We were surprised to see Timothy Potts, soon to be ex-director of the Kimbell, noted in yesterday's NYT as a possible successor to Philippe de Montebello at the Met (actually, the blog CultureGrrl discussed this last November, and the NYT listed her top three exactly as its top three.) Potts has made some interesting acquisitions and made a good hire in curator Malcolm Warner, but is hardly regarded locally as a big success story. More importantly, as one North Texas source remarked to me, everybody rehashes the same handful of names (all of them men), then wrings their hands about the lack of talent to fill the many museum vacancies open at the moment. If, as de Montelbello points out in the article, the job description of museum director has changed so dramatically in the past 25 years (from subdued scholar to worldly entrepreneur), why can't the art world get creative in coming up with candidates who could fill these posts?
also by Rainey Knudson
- You Should Go To Mexico City - August 6th, 2017
- Please Stop Painting The Electrical Boxes (A Public Art Proposal) - July 30th, 2017
- This and That: Chris Burden, David Blaine + Youtube - July 1st, 2017
- As Moths to the Light: Pipilotti Rist at the MFAH - June 18th, 2017
- This and That: Andy Warhol / Tiger Woods - June 5th, 2017