Ann Demeester is the director of Kunsthaus Zurich, Switzerland’s largest art museum – the collection spans art from the 13th century to today. She joined the institution last October with a mission to make it more artist-centric and inclusive. Art Basel spoke to her about her vision for the museum, why artists should contribute more, and how to engage a broader public.
Jeni Fulton: Walk me through your career – you began as an art critic; you don’t have the usual art-historical academic background expected of a museum director.
Ann Demeester: I ended up in journalism by accident, after majoring in English literature and Cultural studies. It suited me very well, but then, Jan Hoet, the curator of Documenta IX and director at the Museum of Contemporary Art [S.M.A.K. in Ghent, Belgium] hired me onto his curatorial team. I think it doesn’t happen in the art world anymore, but 20 years ago, someone would say, ‘Well, just curate an exhibition. Just try.’ After working for Jan, I took a position at a small art space in Amsterdam, which led me to become director of the art centre and Curatorial Program at de Appel.
You came from this area of experimentation and avant-garde art at de Appel, and went to the Frans Hals Museum and now the Kunsthaus Zürich – from this place of experimentation to these very institutionalized spaces.
When I was asked to apply to Frans Hals, I first thought, no. But the Frans Hals Museum is not just old masters, it’s also modern and contemporary. These three types of collections, they should speak to each other. We worked on this notion of the transhistorical museum that connects art, objects, ideas, and stories from different time periods.
How do you see the role of the artist within the institution, particularly an institution dedicated to non-contemporary art?
Artists are a cornerstone of what we do. We must reconnect to how artists think about and experience art, and ask ourselves, how could this be exciting for an audience? I’ve always been fascinated by the Kunsthaus Zürich because I love the typology of the museum of fine arts. There are only a few of them that have truly wild collections, which are what the Germans call hochkaraetig [top-class], but which are also a bit eclectic and a bit weird – not systematic. At Kunsthaus Zürich, on the one hand, there’s Picasso, there’s Bacon, there’s Monet. But there’s also Fuseli and Hodler, whom I love.
You’ve often said that you want to present a more open, inclusive, and accessible art world. What does this mean in the context of the museum?
It’s a huge question. The Kunsthaus has this reputation of being the fortress on the hill. I think for me it means working with different partners, actively starting dialogues. For example, in relation to the Bührle collection, we talk with all kinds of stakeholders, with people from different Jewish communities, people who critique the museum. [Editor’s note: Kunsthaus Zürich received backlash, prior to Demeester’s arrival, for displaying the collection of Emil Bührle, a German émigré to Switzerland who sold weapons to the Nazis and acquired works stolen from Jews.] We also need to activate more of the liminal spaces the museum has. The main building is really like a temple, and the David Chipperfield extension is beautiful inside. We’re going to do a series of commissions from 2024 onwards, asking artists to make work for the foyer. We’re also going to do a commission project in 2025 and ask an artist to design a pleasure garden. We also did an open call for projects in the temporarily vacant Kunsthaus restaurant.
You’ve quoted Édouard Glissant’s idea of the museum as archipelago – you’ve got these little islands everywhere of activation and possibility. One thing that struck me when I first entered the Chipperfield building is that it seems meant for a certain type of artwork – for sculpture, for painting. It’s very formal. Thinking through more contemporary art forms such as performance, installation, and audiovisual activations, how do you bring contemporary art into a space like that?
I think it’s about finding what fits where, how to use this plurality of architectures and typologies that define the Kunsthaus to our best purposes. (we actually have 4 different building elements from different periods, 1910 over 1950’s and 1970’s to 2021) The Kunsthaus started as a Künstlerhaus an artist initiative. But now, I think, a lot of different artist communities don’t feel close to us, which is normal for big institutions. In our case, there’s a lot of work to be done there. We’re also inviting artists to curate parts of our permanent collection. And that brings in [the artist’s] way of seeing, rather than just the work.
Can you name some artists you’ve invited?
Daniela Ortiz is one of them, a Peruvian artist who recently developed a new play for Theater Neumarkt in Zurich. The artist couple Ida Ekblad and Matias Faldbakken is another. It’s important that we not only ask international artists such as these who are intrigued by our collection, but also artists who have an intimate, insider knowledge of the collection because have lived and worked in Zürich for a longer time.
