San Francisco and Los Angeles serve as the two biggest centers of the art scene in California. From the spiraling and iconic reach of the Hollywood Hills to the colorfully painted pink and blue San Francisco blocks at North Beach where Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo found their tumultuous artistic passion — I couldn’t help but reflect and compare how art institutions in each have facilitated dialogues while wandering through the streets of these two cities.
When comparing the institutional influences of art institutions in these two regions, central pillars include the Getty Museum in LA and the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, marked by the Legion of Honor and the De Young Museum. Both reside on hills, commanding views that mirror their lofty cultural ambitions. Both play a significant role in revealing the cultural narrative of their regions, as well.
To me, one of an art institution’s responsibilities — apart from, of course, the conservation and preservation of artifacts — lies in accessibility: making art approachable and engaging for diverse audiences. The Getty exemplifies this commitment beautifully. As I wandered its rotating exhibitions, I was struck by the bilingual presentation of wall texts and introductions: English and Spanish were given equal prominence, a rarity in many museums where translations often appear in smaller fonts or secondary spaces.
However, this inclusivity fades in the gallery rooms housing its permanent collection, where works by European masters like Monet and Degas are displayed without bilingual wall texts. This inconsistency stands out sharply against the otherwise commendable accessibility efforts.
Yet, even beyond its galleries, the Getty’s public programs are impressively accessible. During my visit, I attended a lecture by curators of a new exhibition, “Lumen: The Art and Science of Light.” The talk targeted audiences with varying levels of familiarity with art and was structured to welcome even those with no prior exposure to the field. The curators spoke about Greek philosophers without assuming that the audience had previous knowledge of, say, who Aristotle was. This reflects the museum’s ethos of fostering a dialogue that extends beyond its walls.
This ethos of accessibility is also evident in the Getty’s impact on peripheral art institutions. Initiatives like the PST Art Collective (PST) mobilize a collective dialogue across Southern California, engaging both commercial and non-commercial art spaces. Through the PST, the Getty has provided grants for research and planning to more than 45 cultural organizations, both public and private, across Southern California. From Jeffrey Deitch’s “Post Human” show to San Diego Museum of Art’s exhibition on art and science in the Islamic world, PST Art (and the Getty by proxy) weaves a regional narrative that resonates far beyond LA city limits.
As I frolicked through LA streets with pamphlets from galleries in my tote, I couldn’t help but think how such an initiative would be a hit in the Bay Area, where UI/UX designers and VR enthusiasts could also explore intersections between technology and art. Yet, San Francisco’s art scene faces challenges that complicate such undertakings.
In recent years, the Bay Area has seen the closure of prominent galleries like Gagosian and Pace’s Palo Alto location, and institutions like the San Francisco Art Institute, with its 150-year legacy, have shuttered, permanently closing in July 2022.
These losses have fueled concerns about the Bay Area’s diminishing stature as an international arts destination. Yet, there are bright spots from an institutional perspective. San Francisco museums continue to host remarkable exhibitions, such as the Mary Cassatt shows and thematic explorations at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), with the recent stellar exhibitions like “Get in the Game: Sports, Art, Culture.”
Still, my visits to San Francisco museums reveal certain opportunities for growth. I noticed a lack of multilingual wall texts at the Legion of Honor and SFMOMA, where families often moved through the galleries with children explaining the art to their elders. This reversed the dynamic I observed at the Getty, where Hispanic parents guided their children through exhibits in Spanish.
The Asian Art Museum in San Francisco, despite its focus on Asian cultures, lacks wall texts in Asian languages and significant outreach efforts tailored to the city’s substantial Asian population.
If art institutions are to serve as bridges between communities, they ought to reflect the ethnic and linguistic diversity of their cities. For San Francisco museums, this means fostering dialogues with the city’s broader population. While they excel in preserving and presenting art, there is room to learn from the Getty’s approach to engaging communities.
Initiatives like SFMOMA’s recent exhibition on sports in SF and the Tamara de Lempicka exhibition’s connections with the drag world and LGBTQ+ community are promising examples of such growing dialogues that SF institutions have been working on, hosting nuanced exchanges with non-queer communities.
Both Los Angeles and San Francisco have the potential to lead in art’s accessibility, yet each city needs to navigate its own set of challenges and opportunities. A commitment to inclusivity — linguistically, culturally and thematically — should allow these institutions to bridge divides and empower all voices within the community. In the end, the vitality of a city’s art scene is shaped not solely by the artworks it houses but also, and quite importantly, by the dialogues it creates and the echoes left in the hearts and minds of the public.
Editor’s Note: This article is a review and includes subjective thoughts, opinions and critiques.