The curation of artists’ film and video and distinction-making processes: Tate as a case study

References

1. ArtDaily (2007), ‘New Art Trust expands holdings’, 13 January, http://artdaily.com/news/18873/New-Art-Trust-Expands-Holdings#.XZNSTlVKipY. Accessed 4 January 2021.
2. Austin, Guy (ed.) (2016), New Uses of Bourdieu in Film and Media Studies, Oxford and New York: Berghahn Books.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Balsom, Erika (2013), ‘Original copies: How film and video became art objects’, Cinema Journal, 53:1, pp. 97–118.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Borg, Erik and Vigerland, Lars (2017), ‘Cultural capital in the economic field: A study of relationships in an art market’, Philosophy of Management, 17, pp. 169–85.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bourdieu, Pierre (1989), ‘Social space and symbolic power’, Sociological Theory, 7:1, pp. 14–25.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bourdieu, Pierre (1993), The Field of Cultural Production, Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bourdieu, Pierre (1996), Distinction, London and New York: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Calder, S. (2019) ‘Tate Modern overtakes British Museum as top UK tourist attraction’, The Independent, 27 March, https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/top-uk-tourist-attraction-2019-tate-modern-british-museum-edinburgh-castle-a8841376.html. Accessed 3 January 2020.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Connolly, Maeve (2009), The Place of Artists’ Cinema: Space, Site and Screen, Bristol and Chicago, IL: Intellect.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Cook, Richard (2001), ‘The mediated manufacture of an avant-garde: A Bourdiesian analysis of the field of contemporary art in London, 1997–99’, Sociological Review, Special Issue: ‘Reading Bourdieu on Society and Culture’, 49:S1, pp. 164–85.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Curtis, David (2001), ‘Moving image as art conference at Tate Modern: “Day 1” and “Day 2”’, TATE, https://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/video/moving-image-art-symposium-day-1. Accessed 28 August 2017. [no longer available]
12. Curtis, David (2017), ‘In the bloody basement again’, Moving Image Review & Art Journal, 6:1–2, pp. 260–65.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Dercon, Chris (2012), ‘An open manifesto: 15 weeks of art in action’, in C. Dercon, K. Noble and C. Wood (eds), Tate Tanks: An Open Manifesto: 15 Weeks of Art in Action, n.p.: Tate, p. 2.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Eamon, Christopher (2005), interviewed by L. Zippy, September, https://www.eai.org/resourceguide/exhibition/installation/interview_eamon.html. Accessed 2 February 2023.
15. Eamon, Christopher (2011), interviewed by Anon., ‘Kramlich art collection’, KQED Spark, https://ww2.kqed.org/spark/pamela-and-richard-kramlich/?fbclid=IwAR0d4gqtAIY2ABUVhQJ8PWvsTE70R-CAa_zw7HTQSRbBij6ORaTT81NSlas. Accessed 25 May 2023.
16. Fabrizi, Elisabetta (ed.) (2011), The BFI Gallery Book, London: BFI Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Fabrizi, Elisabetta (2021), ‘Curating the moving image at the turn of the 21st century: An investigation of the role of the curator in the process of cultural consecration of the moving image as visual art in Britain’, Ph.D. thesis, Newcastle upon Tyne: Newcastle University.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Fabrizi, Elisabetta (2023), ‘Rising from the ashes of the film museum: The role of individual habitus and political-economic structures in the shaping of the British Film Institute’s curatorial strategies and the establishment of the BFI Gallery’, Museum History Journal, 16:1, pp. 81–98, https://doi.org/10.1080/19369816.2023.2197345.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Fleischmann, Monika (2003), ‘How gate-keeping systems work in the new media arts’, Netzspannung, http://netzspannung.org/about/mars/publications/?currentpage=6&lang=de#. Accessed 18 January 2019.
20. Flynn, Barbara (2008), ‘The fine art of giving’, Financial Review, 30 May, https://www.afr.com/politics/the-fine-of-giving-art-20080530-jk98e. Accessed 11 January 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Forbes (2020), ‘#73 Richard Kramlich’, https://www.forbes.com/profile/richard-kramlich. Accessed 1 June 2020.
22. Fraser, Andrea (2016a), 2016 in Museums, Money, and Politics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Fraser, Andrea (2018), ‘It’s time to consider the links between museum boards and political money’, Artnet News, 7 May, https://news.artnet.com/art-world/how-are-museums-implicated-in-todays-political-mess-1278824. Accessed 30 June 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Fraser, Inga (2016b), ‘Kinomuseum? Film and video at the Tate Gallery: The rushes of a relationship’, LUX, 17 November, https://lux.org.uk/writing/kinomuseum-film-video-tate-gallery. Accessed 10 May 2022.
