restoration of the artwork, OMA curators and conservators were in contact with the artist, who however, didn't have any particular requirements nor instructions to repair or reconstruct the artwork. Eventually, the work was restored with help of local engineers with components of an old copier machine.

In 2012 Spiral was exhibited at the exhibition From Titian to Warhol at OMA. The reconstruction of the installation was consulted with the author, who proposed appropriate dimensions of the installation, but did not specify it in further detail. Neither the number nor design of the objects belonging to the installation were further determined by the artist and the photo documentation of previous exhibitions did not help much either. The few photos from the exhibition in 1969 focus mainly on capturing the movement of the spiral instead of the technical set up of the work as a whole.⁵⁾ The photo documentation of the Poetry of Rationality exhibition in 1993 has not been preserved due to the transformation and relocation of the exhibition institution. ⁶⁾

The reconstruction of Spiral was well photographed while on display in 2012 and a short video was produced. These visual materials can serve as a reference for further exhibitions of the piece. The depository storage seems unproblematic as well as the inventory of the parts of the installation, which means that the current state of the work is stabilised and Spiral can be exhibited or loaned. However, there is still some important data missing. For example, the restoration report lacks the information about the replacement of the engine etc. The revision is thus necessary in order to document the current state in detail and record as much as possible about the former conditions of the piece.

OMA is aware of the normative role in the process of setting the standards for display of the piece and that the installation methods used at the exhibition From Titian to Warhol are determining for any further displays. Any further documentation of previous arrangements of the work as well as any accompanying documentation (sketches, written notes…) by the author or recording of his memories can play an important role in terms of art-historical research.

Probably the most complex example of all the media artworks in the OMA collections is the work Sembion by Czech-Argentinian artist Federico Diaz. Sembion has all signs of an intermedial artwork, it merges an interactive software and audio visual installation together with automatically designed objects and digital prints.

The technical details as stated by the author:

PC, C++ software, semantic analyser, optical sensor, data projector, semi-transparent material, polyamide material, acoustic insulation, SLS rapid prototyping objects, data network size projection room of flexible dimensions.⁷⁾

The artist’s statement on the work:

The objective of the project is to convert speech in visual forms through specially programmed software. The voice recognitions detects the speech of visitors in the installation and does not analyse the meaning but the syntax and conventionalised phrases and converts them in the dictionary of shapes created in advance. Thus, the result is a set of data visualised as metablob systems through the technology of stereolithography and rapid prototyping. The projects was created in co-operation with the Academic Research Centre of the Academy of Fine Arts in Prague and a distinguished art theorist Jiří Ševčík.
The project was also presented at the exhibition Die Algorithmische Revolution in ZKM, Karlsruhe and in ICA in London.⁸⁾

Sembion was originally designed as a software for data visualisation using a written text as a source material. The text, originally a single book, the anthology Czech Art 1938 – 1989, was analysed according to its morphological and semantic structure, and the extracted data were then transformed into 3D visual forms of so-called metablobs projected on a screen. When it was exhibited as an interactive installation, sensors linked to the programme also reacted to motion, touch, voice or colour impulses of visitors, further variating the resulting image. Following display of the piece used different texts published on the internet as their source material expanding the software’s dictionary. The idea of translating texts according to their content and meaning has never been implemented, though, due to technological demands. Neither reflection of visitors’ emotions or physical condition in the resulting visualisation was possible during the years of development of the software.

The visual outputs of the analysed texts, the “metablobs” – constantly changing fluid forms resembling mercuric substances, constitute an important part of Diíaz’sDíaz’s work. Their shape reacts to every new input – each word in the text, each visitor in the room – and constantly adapts its form. Díaz used these digitally produced metablobs (formed without the artist’s direct involvement) to create physical objects using the method called Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) – the predecessor of 3D print. The method involves sintering of a thermoplastic powder medium by a laser beam thus producing abstract sculptures. This is a method that Díaz further continued at following projects. These small sculptures were then exhibited together with the Sembion installation, separately or as a part of other installations.

