THE ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF "UN-CURATING"
MENTIONED: MELROSE PLACE, VLADIMIR I. LENIN, "CAREER WOMAN" CORRESPONDENT ASHLEY F., TOILET BRUSHES, "DOUBLE-CURATION", a spot-the-difference
As Los Angeles enters FRIEZE ART FAIR SEAS*N, let us dissect the colonizing power of “CURATE” (as a CONCEPT) and make a case for the UN-CURATION OF DOMESTIC SPACE.
THE CATALYST for this analysis was an e-mail we received on 13 February, selling us furniture:
Dear Snoops,
Much is made of the word ‘CURATE’, which is an absolutely omnipresent term – and, as you might agree: omnipresent is far too present. And, it’s lazy. And, we argue, it’s misguiding us.
It is, in fact, a great surprise to us that it is still in use as a concept — where ‘curate’ may suit the “GALLERY”, it instead imposes a kind of authoritarian rigidity on “HOME”. Very, very few examples of the heavenly décor’ed home exist when the décor’ator believed they were “CURATING” their home.
Home as multi-dimensial personal expression doesn’t jive with a single, restrictive, communally-sourced self-imposed ideology-aesthetic. It is against what, we argue, is “PROGRESS”
SOCIETAL PROGRESS: To invite “ultra-specific” into the personal-domestic space is to fear deviation; all progress begins as deviation
PERSONAL PROGRESS: To desire perfection is usually rooted in a fear of judgment, either by others or simply of yourself
So, yes, a surprise to us to be confronted by the demand to “CURATE YOUR SPACE!!!!!!!!” [emphasis ours] by a young-energy Internet marketplace. (The email contains 1x gif and a link to “SHOP NOW”. Not ‘CURATE NOW’, which would have, in fact, been a quite self-awarely charming CTA.)
SO TODAY: we (briefly) judge HYPER-JUDGEMENT and propose an alternative
BEFORE WE BEGIN: spot the difference…
This one is on publishers. The state of décor self-help is DISMAL.
“CURATE” (the book) almost immediately tells you in its introduction that it seeks to help you in ‘creating’ (oh gosh) “unique, uncontrived spaces”. And yet… curation and contrivery are both about “ARTIFICE” (reflecting or establishing artifice) – you cannot seek to curate unless you also seek to contrive.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE WORD “CURATE”
An easy fixation here is the word “CURATE” itself, whose etymological root is the Latin “CURA” i.e. CARE. To care is divine. Yet, there is a scale of TO CARE and TOO “CARE” with respect to décor. From a starting point of “CARING” about one’s homesphere, so much of what is around us forces a totally wacko amplification from simply to “CARE” into “TOO CARE”, i.e. an excess of care, which produces in us not the nest-er but “CURATOR”:
When one reaches complete CURATOR MINDSET and ‘achieves’ “CURATED HOME”, what awaits is not nirvana, but instead extreme fragility (“ACK! Only wooden baby toys, please!” etc.) – the smallest infractions disrupt.
What is promoted as a “fun new way to think about décor”, i.e. to curate, is instead to find displeasure in all but The Perfect. This presents an ideal moment to remind you: THERE ARE NO GOOD TOILET BRUSHES, etc. (i.e. Total Perfection is an illusion.)
Which thus presents another ideal moment, to introduce FOR SCALE’s “CAREER WOMAN CORRESPONDENT” Ashely F. and a theory on the value of, for example, terrible toilet brushes et al.:
CAREER WOMAN CORRESPONDENT ON ‘NOT CARING’ AS ‘EVOLUTIONARY POTENTIAL’:
“What would AMANDA WOODWARD say, I wonder? A Career Woman of the ‘90s knows perfect satisfaction is neither desirable nor sustainable. Indifference to a desk or serving platter is actually ACTIVE POTENTIAL.
When you adore everything, down to the drawer pulls, you’re trapped. AN INTERIOR WITH NO ROOM TO IMPROVE CANNOT SUPPORT EVOLUTION. You love the cutting board, you love the humidifier, you love the toilet brush? Well, then there’s nowhere to go, and as a ‘90s Career Woman going places is kind of the whole thing.”
