This article investigates a principle inscribed at the top of most codes of ethics for curators: they should always “serve the public good.” No self-respecting curator would ever admit to serve “the private good,” that is, the good of the few, whether that of an elite in power or of a circle of friends or allies. The principle of “serving the public good” is inalienable and unquestionable even in situations where it is most open to doubt. However, what exactly is the meaning of this seemingly “true” and on all accounts “universal” principle: “to serve the public good”? To address this question, I look at this principle for the way it is perceived as being both majestic in its impressive widespread acceptance and cloaked in ridicule for being so often disregarded. I will argue—with an example taken from the history of curating—that it is not the meaning attached to the principle that counts, but the respect that it enjoins. I conclude by drawing a few remarks on how the value of the “good” remains, after the principle has been cast aside and the priority of respect is acknowledged, a ghost on the horizon of all curators’ work.

中文翻译：

---

服务于公益事业的策展人

本文研究了大多数策展人道德准则中最重要的一项原则：他们应始终“为公共利益服务”。没有自尊心的策展人永远不会为“私人利益”服务，即少数人的利益，无论是当权精英还是朋友圈或盟友。即使在最容易受到质疑的情况下，“为公共利益服务”的原则也是不可剥夺和毫无疑问的。但是，这种看似“真实”，并且从所有方面来说都是“普遍”原则：“为公共利益服务”的确切含义是什么？为了解决这个问题，我看一下这个原则，认为它既令人印象深刻，被广泛接受，又因为常常被无视而掩饰起来。我将以策展的历史为例来论证，重要的不是原则所赋予的意义，而是它所包含的尊重。最后，我总结了一些关于“好”的价值如何保留的意见，在该原则被抛弃并承认尊重的优先性之后，所有策展人的工作都蒙上了阴影。