I’m interested in the question of reevaluating the canon, another big topic in museology right now. What are your thoughts on this, particularly with the Kunsthaus?
We’re aiming for a transhistorical approach which automatically questions and supplements the linear, chronological approach to art history. The question is, how do you mix objects and ideas from different time periods? The Kunsthaus, despite being very traditional, has a transgressive history of going across time, across disciplines with figures such as Harald Szeemann and Bice Curiger. We’re interested in allowing other forms of art to enter the museum, and not being so strict about what defines fine arts. The best way to do that is to invite people from outside of the art world, those who basically don’t care about the divisions between whether something is art or whether it’s fashion or music.
The show that the late Virgil Abloh curated at the Museum for Contemporary Art in Chicago, Figures of Speech, was well received.
That’s an inspiring example, because all of the references we discussed before were philosopher like, Lyotard curating a show at Centre Pompidou or Kristeva and Derrida at the Louvre. I think it’s about inviting people who have other ways of looking at the intersection between art and culture.
You also push against the masterpiece narrative. This is something that’s been prompted by the art market, and I’m never sure how productive it is, because you still end up with a handful of artists getting all the museum shows. I mean, how many museums own an Andy Warhol? I don’t need to go to another museum to see yet another Warhol.
That’s true, and at the same time, I think a general audience loves icons. But there’s a lot more to explore. We always get this question about marginalized voices, especially female artists – but the question is not how do we change the past but how do we change the reading of the past ? Late 16th and early 17th century In European art history seems to be all about Rembrandt and Caravaggio, but what about Sofonisba Anguissola and Judith Leyster? One of my big dreams is to do a show about Leyster's work.
You are a collecting institution, after all.
Yes, we are. But something I want to avoid is the neocolonialism of trying to collect the world. People say we should buy African, Asian, and Latin American positions. But what is the non-European and non-American internationalism that is in Zürich itself? This is still a very young thought. For example, we have a Sri Lankan community in Zürich. Maybe it makes sense to look at Southeast Asia from that perspective. Not because we think that the Sri Lankan-Swiss will then come to the museum, but more because, this history is part of the city. It’s a way of becoming locally global, rather than the pitfall of just trying to acquire the world again.
What’s your favorite artwork in the collection?
It’s an impossible question; I really don’t want to have darlings. But one I am really fascinated by is The Truth by Ferdinand Hodler. We have no clue what it’s about. I love the weird bodies, the lines, the colors. The undecodable symbolism in his paintings I find exciting. Another favorite is Self-Portrait at the Age of Twelve by Anna Waser. It’s the only known work by this young woman. And that makes it unique, to have a Swiss painter from the 16th century who’s female. There’s something incredibly self-conscious about the painting. There’s a pride in it, in her attitude. What did it mean, in the 16th century, to be a young female painter?
Kunsthaus Zurich is opening their collaborative project space KunstXaus Zürich on June 9 at 6pm, part of the programming for Zurich Art Weekend. Find out more here.
Dr. Jeni Fulton is Art Basel’s Head of Editorial. She holds a PhD from Humboldt University, Berlin, and an M.A. in Philosophy from the University of Cambridge. She teaches at Zurich’s University of Arts, ZHdK.
Published on June 7, 2023.
Caption for full-bleed image (from top to bottom): 1. Kunsthaus Zürich, Georg Baselitz. Photography by Franca Candrian. Courtesy of Kunsthaus Zürich. © Franca Candrian, Kunsthaus Zürich; © Georg Baselitz. 2. Kunsthaus Zürich, Claude Monet. Photography by Franca Candrian. Courtesy of Kunsthaus Zürich. © Franca Candrian, Kunsthaus Zürich. 3. Kunsthaus Zürich, Bührle Collection. Photography by Franca Candrian. Courtesy of Kunsthaus Zürich. © Franca Candrian, Kunsthaus Zürich. 4. Kunsthaus Zürich, Old Masters. Photography by Franca Candrian. Courtesy of Kunsthaus Zürich. © Franca Candrian, Kunsthaus Zürich.