25. Fyfe, Gordon (1995), ‘A trojan horse at the Tate: Theorizing the museum as agency and structure’, Sociological Review, 43:1, pp. 203–28.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Garrells, Gary (2011), interviewed by Anon., ‘Kramlich art collection’, KQED Spark, https://ww2.kqed.org/spark/pamela-and-richard-kramlich/?fbclid=IwAR0d4gqtAIY2ABUVhQJ8PWvsTE70R-CAa_zw7HTQSRbBij6ORaTT81NSlas. Accessed 25 May 2023.
27. Grenfell, Michael and Hardy, Cheryl (2007), Art Rules: Pierre Bourdieu and the Visual Arts, Oxford and New York: Berg.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Hanquinet, Laurie, Roose, Henk and Savage, Mike (2014), ‘The eyes of the beholder: Aesthetic preferences and the remaking of cultural capital’, Sociology, 48:1, pp. 111–32, https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038513477935.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Hanquinet, Laurie and Savage, Mike (2016), Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Art and Culture, London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Harbord, Janet (2002), Film Cultures, London: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Harvey, Charles and Maclean, Mairi (2019), ‘Pierre Bourdieu and elites: Making the hidden visible’, in S. R. Clegg and E. Pina Cunha (eds), Management, Organizations and Contemporary Social Theory, London: Routledge, pp. 98–114.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Jackson, Shannon (ed.) (2022), The Human Condition: Media Art from the Kramlich Collection, I, London: Thames and Hudson.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Knight, Julia and Thomas, Peter (2011), Reaching Audiences: Distribution and Promotion of Alternative Moving Image, Bristol: Intellect.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Kramlich Collection (n.d.), ‘About the Kramlich Collection’, https://www.kramlichcollection.org/about. Accessed 16 January 2021.
35. Kramlich, Pamela (2012a), interviewed by Anon., ‘VIP Art Fair presents the Kramlich Collection’, Vimeo, https://vimeo.com/47119920. Accessed 25 May 2023.
36. Kramlich, Richard (2012b), interviewed by Anon., ‘VIP Art Fair presents the Kramlich Collection’, Vimeo, https://vimeo.com/47119920. Accessed 25 May 2023.
37. Lefebvre, Sam (2020), ‘SFMOMA staffers condemn “racist censorship” and institutional inequities in letter calling for change’, ArtNews, 23 June, https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/sfmoma-protest-letter-1202692108. Accessed 4 January 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Lena, Jennifer C. (2019), Entitled: Discriminating Tastes and the Expansion of the Arts, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Lubow, Arthur (2019), ‘The ultimate video art retreat’, New York Times, 7 March, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/arts/design/kramlich-video-herzog-de-meuron.html. Accessed 7 January 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Lux (2017), ‘20th anniversary of the opening of the Lux Centre, Hoxton Square’, 31 October, https://lux.org.uk/writing/lux-centre-20th-anniversary. Accessed 25 May 2023.
41. Luxonline (2005), ‘Histories: 1970–1979’, https://www.luxonline.org.uk/histories/1970-1979.html. Accessed 5 January 2021.
42. Manasseh, Cyrus (2009), The Problematic of Video Art in the Museum: 1968–1990, New York: Cambria Press.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Matters in Media Arts (n.d.), http://mattersinmediaart.org. Accessed 18 January 2021.
44. Mazière, Michael (2003), ‘Institutional support for artists’ film and video in England 1966–2003’, AHRB Centre for British Film and Television Studies, November, https://web.archive.org/web/20070617040116/http://www.studycollection.co.uk/maziere/paper.html. Accessed 15 January 2024.
45. Morris, Francis (ed.) (2000), Between Cinema and a Hard Place, London: Tate Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Muir, Gregor (2009), Lucky Kunst: The Rise and Fall of Young British Art, London: Aurum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Muir, Gregor (2019), Artists’ Moving Image in Britain since 1989 (ed. E. Balsom, S. Perks and L. Reynolds), New Haven, CT and London: Paul Mellon Foundation and Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Muir, Gregor (2020), interviewed by E. Fabrizi, phone interview, 9 July.
49. Ollivier, Michele (2008), ‘Revisiting distinction’, Journal of Cultural Economy, 1:3, pp. 263–79, https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350802476970.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Olsberg, Nicholas (ed.) (2019), Kramlich Residence and Collection, Berlin: Hatje Cantz.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Perry, Mauree Jane (2006), interview with R. Kramlich, https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/roho/ucb/text/kramlich_dick_donated.pdf. Accessed 12 January 2023.
