Archive for the ‘Artmumbling’ Category

The Problem with Criticism

Saturday, February 27th, 2010

So what is good criticism? Everyone’s talking about the lack of it these days. Not just in Philadelphia, although with the solipsism of the arts world one tends to view things as particular to themselves. The same frustrated energy and debate is going on in DC, Chicago, Portland, gee, everywhere it seems. It is a pervasive problem in the national art sphere that we all tend to view through our local gaze. We all seem to recognize the void in the discourse, but are unsure as to why it continues to grow rather than being rectified. This is partially because the lack of criticism is due to myriad issues involving the death of print media, the perception that art is no longer a part of popular culture, and a dearth of critics themselves.

I think one of the main issues is that those who talk about art are discussing the wrong thing in their criticism. (more…)

Concept, Craft, and Bad Art

Monday, February 15th, 2010

A difficult aspect of art involvement or interest is the issue of what is good – meaning, how does one parse personal tastes and preferences from what is “good” and “bad” and does anyone have the right to bestow these labels?

First of all: eyeroll. Of course there is good and bad art; pretending that context, intent, or anything else can justify the merit or quality of work is a fun game to play at, but honestly, sometimes art is just not good. As I can equally be completely misanthropic, hating everything, or keen to play artist’s advocate, when my brain gets too arts-overloaded to sort myself out I always fall back on the concept and craft argument.

Art needs either a strong in concept or strong in craft, and most agree good art has both. Art can be described as visual evidence of an idea, although the amount of weight placed on the visual or the idea is greatly variable.

Craft is the more approachable aspect and traditionally understood as skill. Typically we think of painting, or sculpture, but these ideas can be applied to any visual media. Craft is something that can be intuitively understood and appreciated. Good craft is well done, well executed no matter what the media. Craft is learned and developed, and can be lost with disuse. Craft itself can be easily manipulated and intentionally poorly executed, complicating the issue.

Concept is basically the idea behind art. What it is attempting to comment or question, what motivated the work. There is a lot of leeway to concept; it can be straightforward or more obtuse. The concept could be the exploration of materials or ideas. Alternatively, concept is not visually present in the work, but rather applied by the viewer in place of artistic intent.

Traditionally craft was the more important in art. Think classical paintings, things that look like things, it mattered how well things were drafted. Nowadays, the hierarchy is reversed, the idea is often more important than the execution. Conceptual art – art that is an idea primarily, existent visually secondarily – is often more difficult for viewers (especially art outsiders) to process as art, because it does not conform with their traditional expectations.

It has become a contemporary trend for artists to use poorly executed craft in place of concept – as though it can be substituted for an idea, and that just doesn’t fly. It’s weak on both accounts, yet has become the go-to shtick for artists – the intentional imitation of outsider art as substitute for proper execution or to obscure a weak image, idea, or both.

I do not feel all art should be beholden to lofty ideas, but I don’t see any point in making bad art.

Unsolicited Advice to Artists – Key Words

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

Lemme tellya a thing or three

Lemme tellya a thing or three

You have a website, or perhaps a tumblr or blogger or wordpress. Marvelous. You even update your resume as new shows and reviews come in, and you add images of new work and inform the public on sales. You’re rocking this web thing. But is anyone seeing it? Can anyone find you?

I’m kind of obsessed with tags and key words these days, because I’ve come to see how essential they are to sorting through the mass of information that is the internet. I was trying to look up information on a Philadelphia artist the other day, and I was shocked to find that searching their name and the word artist lead me to Art in Bars, which you know, isn’t so helpful since AiB was who was trying to find more information.

A buzzy skill these days is search engine optimization. Now, I have barely functioning coding skills, and if you’re not a code monkey yourself, you are in some ways limited as to what you can do, but never say never. If you have html knowledge, you already know how to create metatags for robots and keywords. But there’s always room for improvement in what you input as your keywords.

Imagine you are an artist in Philadelphia named John Circe. You do pencil drawings based on photographs of your friends wearing animal masks.  You also make sculptures out of pencils. This is your shtick.

It’s easy enough to get a handle of making sure your full professional name (John M. Circe) is included with any show you take part in,  or any image of your work you put on the internet. So if someone knows who you are they can find your website by searching your name, perhaps with artist or art if it’s a common name. But let’s imagine someone saw your work in a group show three months ago, didn’t write down you name, but has been thinking about how much they liked that art and wants to track it down. This is where key words become your best friend.

