I never anticipated becoming an art critic preoccupied with exhibition interpretation. And yet, following a recent experience at the 36th Bienal de São Paulo, I find myself precisely in that position.
The Debate Over Exhibition Didactics
How crucial are wall labels to a museum experience? Incredibly so, it turns out. My shift in perspective began in 2024, after observing the critical response to that year’s Whitney Biennial. Jackson Arn posed a provocative question in The New Yorker: “If every label in ‘Even Better Than the Real Thing,’ the 81st installment of the Whitney Biennial, were peeled off the walls and tossed into the Hudson, what would happen?” He suggested the exhibition might actually improve. Travis Diehl, writing for The New York Times, observed that the labels, intended to clarify artistic intent or social commentary, felt surprisingly “belittling.”
Even Sebastian Smee of The Washington Post, while declaring the show the best in over a decade, conceded that the dense wall texts were “convoluted” and “brain-draining,” potentially diminishing the impact of the art itself. These criticisms resonated with Jerry Saltz’s candid statement that “the show isn’t for people like me”—a sentiment Emily Watlington characterized as representing a specific demographic: “various white men whose names happen to start with the letter J” (Jason, Jackson, and Jerry). It seemed to me that focusing on the labels stemmed from a lack of deeper engagement with the artwork. I confidently dismissed this line of thought, until my visit to São Paulo.
The São Paulo Biennial’s Approach to Information
The 36th Bienal de São Paulo, curated by a team led by Cameroon-born, Berlin-based Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, presented a vast collection of work. The exhibition featured 125 artists and approximately 1,200 artworks within a 30,000-square-meter space—equivalent to five American football fields. Despite many commendable aspects of this thought-provoking show, the exhibition’s interpretive strategy proved problematic. Instead of traditional wall texts, the Bienal utilized placards on the floor displaying only the artist’s name and a QR code.
This approach immediately struck me as flawed. I, like many, find QR codes and digital tools like Bloomberg Connects distracting, pulling focus away from the art itself. Additional labels listing title, date, and medium were often placed remotely from the corresponding artworks, transforming the viewing experience into a frustrating search. Furthermore, lengthy section texts—up to 500 words per artist across six “chapters”—totaled 62,500 words, exceeding the length of my last two books combined. This contrasted sharply with typical museum practice, where extended labels (“chats”) rarely exceed 125 words and are applied to only 25-30% of displayed works.
Balancing Access and Context
The Bienal’s organizers justified their strategy as a means of fostering a direct connection between viewer and artwork, framing it as a democratic gesture that minimized curatorial influence and acknowledged the multilingual audience—particularly the fact that Portuguese and English are both considered colonial languages. However, this rationale didn’t resonate with all observers. Fabio Cypriano argued in Arte Brasileiros that withholding information reinforced the curators’ own perspective, potentially constituting “a practically colonialist act.”
This assertion sparked considerable debate in Brazil, with Bruna de Jesus, a philosopher and museum educator, defending the approach by suggesting that understanding can occur through multiple avenues, and that “estrangement is part of the process.” Fabrício Reiner offered a nuanced assessment, acknowledging the curators’ intentions but criticizing the execution as “communicative noise.” I observed numerous non-specialist visitors, including parents with children, actively searching for artist signatures, highlighting the inherent value of basic identifying information. The Bienal’s commendable decision to offer free admission and prominently advertise this fact undoubtedly attracted a broader, more casual audience.
The Importance of Thoughtful Interpretation
The debate surrounding the Bienal’s approach extends beyond a single exhibition. It touches upon fundamental questions of audience engagement and institutional responsibility. The recent March 27, 2025 Executive Order, “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” demonstrated the political sensitivity surrounding interpretation, focusing solely on wall label content rather than the artworks themselves. What’s at stake isn’t ideological content, but rather the provision of helpful, welcoming, and accessible information.
Sara Bodinson, Director of Interpretation, Research, and Digital Learning at the Museum of Modern Art, explained that visitor research consistently reveals a desire for information regarding artist inspiration, materials/process, and socio-historical context. MoMA’s approach prioritizes concise, focused texts, avoiding subjective language that might limit viewer engagement. Ultimately, effective labels should appeal to viewers with varying levels of knowledge, offering clarity without condescension. As Ingrid Schaffner aptly stated, a label should be accessible to someone who knows more, less, and as much as the curator. This is a challenging task, but a crucial one, as wall texts represent a direct line of communication between institutions and their visitors, demonstrating a commitment to hospitality and meaningful engagement.