— CAREER WOMAN CORRESPONDENT ASHLEY F.
MAXIM #1:
SH*T STUFF IS A GATEWAY TO EVOLUTION.
THE “DOUBLE-CURATED” HOME
It is not enough, the Intern*t tells us, to curate. To ensure we are curating “CORRECTLY” we are invited to curate from a curation:
They curate so we can curate.
This is a destroyer of “TASTE”, and is reflected in the ALGOR*THMS of the moment, written about by KYLE C. in his new book FILTERWORLD (ISBN: 978-0385548281). To super-summarize: algorithms flatten culture. (And so does double-curation.)
To expand (not from Kyle C. but from us): DOUBLE CURATION → leads to ENCOURAGED LIMITATIONS → leads to HOMOGENEITY → leads to EVEN MORE INCREASED CONFORMITY PRESSURE → leads to REDUCED EXPERIMENTATION → leads to IMPERSONAL SPACES which we are gaslit to believe are the result of HYPER-SPECIFIC (i.e. HYPER-PERSONAL) ‘CURATION’ → leads to LIMITED EMOTIONAL CONNECTION.
WHAT IS RESPONSIBLE?
Capitalism. (So sue us! We won’t be expanding on this.)
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
To quote Vladimir Ilyich L.: “Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement.”
And, our theory is thus (APPROPRIATELY, we hope you agree, IN THE FORM OF A MANIFESTO):
There are some perceptible, possible contradictions here – example: we request passion, research, and willpower but also an embrace of sh*t you don’t like. Are you supposed to put in the effort, or release yourself from the need? BOTH.
It is precisely within this tension, and in an exploration of one’s own boundaries, that we find the LIBERATING CAPACITY OF UN-CURATING.
If the domestic sphere has the capacity to contain BOTH/AND-ery, then so do we. We can BE SELECTIVE and also NOT GIVE A F*CK simultaneously. And, there is a certain humanity in “FLAW” and contradiction.
MAXIM #2:
FLAW REFLECTS HUMANITY, PERFECTION DENIES IT.
ONE I.R.L. example:
Of the many near-’flawless’ midcentury houses that dot FOR SCALE’s hometown of LOS ANGELES, there is one that contains such a glaring “IMPERFECTION” that it renders the home “ULTRA-HUMAN” rather than (simply) “ARCHITECT(URE) FANTASY PROJECT”. And that PIERRE KOENIG’s pocket-sized STAHL HOUSE (1635 Woods Dr, Los Angeles, 90069), which is thus:
Flawless, you might say.
Yet, it’s off-the-kitchen bathroom is PURE ESCAPE-FROM-“MODERN” FANFASY - and despite the everything, IT’S BEST FEATURE IN OUR OPINION for what it does to the rest of the house (gives it humanity beyond ‘Design’):
A break in “CURATED TOTALITY” if we have ever seen one, and the most endearing element of STAHL, especially given that the house is now furnished by DESIGN WITH*N REACH and feels like a Stale Showroom, furniture-wise. Stahl is not archi-sculpture, it is home; home is people; people are f*cked up (← our final maxim).
Until next time. LOVE AND GOOD LUCK,
"When one reaches complete CURATOR MINDSET and ‘achieves’ “CURATED HOME”, what awaits is not nirvana, but instead extreme fragility (“ACK! Only wooden baby toys, please!” etc.) – the smallest infractions disrupt." Agree with this statement so much! The other day I was thinking about all of the parts of my home that I am dissatisfied with (1970s dated kitchen cabinets are only one). Then I reminded myself that whether my home achieves some sort of perfection of design has nothing to do with whether it is comfortable, inviting, and pleasing to be in. Which is the whole point of decoration to begin with.
Love the manifesto. 😩👌
Also, re: the wooden toys...this sort of mindset leaves no room for the charity, thoughtfulness, and good will of others. It makes one a "bad receiver," if you will. Yes, you might end up donating, but don't be so prudish as to refuse on the spot a sweet dolly from Grandma or a Tonka truck from Grandpa. Save that for later if need calls for it.