Justifiable aversion to art shows cont'd

[Jim Riley]

We ran out of space on the original thread but not out of wind.

At the risk of becoming very unpopular or tiresome and seeming like a vulture preying on each and every post I continue in this small quest to sort out the role of art shows and judges. Perhaps it's the many years of having heard the same litany of complaints, speculations, and urban legend-like assumptions that prompts my need to prevail.

This is like an argument within the family and I hope the fact that we are all, in the least, kindred spirits with similar goals with dedication to our craft and will forgive my open opinion and frankness. My need to do so overcomes my fear that you will wish that I just shut up. I carry on because art shows are the most common venues from sidewalk to major competitions and an important tangible link to the community

I'm struck by the tale of meeting judges at shows that "differ (should have read "defer" as Tim notes below) to the practicing artist". I honestly have no idea what that means and confess surprise that an artist would know, recognize or meet judges once a show has opened. Normally they do their job, sometimes make statements and usually disappear.

Having judged a few shows myself I believed it not in my best interest to dwell at the show (which I am already intimate with) and run the risk of having to explain decisions already made. I would like to talk to one of the many noncreative judges from any of those shows in the interest of gaining a better understanding of their deference to practicing artists.

I have to say also that I have a problem with the idea that it might be good to have judges that have an informed and learned bias. Suppose the bias favors abstract expressionism? What possible damage can a non-biased judge impart?

Enzie, thanks for your list and observations gleaned from your local event. These are very common notes and concerns of artists everywhere. I hope you don't mind if I respond to these oft repeated concerns, which by no coincidence represent the artists' perspective more so than the participants, who not surprisingly represent a greater variety of likes and needs.

My comments may not be pleasing to those that view our efforts as lofty and sometimes nearly holy pursuits. In fact they may more reflect and reveal my experience in the commercial/industrial world where success depends on the ability to know and understand the market and deliver. Once again, it's the practice of knowing what has been done in the past, what's happening today and how I can do something distinctive that will stop people in their tracks and capture their undivided attention.

A fellow designer once said: (to paraphrase) The artist's uncompromising role is to do something remarkable for those who otherwise do not understand what we do and to do it in an uncompromising way. Why not?

1. It should really not be a surprise that tastes differ. Again the artist tends to tie value with a demonstration of acquired skills.

2. Why be surprised that friends or family favor someone they know? All things equal, I would do the same.

3. Selection based on couch colors? Just as the artist composes a painting the buying public looks at their house as a statement of who they are and like to publicly demonstrate that taste. A well-executed painting may not have the subjects they relate to as well as the color consideration. As much as artists may harbor resentment for framing concerns, it is also part of the package. Why do we insist that paintings be bought based on our weighting of importance?

4. I can't excuse bad behavior. People who know me are kind and at worst quiet at shows. Otherwise I am usually anonymous.

5. I understand a tendency to duck the higher price even when the work has merit. The car at the local Benz dealer was clearly superior but I bought a Honda. Pricing, I believe, could warrant a thread of its own. It's not good to underprice either. Pocketbook consideration are just part of the brutal facts of life. Artists traditionally do not like to think of their efforts on a business basis but it too is a necessary part of what we do.

[Timothy C. Tyler]

Jim, if you meant me, I said "defer". They sometimes differ also. I've been in many circumstances where at some point, the authority of real knowledge has expressed point after point, upon image after image and inspires quiet from less informed people.

In the same way, we do not try to tell Michael Jordan how to play basketball. Or, more to the point of this discussion, people who build backboards or varnish the floors would defer to the real knowledge of "one who actually does" the thing.

Art shows that are judged by people in "Art Related Fields" simply don't "get it" as deeply as painters. Painting is not about dexterity. It's about knowledge -- applied knowledge -- as merely displayed in pigment.

[Jim Riley]

Tim,

You are correct. My post should have read "defer" and I have since corrected it.

MJ has an advantage. You can measure his ability. Judging doesn't apply. I don't believe art show judging should be read as any attempt to instruct artist as much as it tries to identify the best players/works/messages. I have never heard instruction said or implied by judges and find most often they say only the nicest things about the entries. Whatever painting is about it's the ability to communicate and effect a response from the viewer that matters and should be the basis for judgement. Otherwise we are talking to ourselves. Art shows are like ball games in a way. You can play or sit in the stands. (Sorry about the sports analogy)

What a catch 22 situation. If the artist is the only one who can truly understand his message (as is implied often) then it would only be fair to have each artist judge their own work. And to limit show judges to fellow artists, it would seem to me, opens an invitation to more backbiting, politics, and bias than we have today.

I guess I revert to my earlier suggestion that art shows be a place to display, enjoy, learn and celebrate. I don't know who would really care if prizes weren't given. Keep the tradition of a little wine and cheese and enjoy.

In the mean time let's be kind to the uneducated art community. One of them may be your next customer.

[Timothy C. Tyler]

I think kindness sounds nice.

None of my thoughts are original. Here's another example. Remember listening to Howard Cosell and Don Meredith on Monday Night Football? Both experts, both wise people. BUT, at least once a night Howard would say something, make some general observation that left him a little confused. Don (who actually played the game) would very pointedly and not too sweetly explain what had really happened in depth to Howard.

Two experts, one observed and talked a lot and one actually understood. Real knowledge has authority.

[Timothy C. Tyler]

By the way, you're right about the wine and cheese!


...and your attitude is the best way to have a great time. Most of us at art shows are NOT the winners, no matter who judges.

[Enzie Shahmiri]

Jim, I agree with your points wholeheartedly. I hope my message was clear enough to point out that these were the observations I had. That

[Mike McCarty]

I love competition, it's in my nature. I have, and will compete at anything. It seems that all that I have ever done has had a competitive component, or maybe I just see it that way.

I was quarterback of the football team, third base on the baseball team. I have played on the pro billiards tour and shot competitive skeet (tied for seventh in the world). And I won $3 for first in portraits at the Tulsa state fair. It came down to me and a joint effort from sisters at the nearby nursing home. Since they collaborated I won on a technicality. I will pitch pennies against the wall and race my dog across the backyard. Ok, I tie her back legs together, but that still gives her one more leg than me.

I am also frighteningly cynical and naively optimistic. I am always amazed when I don't win the powerball lottery (which I view as a competition).

My only complaint is that there are not enough opportunities to compete. If I lose because the judges are incompetent, biased, short, I don't care. I say let's gather up again next week and do it again.

[Cynthia Daniel]

Jim,

Didn't run out of space on the other thread. I closed it because it was getting too off-topic. I noted that in a post, but was ignored.