Last Word: Dr Simon Maidment, Associate Director, Museums & Collections, University of Melbourne

Dr. Simon Maidment is Associate Director, Art Museums, in the Museums and Collections department at the University of Melbourne, and Director of the Ian Potter Museum of Art and Buxton Contemporary, as well as overseeing programming at Old Quad and the 2019 M Pavilion, all situated in Melbourne. Previously, Maidment spend eight years at the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV), as Senior Curator of Contemporary Art, and completed his PhD at the University’s Centre for Ideas in 2018.

His research into curatorial practice as a method to investigate art’s relationship tosocial and political change is directly informing new acquisitions and programmingnow being implemented across the collection.

Here he talks to Ursula Sullivan about revitalising collections and programming.

Hi Simon, welcome back after your trip to Venice! How was it? Any highlights?

Thank you, Ursula, it was an immensely productive trip. I went with two First Nations staff members who were involved in the aabaakwad program, linked to the Sámi Pavilion presentation—also known as the Nordic Pavilion. It was fantastic reconnecting with my network again and engaging in some informal exchange and knowledge sharing. While the move to Zoom has allowed a certain type of exhibition and project development to be streamlined, the flow of ideas in less structured ways has been impacted and it was fantastic to have access to that more organic process with international colleagues. Seeing art in the flesh was a highlight too. The Australian representation with Marco Fusinato’s performance installation was really exciting, and I loved experiencing and considering it in contrast to, and exchange with, the French, Belgian, Romanian, Sámi and Polish Pavilions in particular.

We’ve noticed a new direction for the University collections and exhibitions, one that perhaps aims to highlight both First Nations and Female artists—the recent exhibition at Buxton Contemporary Observance was a powerful example of new perspectives to be shared. What drives this?

We are not alone in recognising this important moment to expand the opportunities for more diverse voices. We have developed a new Artistic Vision for the program which reflects a shift in the University’s vision, Advancing Melbourne, which acknowledges Grand Challenges that face us today and we are committed to contributing to addressing them. This recognition of a socially impeded position is a significant statement of agency and shared responsibility. It acts as a call to action across the University, marking a shift of institutional mindset from a distanced ‘apolitical’ position to an active poly-political one. This carries into our new Collection Strategy. The Strategy identifies that the University of Melbourne Art Collection should primarily advance opportunities for research and educational activities through object-based learning. Gaps in the Collection will be addressed, beginning with a recognition that efforts must continue to diversify voices within the Collection. The priorities are to increase the numbers of works by women, LGBTIQ+ identifying artists, artists of colour, artists of diverse cultural backgrounds, and art from certain regions and Indigenous language groups around the country.

What was one thing you wanted to change about what works were acquired, and how these were engaged with by audiences (so two things!) when you took up this position?

In terms of what was collected, the main change is to refocus priorities to collecting works that will be actively used by different faculties and areas of the University for teaching and learning, rather than replicating the accumulation that might typify a State Gallery or Museum with a more ‘encyclopaedic’ approach to representing an era, or movement. This collection needs to be used in a different way to those. This means greater consultation with our academic colleagues when identifying typologies of work to collect.

What are some of the greatest challenges about the acquisition process today?

Establishing clear provenance in collecting historical works is an enormous challenge. Aside from this, I would say the process of acquisition itself is not terribly challenging,

but instead, time consuming. There is a great deal more documentation required—for good reason—than in the past, which I put down to the industry becoming more aware of its responsibilities.

The greatest challenges are more to do with how a work is managed following its acquisition. These issues include: its digitisation and discoverability; increasing access for communities, including communities of origin, and deciding what that access looks like (for instance where cultural objects might be held); in the cases of historical collections issues of provenance, repatriation and rematriation; adherence to cultural heritage legislation; and resourcing consultation with communities. These all factor into the decision to acquire and are ongoing for as long as the work remains under our custodianship.

Finally, a favourite moment since taking the role?

Look, there are many, I really enjoy the challenge and opportunities and I am at home in the context of the University, with which I have had a very long association. Most recently, I had a moment on the weekend where I felt deeply moved as part of my role. I was humbled to listen to Observance artists Julie Gough, Lisa Hilli and Angela Tiatia in conversation with the curators Samantha Comte and Hannah Presley. The insight, resilience, vulnerability, generosity and solidarity they all embodied was very special. The event acted as a reminder to me of the responsibilities we have, to bring care and close attention to our roles on an everyday basis, and of the incredible opportunities we have to reshape our future if we listen carefully and work together in support of those goals.