Running head: OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSUEMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

Object Labels in Art Museums:

Inspire or Restrain?

Stephanie Wang

University of California, Santa Barbara

OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

Object Labels in Art Museums:

Inspire or Restrain?

I still remembered my deep exhaustion during an informal private exhibition of the

backroom collection of RISD museum. I was scratching my head, trying to make educated

guesses out of the bold strokes and abstract lines, but then gave up. That is the only exhibition I

went to that did not provide object labels, and the absence of them proved their significance. The

object labels used in the art museum, indeed, have developed into an essential genre of writing

that provide basic information of an artwork and redefines the viewer’s relationship with the

exhibits. In my perspective, gallery object labels both expand and limit the audience’s

understanding towards the artworks by generalizing information, presenting artistic facts,

applying rhetorical devices and redirecting perspectives.

Object label is a genre of in-gallery text that describes the accompanying artwork. A

genre, according to Bickmore, is “[a] predictable and recurring kind of communication.” (2016)

To store, study, and propagate arts and cultures, people established the earliest museum in

human history. Searching for a way to communicate their ideas better with the viewers and

optimize their museum experiences, curators and artists provide descriptive note next to each

artwork as a brief explanation. The object labels often contain title, name of artists and donors,

year of creations, and medium used, sometimes following by short descriptions. The recurring

usage of this specific expression, then, turn object label into a genre. Through this repeated

process, the conventions of object labels are established; they are highly relevant to the genre’s

context, audiences, and purposes. According to Stedman, the conventions have a “fundamentally

rhetorical nature.” (Stedman, 2011, p.244) In the following paragraphs, I will describe how

object labels’ conventions both increase and limit its rhetorical effectiveness.
OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

Figure 1 Composition with Flame by Jackson Pollock and the object label (right)

Initially, I found that good object labels often communicate ideas to the readers in a

highly concise way, which allows the audience to grasp the general ideas of the artworks more

efficiently. Experienced writers specify the details right to the point; the descriptions are clear,

crisp, and direct, giving the audience an initial glimpse into related aspect of the works. The

object label of Jackson Pollock’s Composition of Flames, for example, starts with a one-sentence

description of the visuals: “out of theses jagged red flames appear half-formed human figures,

their heads and limbs tangled in a ferocious whorl.” (Bilisoly, 2016) Considering the abstractness

of the artwork, the visual explanation helps the viewers verify their understanding of the image.

Furthermore, to invoke deeper thinking about the artworks, label writers also add in other

background information. Usually, exhibition attendees like me are more artistically motivated

than a random pedestrian; as they stop and scan a label, they expect to understand the artwork in
OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

a more sophisticated way. In the Pollock’s label, the writer points out that the radical use of

colors and lines of this painting foreshadows Pollock’s later transformation to the paint-dripping

style (Bilisoly, 2016). For art lovers like me, who already know the well-known style of Pollock,

this brings an “aha!” moments; for the general group of audience, the revealing facts helps them

recognize Pollock’s artistic style in a bigger picture. By providing related artistic facts, the writer

shows his/her consideration of both the intended audiences and real audiences (Lunsford, 2004,

p. 22). Not only do the artistic facts fulfill the demand of different audiences, they also increase

the persuasiveness of the label’s content. Every genre, according to Lunsford, is arguing in order

to achieve its purpose (Lunsford, 2004, p.10). In the case of the Pollock’s label, the writer set up

an argument to inform his/her readers about Pollock and the painting connections to his artistic

development. Initially, the fact that this label is approved by the Columbus Museum of Art, a

trustworthy institute, already lay a solid foundation for the writer’s credibility. By connecting the

famous paint-dripping technique to the known facts of the audience, the writer further his

knowledgeable character and credibility.

Besides factual descriptions, some writers also elevate the labels’ rhetorical effectiveness

by adding emotional appealing elements. In this case, the evidences are not simply facts; they are

more personal, dialogic, and empathetic. This way of illustration creates stronger bonds between

the writers and the audiences, encouraging further contemplation. Melva Ware, the invited local

writer of Danny Lyon’s work, narrated her childhood experience of segregation in the label she

wrote for a photograph. Titled “Segregating drinking fountain in the country courthouse in

Albany, Georgia”, the photographer juxtaposed a big water fountain with the sign “WHITE” and

a smaller one with the sign “COLORED”, bringing the viewer back to the period of segregation.

Ware recalled how the six-year-old her got frightened by Mame’s “quivering voice” as she tried
OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

to climb up to the “WHITE” fountain (Faherty, 2019). As a local community member, she

supports her argument with personal anecdotes, which builds up her persuasiveness. Also, this

personal perspective enables her to list out the sense-appealing details such as “municipal

market”, “hot dog”, “roasted peanut”; they illustrate her innocence, fear, and doubt as a child,

which form strong contrast with the evilness of racial discrimination. Using a narrative tone,

Ware also converses with the readers as their friend, revealing to us the significant yet complex

influence of segregation on all the innocents. As I read the label, I could sense the strong

empathy Ware evokes from the represented audiences, including the previous victims of

segregation. The emotional appeals of the label writing genre, therefore, is a powerful means to

enliven the artwork. Nevertheless, touching stories and strategic selection of related facts also

bring out potential bias.