52. Prior, Nick (2003), ‘Having’s one’s Tate and eating it: Transformation of the museum in a hypermodern era’, in A. McClellan (ed.), Art and Its Publics: Museum Studies at the Millennium, Malden, MA: Wiley, pp. 51–76.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Quinn, Malcolm, Beech, Dave, Lehnert, Michael, Tulloch, Carol and Wilson, Stephen (eds) (2018), The Persistence of Taste: Art, Museums and Everyday Life after Bourdieu, London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Reimann, Neill (2001), ‘NEA was not immune to mistakes’, Forbes, 7 February, https://www.forbes.com/2001/02/07/0207VC.html#5554adae3aee. Accessed 10 January 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Rosler, Martha (1997), ‘Money, power, and the history of art’, Art Bulletin, 79:1, pp. 22–23.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Savage, Michael, Barlow, James, Dickens, Peter and Fielding, Tom (1992), Property, Bureaucracy and Culture: Middle-Class Formation in Contemporary Britain, London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Schmitz, Andreas, Witte, Daniel and Gengnagel, Vincent (2016), ‘Pluralizing field analysis: Toward a relational understanding of the field of power’, Social Science Information, 56:1, pp. 49–73, https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018416675071.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Serota, Nicholas (2001), ‘Moving image as art conference at Tate Modern: Day 1 – Introduction’, TATE, https://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/video/moving-image-art-symposium-day-1. Accessed 28 August 2017. [no longer available]
59. Skegg, Beverley (2004), Class, Self, Culture, London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Stanger, Ilana (n.d.), interview with M. Rosler, https://web.archive.org/web/20130606173700/http://www.nyfa.org/level4.asp?id=120&fid=1&sid=51&tid=167. Accessed on 25 May 2023.
61. Strickland, Erika (2006), ‘There at creation: A video art collector with an eye for emerging talent is now sharing’, San Francisco Weekly, 18 October, https://web.archive.org/web/20210916014031/https://www.sfweekly.com/news/there-at-creation/. Accessed 11 January 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Sturken, Marita (ed.) (1999), Seeing Time: Selections from the Pamela and Richard Kramlich Collection of Media Art, San Francisco, CA: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Tate (2002), ‘Eija-Liisa Ahtila: Real characters, invented worlds’, press release, 29 April, https://www.tate.org.uk/press/press-releases/eija-liisa-ahtila-real-characters-invented-worlds. Accessed 12 November 2020.
64. Tate (2004a), Tate Report 2002–04, London: Tate, https://www.tate.org.uk/documents/64/tate_report_2002_2004.pdf. Accessed 23 June 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Tate (2004b), ‘Time zones: Recent film and video’, October, https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-modern/exhibition/time-zones. Accessed 23 September 2019.
66. Tate (2007), ‘Tate acquires major gift of new media works with US museums’, 23 January, https://www.tate.org.uk/press/press-releases/tate-acquires-major-gift-new-media-works-us-museums. Accessed 18 January 2021.
67. Tate (2012a), ‘Eight major works by Anthony McCall donated to the New Art Trust’, press release, https://www.tate.org.uk/press/press-releases/eight-major-works-anthony-mccall-seminal-solid-light-film-series-donated-new. Accessed 18 January 2021.
68. Tate (2012b), ‘The Tanks opening’, press release, https://www.tate.org.uk/press/press-releases/tanks-go-live. Accessed 7 November 2018.
69. Tate (n.d.a), ‘History of Tate’, https://www.tate.org.uk/about-us/history-tate. Accessed 7 January 2020.
70. Tate (n.d.b), ‘Art Now: Matthew Barney: OTTOSHAFT’, https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-britain/exhibition/art-now-matthew-barney-ottoshaft. Accessed 18 January 2021.
71. Tate (n.d.c), ‘Matthew Barney: Cremaster 5 (1997)’, https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/barney-cremaster-5-t07572. Accessed 18 January 2021.
72. Thornton, Sarah (2016), ‘Risky business: Bay Area venture capitalists bring their pioneer mentality to art’, ArtNews, 30 August, https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/risky-business-bay-area-venture-capitalists-bring-their-pioneer-mentality-to-art-6875. Accessed June 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
73. Wacquant, Loïc J. D. (1993), ‘From ruling class to field of power: An interview with Pierre Bourdieu on La Noblesse d’État’, Theory, Culture and Society, 10:3, pp. 19–44.
    [Google Scholar]