Sembion was offered to OMA in 2007 by a private gallery Zdeněk Sklenář Gallery as a set of works. It consisted of a software on a CD-R with one extra copy (both copies signed by the author), three large digital prints depicting the metablob adjusted and signed by the author, and an SLS produced sculpture. An additional element to the SLS sculpture – a luxurious looking platform made of shiny red plastic, belonging to the project Fluid F1 – is also part of the set, suggesting a combination of two independent projects.⁹⁾

The two CD-Rs both contain a single file – a boot command – that supposedly opens the Sembion software. The software itself, however, is stored elsewhere. It is not even clear what else (software or hardware) is needed to reconstruct the installation in the same form as it was presented between 2003 and 2005 or what the exact function of the software is. This issue – supposedly the most problematic about Sembion as a collection item – belongs not only to the category of collecting and documentation of new media but also licensing and authenticity and in a broader sense to ontology of digital art. This however seems as a highly museum-related problem, which may also be one of the reasons why Díaz decided to turn to privately funded and commercial projects.

Since the acquisition, Sembion has only been displayed once at the exhibition From Titian to Warhol at OMA, where only the SLS object with a video documentation of the installation were shown with no interactive elements.

To put it short, the Museum, who had never before acquired similar artworks and did not have a developed infrastructure for collecting such artworks, acquired an art piece that simply proved inoperative before it could have been displayed. And since the original software soon became outdated, with similar interactive softwares being developed in many fields, this work simply stands as a proof of the progressive ambitions of early software art in the Czech Republic.

From the perspective of OMA, three options for future displays seem relevant: 1) Reconstruction of the piece using the original software with adequate hardware constellation; 2) Gaining archival materials and documentation of the installation as it was shown in ICA London or at ZKM Karlsruhe to show it as a document of once progressive technologies; 3) Emulation based on the function – using up to date system to imitate the operation of the work. The last option seems the most problematic and opens up issues of authenticity and integrity of the work. Documentation of the original adjustment would be a necessary part of such installation. Author’s statement can play a determining role in this case, however, all efforts to contact Federico Díaz have so far been unsuccessful.

The gradual change in the goals and ambitions of OMA and SEFO has led, among other things, to a higher representation of current progressive art forms and the introduction of artists of the younger generation in the exhibitions and collections. This includes contemporary interventions in exhibitions of canonic artworks, transhistorical approaches within the permanent exposition, site-specific and public-art realisations during the SEFO Triennial and many more. All this reflected the tendency towards intermediality or post-medial approach and introduced new technological challenges to the curators, installation workers as well as conservators.

Among these there was a commissioned art intervention in the exhibition of Jiří Kolář created by Roman Štětina – a Czech intermedial artist, Jindřich Chalupecký Award laureate and assistant at the intermedial art studio at the Academy of Fine Arts in Prague.

The artwork was commissioned for the exhibition of Jiří Kolář’s confrontage series Babyluna. Kolář's album, consisting of 52 individual sheets with two confronting motifs on the front and author’s epigrams on the back of each sheet, became a semantic and formal inspiration for Štětina. The resulting intervention consisted of a sound installation in which a man’s voice (a radio director Miroslav Buriánek) reads the epigrams trying to find a proper pronunciation and intonation for each of them, while at the background we hear Štětina clicking the mouse when cutting and editing the final piece. The articulation of the process of collaging won over the content of the spoken word. Another part of Štětina’s intervention was his variation or appropriation of one of Kolář’s confrontages – in which he varies one of the sheets with the help of Google image search resulting in a new confrontage, seemingly not dissimilar to the original, yet formed purely by Google algorithms.

The installation is meant to be invisible, played back at regular stereo speakers mounted to the ceiling of the room leaving only the voice and clicking present in the room. The piece thus consisted only of the data file and a set of instructions communicated in advance via email between the curator, artist and audio-visual worker.¹⁰⁾ After some debate, the decision to omit any visible – or even visually attractive – sound reproducing device was made and the final “appearance” of the work was thus left to the curator and technological possibilities of the space.

