The theme of Nob Hill Gazette’s May issue is Art, and there’s lots of 51ԹϺ Davis and Manetti Shrem Museum representation, so read on. The magazine is published in San Francisco.
The Interview: Mike Henderson Has More to Do
An interview with was the cover story for this month’s issue of Nob Hill Gazette Magazine. Henderson talks about his humble beginnings, artists that inspired him, the importance of community and about his time as a 51ԹϺ Davis professor.
We included an excerpt from the interview below. The story was written by Janet Reilly.
In 1965, Henderson headed west to attend the San Francisco Art Institute, the only desegregated art school at the time. Here, he found a community of artists and friends and developed his talents as a musician, filmmaker and painter. As a young artist, Henderson created large-scale figurative paintings reflecting the tumultuous political times of the 1960s, depicting scenes of social uprisings, racism and police brutality. Later, his work evolved into powerful abstractions. Prior to retiring in 2012, Henderson taught for more than four decades at 51ԹϺ Davis with other luminaries such as Wayne Thiebaud, William T. Wiley, Roy De Forest and Manuel Neri — all friends for life. In 2023, the will host Mike Henderson: Before the Fire, 1965–1985, a major survey exhibition.
You taught art at 51ԹϺ Davis for 43 years. What did you love about teaching?
Oh, everything. The students were all from such different walks of life. I always wanted to communicate with every one of them. And God, it was so much fun being there with Wiley and the rest. When he retired, it was like John Lennon leaving the Beatles or something, you know? It just shifted. Everybody thought that they could take his place, but they couldn’t. He had a different thing he brought to the table. Everybody did.
Everybody there was a character, from Thiebaud, to Wiley, to [Robert] Arneson, to Roy De Forest — who I called “Dad.” He was always correcting me. He’d say, “I need to correct my son.” I’d say, “OK, Dad, what’d I do wrong?” It was funny. I learned something from everybody I could.
Read the full interview .
Life After Benezra
This shares the thoughts of art critics, curators and museum heads regarding what SFMOMA should look for in its next leader following the leadership of Neal Benezra. Rachel Teagle, founding director of the Jan Shrem and Maria Manetti Shrem Museum of Art; Sampada Aranke (Arnold Kemp guest curator and scholar-in-residence); and Susette Min, a curator and associate professor of Asian American Studies, are all quoted in the story.
The following s were posted by Nob Hill Gazette magazine. The story was written by Jennifer Blot.
When San Francisco Museum of Modern Art Director Neal Benezra came aboard in 2002, the expectations of a museum’s role in the community were very different. Today, as the museum embarks on an international search to replace Benezra, who announced his retirement earlier this year after nearly two decades in the position, all eyes are on SFMOMA. The Gazette recently checked in with artists, academics, curators and critics from various corners of the art world, posing the question: With Neal Benezra’s imminent departure from SFMOMA after 19 years at the helm, what should the museum be looking for in its next leader?
Founding director of the Jan Shrem and Maria Manetti Shrem Museum of Art
“I believe SFMOMA has achieved the status of a national and international leader in the museum field; they no longer need to be looking up to other museums for inspiration. Since the days of Jack Lane, SFMOMA built its reputation looking to models in Europe and the East Coast. I think that was a necessary part of SFMOMA’s journey and they’ve achieved what they set out to do some 30 years ago. Now, at the top of their game, they need to look around them to see what California artists have to offer. They are in the position to raise up so many voices. By focusing their attention on our community, they become even more effective leaders. SFMOMA has an opportunity to be a true leader in the field if they bring in a new director who’s not only an excellent curator and excellent art historian, but also someone who has a proven track record of engaging communities and doing the face-to-face work of community development. Community building is one-on-one, having coffee with people — truly face-to-face work. Anything abstract, anything delegated, doesn’t work. You have to have a leader who is in your community.”
Independent curator and associate professor of Asian American Studies at 51ԹϺ Davis
“I hope that the next director will be committed to supporting manifold ways of dismantling and reenvisioning what we currently know as the ‘museum.’ SFMOMA needs a museum director with vision, imagination and a backbone; who is fearless, financially savvy and generous and not beholden to corporate trustees and profit, the canon and the market. A museum director of the 21st century can no longer approach the museum as a sacred artifact, a private warehouse for rich collectors, a site of blockbuster entertainment, a tourist destination — but rather, figures it as an open-ended democratic assemblage that constantly evolves, a place of discovery and creative learning, apart from its 19th century pedagogical civilizing mandate. Talented and visionary artists are leaving the Bay Area in droves because the cost of living here is so expensive. It would be amazing if the museum hosted not only the curation of exhibitions of emerging and underrecognized artists and challenging thematic exhibitions, but also supported the making of art — a creative sanctuary for local and global artists to thrive and experiment collaboratively.”
Assistant professor of art history, theory and criticism, School of the Art Institute of Chicago; scholar-in-residence, Jan Shrem and Maria Manetti Shrem Museum of Art, and curator of Arnold Joseph Kemp: I would survive. I could survive. I should survive.
“I believe SFMOMA should destroy the current status quo of leadership models to a more radical presentation of what leadership looks like. What might it mean to have a collective run the institution? A group of radical artists, curators and administrators of color who could work in the spirit of collectivity revolutionized in the Bay Area in the 1960s and beyond? Instead of thinking of one new leader, I think the museum should dismantle that model and put in its place something radically democratic, collective and revolutionary.”