Art research practice on contemporary
fiber art fails to include the necessary elements required in accurate
reliable scholarly research in all other fields of the liberal
arts and sciences, e.g., transparency, due diligence,
collegial challenge, etc.
It is amply documented that the
existing institutional art research lacks transparency. It
rarely requires clear accounting of what is traditionally omitted
from its projects. Nowhere does it clarify its required
due diligence. No discussion of the structure of the research
is encouraged, no less permitted.
In a nutshell, institutional research
which traditionally underrepresents populations without being held
accountable for those traditional omissions of certain populations
is simply not scholarly quality research. It is merely popular
Ironically, while striving to champion
traditionally underrepresented populations of craft media artists,
the Fuller's exhibition was almost entirely ignored.
Only one very brief newspaper review
of the Fuller's exhibition seems to be publicly available. In
that sole available article, the reviewer referred to one of the
weavers not as "he," but as "she."
On the one hand, the principal point
of the exhibition itself — that the weavers in it were not
females — went entirely over the head of the exhibition's
reviewer. On the other hand, ironically, the reviewer has
indeed dramatically demonstrated the unreliability of the dominating
inaccurate art research on this field that generates inaccurate
stereotypes about contemporary fiber art.
And the last, but not least, of
the anomalies calling out for sunlight and remedy, is that although
the Fuller's important exhibition focused on populations of craft
artists that are traditionally underrepresented in institutional
art research, the museum has no photos of the installed exhibition
to share and be used to further the important "conversation" so
clearly needed here.