After a period of a little over two years, Glenn Adamson stepped down from his role as director of the Museum of Arts and Design in New York. MAD announced the resignation late last week, stating that Adamson will leave the museum effective March 31st and that he will work on exhibition, research, and institutional development projects. He will continue to collaborate with the museum, working with the curatorial team on exhibitions running through the fall. Among them, an exhibition about the work of ceramic sculptor Peter Voulkos.
Adamson, who as appointed in October 2013 will be replaced by Managing Director Robert Cundall, who will lead MAD in the interim while the board of trustees searches for a new director.
When Glenn Adamson took the post he lead the Victoria and Albert Museum’s Research Department. The New York Times reported that at the time Adamson had a doctorate in art history but, “was seen as a researcher without the usual executive experience for such a role, and a person who had been a critic of the museum.” He succeeded Holly Hotchner, who led the museum for 17 years.
According to a museum statement, Adamson was responsible for adding a new research position, expanding the artist-in-residence program and making additional contributions to the organization’s financial position and collection. For his part, Adamson is quoted by the museum stating that it is the right time for him to step down “so I can work on a number of projects that are important to me and the field.”
You can read more about CFile Chief Garth Clark’s take on MAD here. He wrote at length about the museum and the issues particular to it a year ago.
What do you think of this development between Glenn Adamson and the Museum of Arts and Design? Let us know in the comments.
I have spent a lot of time trying to understand Glenn Adamson’s book “Thinking Through Craft”, and was frankly surprised at the MAD appointment given the book’s thesis (as I came to understand it): that Craft is at best a poor step-child to Art, a supporting Frame, or an incidental aspect of the process. Craft as a goal in itself is missing the point of Art. Were MAD directors hoping to prove him wrong? Or so grateful that anyone would write critically and competently about Craft that they offered him the job? I am not close enough to the issues to know what lies behind the resignation but can’t say I am surprised.
Its the museum loss