Babyluna by Roman Štětina was then proposed for acquisition as the first new piece to the newly established New Media and Intermedia Collection and eventually acquired as the first sound art piece in the OMA collections. The communication with the artist then began setting the conditions of purchase and its actual subject. At this point, mainly the author’s experience with sales of videos was of a great help to the curators and documenters. Babyluna was delivered as a dataset on an SSD disc stored in a simple black case with a certificate of authenticity and a technical data sheet. The certificate confirms that the work was produced in an edition 1/1 by the author himself, the technical data sheets then describe what the SSD disc contains and how the piece should be handled and exhibited.

1. Basic specification
2. Archival and exhibition copies
3. Technical requirements
4. Manual for displaying
5. Information for labelling

Basic specification describes what files are stored on the disc (in this case one archival copy file and one exhibition copy file) and what their technical specifications are – file type, length, channels, bitrate and sample rate. The second section includes a simple description of the physical content of the case. Technical requirements fix the appropriate display of the work (stereo audio system/headphones, playback options, type of the device) and specify the options for conversion and compression of the files. The manual for displaying states that the use of acoustic and sound-absorbing materials are recommended when displaying the work in a room with other works. Finally, the information that should be included on the label is listed in the fifth section.

Aside from the case with the disc, a box frame with the original print labelled and signed by the author is part of the acquired artwork.

From the perspective of sustainability, Babyluna seems relatively unproblematic, OMA possess a documentation of the work approved by the author and technical documentation determined by the author. The work, being the first one assigned to New Media and Intermedia Collection, served as a case study in terms of evidence and database assignment as well as in terms of storage and backup of the files within the museum’s data storage system. The entire technical documentation system was proposed by the author himself, which proved Štětina’s experience with producing and selling videos and audio pieces.

As mentioned before, the new exhibition formats of OMA, particularly the SEFO Triennial, have induced several new collaborations with artists from different fields of art, who have created performative, site-specific and participatory projects. These formats usually exceed the regular museum context – their ephemerality or immateriality make them virtually impossible to collect or preserve or even show at common museum displays. These projects included participatory happenings with performers, lecture series, temporal art interventions in public space, pop-up performances and events. One of the artists with whom OMA has initiated a long-term collaboration during the SEFO Triennial, is Petr Válek. Válek prepared a series of performative events, public space sound interventions using navigation speakers for the blind as the playback medium, or a kinetic object – a special attention attractor – placed in a museum window. He also used a museum building and its everyday life as a source material for his music improvisations on which he collaborated with two curators and sound theorists Martin Klimeš and Miloš Vojtěchovský.

Two kinetic sound objects by Petr Válek were acquired in 2022 together with the author's video documentation of their ideal adjustment and functioning.¹¹⁾ Although materially belonging to more or less traditional media, their sonic element and significant performative potential situates them within the context of New Media and Intermedia Collection.

Petr Válek is a sound artist, musician, performer, painter, creator of musical instruments, synthesisers and sound effects, author of videos that he shares on social media, and above all a tireless experimenter in the field of sound and noise. Válek did not study at an art school, nor does he belong to an easily definable group of creators. A common feature of his work is an interest in DIY and handmade processes, constant material recycling and exuberant creativity. Although Válek creates mainly kinetic objects and sculptures, their aesthetic effect lies primarily in the rhythmical and sonic element.

Válek’s sound works have only recently been recognised by the art scene, and in 2021 his work was exhibited by Brno's Vasulka Kitchen, Opava's Bludný kámen and the East Bohemian Gallery in Pardubice, which also purchased several works for its collection. Other works are also part of the collections of the Art et Marges Musée in Brussels.