You need to think about how people who know you, who know your art, and have no idea you exist will find your art. Key word combination that should lead to you. Think specific. Of course use the terms Philadelphia, artist, drawing, pencil, art, but also think of the kind of drawings, the subjects, the materials and add those. Make up long strings of words someone might use to describe your work – weird drawings people masks, hipsters animal mask, Philadelphia drawing mask people, and flatter yourself.  Best Philadelphia drawing, really cool pencil sculpture, interesting drawings masks, new artists pencil really good. Always assume you want people to find you who don’t even know who you are, who have an idea of art they would like to see, and make sure your work comes up.

This assumes you have access to code to embed keywords. Let’s say as fancy as you get is a blogger site.  You have no idea what I’m talking about with keywords. Tags can be used the same as keywords, and should. Even if you post one image of a painting in progress, tag the hell out of it. Your name, the materials, the subject, the location. The robots of the internet use these words to find your page and suggest it to people who are searching the terms. The robots do not see pictures, they see words (this is why one can make an argument against artists having flash websites) then they look to see if the words in your tags or keywords match other words nearby (so you’re not lying about the content.)

The unsolicited advice: always when you put an image of your work on the internet, attach words to it. Lots of words. Specific words. And then the robots, and the art lovers, can find you.

What is Attention Worth?

Monday, January 25th, 2010
Who knows where I found this

Who knows where I found this

I happen to know a exceedingly talented illustrator and humorist. I see him occasionally, and stalk his site bearskinrug.co.uk frequently. You should too – the man is immensely creative. As I mull over all sorts of interrelated ponderences of the meaning and worth of art, as well as the meaning and worth of artists, all these sticky issues keep bubbling up. The sticky issue which Kevin and I appear to be pondering around the same time is particular to the internet: what to give away, what to keep, how to earn from it.

Kevin, as a freelance illustrator, and published author is in a different boat than I, or perhaps you are. All my run-on sentences and half supported declarations are free for the taking (I say now.) But for actual artists, who produce creative visual work, the issue is much more serious. One needs, in some way, to put work out on the internet to gain visibility, to show the world what one can do and how brilliant they are at it. Conversely, show too much and no one feels as though you’re owed anything by it. Moreso, the mentality of the internet seems to be of entitlement. Creatives owe the collective hive mentality their best to be shared without compensation. Read this recent article in the NYT for more about this mob mentality.

This is troubling, especially if you happen to be a creative. How can you be expected to have the leasiure, freedom, and opportunity to work hard to create the content if there’s no compensation? How can you support the demand for creative content if you are not supported?

Thinking

Thinking

As artists, this should especially ring true if you are involved with image making. (Not all art is image – but that’s another half-finished post) a strong image once on the internet is lost to the artist and, somewhat unfairly, becomes property of the collective to be used in any way without the artist’s permission, and I’m sorry I keep harping on this, or compensation. Look at the image I used to illustrate this post – took me like 3.5 seconds to grab. Did I compensate the estate of A.A. Milne,  or perish forbid, the Disney Corporation? Golly no. The happy graphic? On TinEye it comes up from 54 sources, and the original artist is lost in the noise of reproduction. It’s on the internet. Finders keepers.  Who cares if it’s a corporate behemoth or a struggling independent artist.

Which brings us back to the artist – once your work is out, there is the double edged sword of either now people know where to get it legitimately, by contacting you, or more likely, your work swiftly loses attribution and the next thing you know your work is being printed on a tee shirt, or repainted in a lesser quality, and someone else is making money from your hard work and creativity. Happens all the time. I know one designer who frequently is told of etsy sellers ripping off her images, and  another artist who found their work printed in a book without their knowledge. What is to prevent someone taking work of yours, recreating it, and gaining from your good-faith attempt to be part of the discourse?

How can an artist balance making their work available to the public without jeopardizing it? Is it the duty of the artist to be present online, come what may? How do we protect the value of artists and their creations now that there is the expectation of free availability?

