There’s been a minor fuss recently over the term “curator”. Museum folk didn’t care to be compared to the Pinterest folk, somewhat protective of the word.
Listen, things like this get people in lather…I knew a prostitute who only wanted to be called a whore. I tend to be old school on this by calling people what they want to be called, not what you feel they “should” be called. Of course I can’t call a lieutenant a general, but let’s not get sidetracked.
Normally I’d give you a smart overview on the root history of the word “curator”, deepening your immediate understand of how the word has evolved, changed and remorphed over the years but I’m not interested in that kind of writing. Instead I’ll link you directly to Wikipedia. Make sure to come back once you get what you need.
Thanks for returning.
Choice and selection based on knowledge versus picking and sharing based exclusively on what you like. One speaks to the brain, the other to the soul.
The “pinning” numerous images of bridesmaid’s dresses to one central location for the gals to view, or the DJ cherry picking the appropriately hot tunes to advance the evening, or the selection of the perfect Etruscan vase for the new wing of an urban museum…all are great design in my book because each one accesses creativity and imagination.
How is a curator identified right before they are a christened a curator? To that point, once a curator, always a curator?
I will trust that I’m not making the wrong things important here. The end-goal should be based on thoughtful selection and opinion while relying on images and information we find both beneficial and elevating to the end goal.
At the end of the day, we are all students to the learning curve.