Photo By Sean Hughes/photopresse.com

CAC Director Linda Shearer faces the challenge of inventing a new Contemporary Arts Center that makes sense for its new home. Shearer has been on the job since July of 2004.

Like all art history students considering a museum career, I was forced to select an area of specialization. The options were many, but I never gave the choice more than a cursory thought. There seemed to be no real contest between studying the past versus absorbing the present.

As a young person, I needed to understand my own world. I believed that art, fresh from an artist's studio, would provide insight. I felt that way then, and I continue to believe in the validity of that point of view today. So I have a natural affinity for the mission of the Contemporary Arts Center (CAC), and I have watched closely the transition from their rented second-floor gallery space on Fifth Street to their own architecturally acclaimed building at Sixth and Walnut.

All of our expectations were high as the CAC shifted from a modest arts center to a major cultural institution. To succeed, the institution would need a bigger and better staff, a larger and more ambitious exhibition program and a great deal more public education and outreach.

In the late 1990s, there was a lot of talk and press about a new building, a rising star architect and culture as a tool of economic development and downtown revitalization. But there was little mention of what kind of contemporary art's organization the CAC would have to evolve into in order to succeed.

This lack of strategic institutional planning has now, after almost three years, caught up with them. The high spirits surrounding the opening of the heralded Zaha Hadid building have declined, as the CAC has suffered a series of setbacks and struggles to redefine itself.

First, there was the unceremonious departure of the CAC's director Charles Desmarais, the motivating force behind the new building. Once the CAC board of trustees made it clear that the directorship would not go to Senior Curator Thom Collins, he resigned for a new position elsewhere. This has been followed with what can only be called public fatigue with the lackluster -- and difficult to grasp -- exhibition program.

Basic, post-opening CAC statistics can be spun different ways. Current membership far exceeds what it was in the old space, but it has declined significantly from 2003-04. The same can be said for attendance. The endowment continues to grow due to a major fund-raising campaign, and the annual operating budget is more than double what is was for the old space. Nonetheless, the annual exhibition budget -- that is, the funds earmarked each year for artistic programming, the primary purpose of the CAC -- is embarrassing low.

If the truth be told, the real challenge facing Linda Shearer, the talented and personable museum professional who became the new director, arriving in July 2004, is to invent a new CAC that makes sense for its new home -- with a new staff and clearly defined institutional priorities. She is close to succeeding with her first essential task of putting together a new staff leadership team. As this article went to press, the too-long-empty and key position of senior curator is about to be filled; an announcement is expected this week.

Shearer's next challenge is to work with her new curator and other staff to put in place an exciting and balanced exhibition program that will bring in the public.

I am the last person to say that the CAC must create "popular" programming driven by attendance figures. I would cut up my membership card if they turned their back on their fundamental mission. But, let us not confuse pandering to popular taste with mounting a balanced program that truly reflects the contemporary art scene.

A program that was diverse as contemporary art itself is bound to have audience appeal. This program would be one that the community gets excited about because the advance publicity, word-of-mouth buzz and public outreach programs generate genuine curiosity. We live in a time when one approach to making art or a narrow view of accepted subject matter does not crowd out all others.

A walk through New York City's Chelsea gallery district on a Saturday afternoon will take you from the realistic and poignant small-scale portrait drawings and paintings by Elizabeth Peyton to a raucous and monumental installation by Charles McCarthy. One brightly lit gallery will feature the somber abstractions of Louise Fishman. Another will be totally darkened to accommodate the latest video projections of Bill Viola.

You might see 15 shows in the course of the afternoon. Some will be of no interest. Others will captivate. But the techniques and ideas presented by these artists will be dissimilar, and the content will range from highly personal and subjective to socially and politically motivated.

One of the defining characteristics of the CAC is that it is a kunsthalle -- the German term for an art space for changing exhibitions. If visitors do not like a particular exhibition, they can come back three months later: A kunsthalle is never static. Thus, it has the potential for a large and loyal audience that visits several times annually.

For this kunsthalle strategy to work, the program has to be varied so loyal patrons anticipate change. In addition, the educational materials and programs for every show have to be understandable. No artspeak on labels and in promotional literature that puts off, rather than engages the visitor searching for helpful information.

Shearer has the ability to do all this and more. Her impressive track record at the Museum of Modern Art and the Williams College Museum of Art is proof enough. In time, her leadership and the energy of her new staff will produce results.

While I applaud the CAC for raising an additional $10 million in endowment funds since the new building's opening, it is essential that the institution look away from its long-term business plan for a moment and honestly face the situation at hand. For Shearer's leadership to be effective, the ambition of the artistic programming must match the ambition of the building now -- not sometime in the distant future.

For this to happen, the annual artistic programming budget needs to be increased substantially. Then the staff can ratchet up the programming to the level the building mandates and the public deserves.

The private and corporate sponsors behind the CAC cannot afford to let the institution fall any lower in the eyes of the community. Before writing this commentary, I spoke to a variety of people, from local artists to old-time CAC supporters. A surprisingly large percentage of them have lost patience waiting for the CAC to become a more interesting place.

These folks do not care about insider talk regarding open curatorial positions or the high cost of mounting exhibitions featuring artists with name recognition. They are simply disappointed in what they have seen and claim they don't hear anything that leads them to believe that the next exhibition will be better or strikingly different from the last.

Because I am a diehard believer in the value of contemporary art and the role of the CAC in this community and because I have faith in Shearer's curatorial expertise and leadership skills, I tell these disappointed people the following: Don't think of the CAC as a 66-year-old Cincinnati institution that should be on surer footing after a new building and many multi-million dollar infusions. Rather think of the building on Sixth and Walnut as a totally new CAC, that is barely three years old.

I think we all ought to give the new CAC a bit more time to grow up. But I am not for a moment suggesting we lower our expectations in terms of what this community has a right to expect from it -- in the not-too-distant future. ©