Figure 2: The museum setting and the object label of the work “Segregated drinking fountains in the county courthouse
in Albany, Georgia”
OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

As the label texts become emotionally appealing, subjectivity creeps in easily, which

unintentionally restrain the audience’s thoughts within the author’s pre-existing perspectives and

block further insights to the artworks. Label writers carry subjective interpretations and pre-

conceptions, sometimes involuntarily, to the works. The Pollock’s label, for instance, describes

that the “small painting” envision his psychological pain “on a grand scale” at the beginning and

concluded that “he would revolutionize American paintings” (Bilisoly, 2016). Immediately, I

could sense the writer’s subtle personal admiration towards Pollock. The description implicitly

affirms Pollock’s significant influence in American modern art, which is forcing the audiences to

appreciate the artworks in this way. Though the information itself is all factual, the selection of

information may create bias and refrain the viewers from other possible interpretations. Most of

the general audience will naturally adhere to this standardized perception when they see the

name “Jackson Pollock” in the future. His praise to Pollocks auto filled my space of thoughts, in

which I may fill with different ideas otherwise.

A more radical example is the gallery label for Jeff Koon’s art collection Made in

Heaven, which includes a series of explicit paintings and sculptures that depict sex scenes

between Koons and a porn star, which almost resemble “a pornography” (“Jeff Koons: A

Retrospective”, 2014). Despite the work’s radicalness, the label writer defines Koon’s work as

“an extremely risky and vulnerable form of self-portrait.” (“Jeff Koons: A Retrospective”, 2014).

Alleging the artistic significance of the work, these qualified writers inject their perspectives

effortlessly into the non-professional audience’s minds. According to Devitt, people don’t label

jokes merely based on formal features; they recognize them by perceiving the “rhetorical action”

(Dirk, 2011, p. 253). Under the museum context, which indicate academic authoritative, the

statements on the labels sound even more convincing to the viewers. But why do we have to
OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

agree with Koon’s significance and hide our squeamishness? While the rhetorical strategies used

in museum labels’ enrich the experience of its general audiences, I believe they also dictate the

realm of imagination and interpretation.

Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge that every genre is dynamic, so does the gallery

labels. “Genre”, according to Dirk, “requires more effort than simply following the rule.” (2011,

p. 258) As the internet develops into the, Recently, people begin bring the contents of the biggest

library for human—the internet—into galleries. In 2017, the AMLABEL company launched a

digital gallery label display (Primozic, 2016). Functioning like a kindle on the wall, the digital

label grants the audiences access to real-time information and multidimensional interpretations

of the artwork. As the audiences click on the e-label, they evolve from a passive recipient to an

active selector of information, which changes their museum experience entirely. While the

traditional museum labels may infringe on the flow of inspiration, e-labels give the viewer’s

freedom to select what to read. This technology, however, is a double-side blade. To eliminate as

much bias as we can, we have to sacrifice efficiency.

Up to now, I still don’t know the meanings of those unlabeled backroom paintings; but I

am also not as eager to find out the expert’s explanations anymore. Museum label genre, shaped

by its situation, audience, and purposes, predict the audiences’ questions and respond effectively.

As the writers add in rhetorical elements, however, the labels start to control the audience’s

thinking process. Why not, then, just make some educated guesses and enjoy the flow of my

imagination? In this new era of the internet, I also believe the genre of museum label will

continue to evolve and refine itself along with the change of rhetoric situations.
 OBJECT LABELS IN ART MUSEUMS: INSPIRE OR RESTRAIN?

Reference

Lunsford, A. A., Ruszkiewicz, J. J., & Walter. K. (2004). Everything's an argument. Boston:

Bedford/St. Martin's.

Bickmore, L. (2016, August 1). GENRE in the WILD: Understanding Genre Within Rhetorical

(Eco)systems. Retrieved from https://openenglishatslcc.pressbooks.com/chapter/genre-in-the-

wild-understanding-genre-within-rhetorical-ecosystems/.

Bilisoly, R. B. (n.d.). Jackson Pollock - Composition with Flames - 1936 Label. photograph,

Columbus, Ohio. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/66082566@N00/25713288464

Dirk, K., (2011). Navigating Genre. In Writing spaces: readings on writing. West Lafayette, Ind:

Parlor Press.

Jeff Koons: A Retrospective. (2014, June 27). Retrieved from

https://whitney.org/Exhibitions/JeffKoons?section=7&subsection=2#exhibition-artworks.

Faherty, A. (2019, September 2). What makes a great museum label? Retrieved from

https://www.museumnext.com/article/what-makes-a-great-museum-label/.

Primozic, U. (2016, August 11). Introducing the smart museum label for the 21st century. Retrieved

from https://www.visionect.com/blog/epaper-museum-label/.

Stedman, K. D. (2011). Annoying ways people use sources. Writing spaces: Readings on writing,

242.