The two objects that were selected for acquisition are Vrrrrrzofon and Import – Export. The first one consists of a base holding a device made of a round sheet metal plate and an assembly of wires bent so that each of them touches the plate. An engine rotates the plate making the wires scratch and squeak in a rusty noise. A potentiometer controlling the rotation speed adapts the final saturation of the sound. Import – Export is an object that consists of a base with an engine rotating around a horizontal axis with a long wooden stick attached to it. A banana box is attached to the end of the stick and the rotation of the engine pushes the box forward and pulls it backwards. The friction of the box on the floor produces a deep resonant sound.

In the context of a room adjustment we can refer to Import – Export as an installation (rather than object), as the resulting effect is highly dependent on the space where it is placed. Furthermore, since the author’s intent lies in the production of complex sound environments, we can recognize spatial and temporal as well as performative qualities in most of his works. From an expository point of view, it is essential to take these aspects into account. Although the visual form of the works remains more or less stable, the sonic component is significantly influenced by the environment in which the works are exhibited making it a key factor for the perception of the work, despite not being an integral part of it. The sound emitted by the objects fundamentally influences the perception of the works in their surroundings and, no less significantly, the work of the museum's employees. The uncomplicated construction and straightforward technical operation of the works seems rather unproblematic in terms of restoration of the artwork. At the same time their technical instability and fragility of some of the elements pose a challenge for conservators. Moreover, the creative input of the author plays an important role in the process of construction and during the interview the author has expressed an interest in reconstructing the works by himself. When asked about what happens to the works after his death, he replied that they will die with him.

An interview with Petr Válek dedicated to issues of integrity of his works, their preservation and restoration, as well as their installation and an interpretation of the artist’s intent was conducted publicly during the New Media Museums Colloquium and has been published within this proceedings.¹²⁾

Although OMA’s New Media and Intermedia Collection is rather fresh and same can be said about its experience with media artworks, we feel that the topic of their preservation should be raised, and expertise in dealing with new media artworks should be gathered and shared to set satisfactory conditions and propose functional methods across organizations and institutions focusing (not only) on new media art to ensure their longest lifespan possible. This is also the reason why Olomouc Museum of Art, despite not having a new media collection, implemented the project New Media Museums.

The four examples represent only a few of the vast array of issues and problems associated with new media and intermedia artworks and their handling from the moment of their selection for potential acquisition, through their registration in the collection and physical storage, to their display and eventual loan.

On the basis of the presented findings, it is apparent that the ability to anticipate is crucial for the proper handling of these works, especially in identifying potential problems, determining the cost of maintaining the work, etc. If we are able to anticipate forthcoming issues and prevent them or at least be prepared for them, we can not only save the affected artwork, but also, we can save the museum from unpredicted workload and inevitable costs. Moreover, if we follow the methods that are already for some years available at major museum institution websites and different independent platforms, or we adopt some of the methods that were presented within this project, the anticipation process would become much more feasible.

Conversely, it is necessary to take care of the artworks when any unforeseen event happens to them and to learn to react instantly and with enough flexibility and necessary courage. A detailed documentation of every step we take in these often unproven processes must be obtained. This allows researchers to follow the process of transformation or deterioration of the artwork, but it also helps facilitate the future understanding of the work and its interpretation in the art-historical context/research.

Furthermore, the interdepartmental collaboration between curators, conservators documenters and IT workers leads to overcome the fear of making mistakes, and shows that when conserving new media, it is not possible to follow any strict instructions and procedures from a manual, but with each work it is necessary to collaborate in cross-diciplinary teams and to learn and master new processes.

With the notion of the current economic crisis influencing not only the operation of the museum but also any investments in exhibition programs and collection making, it is evident that no major acquisitions will be possible in the near future. This situation creates space for deep and insightful rethinking of care for the works of art and to pay special attention to selected pieces, either to determine adequate methods of display or preserve it for the future. Having in mind what Zuzana Bauerová writes in her essay about the dependence of cultural preservation on the state investments making the collections and artworks susceptible to bureaucratisation and manipulation, this process seems relevant under the aforementioned conditions and it is certainly beneficial to the artworks.¹³⁾