Partners, Wes Anderson film director and illustrator and writer Juman Malouf, have teamed up to present a specially curated exhibition in Vienna. They have hand-picked treasures from the vaults of Kunsthistorisches Museum to be displayed.
This is the third instalment of the series, entitled ‘Spitzmaus Mummy’ in a coffin and other Treasures, and opened n the 6th November. Staff teamed up with Anderson and Malouf to curate over 400 spectacular objects. Starting in 2012, the Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna began a run of exhibitions inviting creatives to present the own hand-picked selection from the museum’s archives.
There is a vast array of cultural and distinctive types of antiques. They range from Egyptian, Greek and Roman. Items such as Old Master paintings, Coin collection, Collection of Historic Museum Instruments as well as pieces from Imperial Armoury, Theatermuseum, the Weltmusem, the Imperial Carriage Museum.
The pair have created an exhibition with classic Anderson flair. The auteur, who is renowned for his highly stylised aesthetic and strange plots, has created a theme that many fans will instantly recognise, linking contrasting pieces of differing age through colour and design.
“We place the painting of a seven-year-old falconer (Emperor Charles V) next to the portrait of a four-year-old dog-owner (Emperor Ferdinand II) in order to emphasise the evolution of natural gesso; a box of the storage of Spanish powdered wigs goes next to a case for the storage of the crown of the king of Italy because both we so clearly shaped and formed by the introduction of the hinge,” said Anderson
In the accompanying catalogue, Anderson explains: “We do harbour the humble aspiration that the unconventional groupings and arrangement of the works on display may influence the study of art and antiquity in minor, even trivial, but nevertheless detectable ways for many future generations to come.”
“True: one of the Kunsthistorisches Museum’s most senior curators (educated, of course, at the University of Heidelberg) at first failed to detect some of them, we thought, more blatant connections; and, even after we pointed most of them out, still questions their curatorial validity in, arguably, all instances. But, should our experiment fail on these levels, we are, nevertheless, confident it will, at the very least, serve the purpose of ruling out certain hypotheses, thereby advancing the methods of art history through the scientific process of trial-and-error. (In this case, error.)”