I started reading the art blogs again after a very long hiatus. I have a few favorites, most of them are in my blogroll. An interesting discourse has come up over the last few days that I have been following from blog to blog. For me, it started Edward Winkleman’s blog, where he cajoles his artist readers to keep applying for opportunities no matter how many rejections they accumulate.
More than that, though, sometimes, totally independent of the application process, one of those powerful people will want to do something with you outside this particular grant program. Ruby told me of one applicant whom a selection committee member recently said he didn’t care whether this artist received the grant or not, but he so loved their proposal that he offered them an opportunity to realize their work in another state because the project was so perfect for their institution. In other words, the rewards of applying to such programs may not be limited to whether or not you receive what you applied for this one time. Read the post
There was a comment to a post on the long-abandoned SELLOUT that I remembered. Unfortunately, the site has been taken down and there is no way that I can verify the accuracy of my memory. The comment was from an anonymous curator who confessed that he acted as a juror on panels for regional shows as a kind of community service. He never offered additional opportunities to either the successful or unsuccessful applicants.
Eward Winkleman’s post addressed a specific opportunity at Creative Capital. This particular organization is heavy on support for conceptual works. Applying for this is definitely a waste of time for someone whose art revolves around something like painting. In fact, most opportunities for artists are more inclined to conceptual art. I haven’t bothered with these opportunities at all, frankly. Pretty Lady, a blog that I check into with great frequency, articulates it quite well –
Moreover, as a painter who attempts to expand the boundaries of self with work that does not belong to a recognizable genre, I endure a significant amount of contempt and dismissal within the contemporary art world itself. Spokespersons from Big-Ass Art Institutions would never admit it, but there is a not-so-subtle bias against painters when it comes to awarding grants, residencies, solo exhibitions and places in the Whitney Biennial; the unspoken but loudly implied subtext is, “God, another painting. That’s so boring, so bourgeois, so Been Done Already, so over.” Read the entire post
Now, the justification that I have heard for this bias towards conceptual art is that painters, for instance, have an opportunity to support themselves, but that the very nature of conceptual art means that it must be supported through some other system. If only this were true. Ive said before that conceptual art as a philosophy has usurped all intellectual practice from other forms of art. Unfairly, concept is not perceived as an important part of painting and intellectual content is virtually ignored in the art form.Frankly, if I had to support myself on painting, I would have given up a very long time ago.
It appears that it doesn’t stop the support system for conceptual artists from trying to seek support from the very practitioners for whom they hold so little regard. Sharon Butler, Two Coats of Paint, points this out in her recent post –
To raise money for Smack Mellon, artists Kristopher Benedict, David Goodman, Julian Kreimer, Andy Lane, Amy Lincoln, Rebecca Litt, Jason Mones and Helena Wurzel have agreed to paint portraits for an evening at Michael Steinberg Fine Art. According to the invitation, each sitting will last about 30 minutes, and by the end of the evening the paintings, which cost $250 each, will be packed and ready to go. “Eight contemporary artists, all graduates of noted MFA programs, will paint the subject of your choice from life.” Read the post and the comments on this one
It’s not just NYC galleries and organizations that do this. It happens right here in my backyard. I have been approached by an organization or two to donate works to support their venue. Organizations that would never consider my work for exhibition, dangling the tired carrot of exposure as a means of getting some cash in the door. But I find that I cannot support their exhibition programs and cannot fathom why they think I would.