Unsolicited Advice to Artists – Pump the Resume pt.2

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

(Part 1)

How to pump your resume? The most obvious advice is to apply for juried and group shows. Try for grants, purchase prizes, and public and private commissions. Submit your work for anything and everything you are remotely qualified for. But don’t fall into the trap of throwing your money away on scam shows, such as those that are online only or pay-for-play. Read the fine print. There are many opportunities that are free – paying for the chance to compete is not always the wisest decision as an emerging. Some good shows are free of cost and some bad ones have a very high entry fee. The point of these shows is the exhibition itself but also to use as a springboard and to boost your curriculum vitae, to parlay into the next exhibition. (more…)

Unsolicited Advice to Artists – Pump the Resume pt.1

Monday, January 18th, 2010

Emerging artists are in need of expanding their accomplishments: unlike the standard maximum of no more than one page, artists are encouraged to list every little thing they have ever done. There are certain segments of the art world for which your curriculum vitae is as important as your work, and strong art without a strong resume isn’t given equal consideration. Unfair, but true. Some people make quick judgments based on length alone, before even reading the details. Once established beyond that a single page of accomplishments, only then should artists perhaps weed out the less auspicious appearance they’ve made.

(more…)

The Collective Issue – By Appointment

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

A prevalent issue that collectives face is how to get buyers to the space. Collectives are generally strong when it comes to harnessing the power of self-promotion, getting press and publicity both for the space and the individuals who show there, but how can that promotion be parlayed into sales to the emerging Philadelphia artists? I feel the art produced by the city has a distinct flavor that should be seen, but if most of these exhibitions are one evening only, it vastly limits their impact outside of the artistic circle, and the artists ability to ‘do the dance’ with potential buyers.

The artblahg is constantly on about how many collectives are open by appointment only. As far as I can tell, collectives don’t really have a choice. If a space operates during gallery hours, someone needs to be there, and they generally like to be compensated for their time. Frequently, it works as a co-operative trade system – you show here, you’re obligated to sit here x number of hours with a book and chat with whomever comes in. This tends to work  only if you have an established space with foot traffic, or an alternative income source, or are a collective of more secure artists, but for those fairly fresh out of school that sacrifice of unpaid daylight hours is just not an option.

It is part of my job to sit in a gallery hoping people will come in to see the work. Frequently, they do not. And I can count on one hand how many times in the last four years someone has walked in off the street and bought a work simply by seeing it on the walls. I’m not just getting paid to sit at a desk, however, I’m getting paid for the other work I do while I happen to be around should anyone want to see the show. When I leave the gallery, the owner has discussed the possibility of going by appointment only, or eliminating the physical space all together.

Ashley Gallery (another Northern Liberties gallery, now closed) never existed in a physical space; only online and by participating in art fairs, and it was consistently picked for press and promotion because of its solid online presence. It amused me that it would receive gushing national blurbs with the address was given although there was no gallery space for the readers to visit. It continued to be named one of the top Philadelphia galleries after it had been closed for more than a year. And it did very well in terms of sales for its artists.

By appointment is not an option only utilized by collectives, but formal galleries have more opportunities to weigh against not being open to the public. Collectives suffer not from underexposure by this decision (they manage to get plenty of press and hold their own online with image and information dissemination) but from a basic inability to connect with buyers; more often than not artists and critics populate opening, rather than potential patrons. And as a gallery employee, I can say very few people ever make appointments to see the work, even if they are interested. If it doesn’t jive with their schedule, they just let it slide. It’s only art, after all.

I personally think it would help sales and money flow if the collective spaces could be open more often so more people could see them. Especially as traditionally, the locations artists can afford to set up shop in tend to be in the, shall we say, less gentrified areas, and foot traffic tends to be an issue.  Therefor a trip to see the work in a collective is a destination appointment, but would simply being open more help? As someone who has seen a solid week go by without any walk-ins, I don’t think that’s a panacea. I’ve already discussed why many cannot afford the sheer cost of a open storefront. And many are not able/interested in submitting to the difficult grant/becoming a non-profit application process. So is there a solution? Or are all collectives doomed either to go gently into the good night or follow the Space 1026 model?

Unsolicited Advice to Artists: Name Game

Thursday, December 17th, 2009

Lemme tellya a thing or three

Lemme tellya a thing or three

Names are vital in how you present yourself. I’m not getting into how important it is to name work (I’ve yet to meet someone for whom Untitled is an accurate reflection of the subject of their work – it’s a lazy argument for a lazy solution – but that’s another post) but rather your file names when you submit work. Think I’m being glib? The other day I sorted through over 50 discs of artist submissions to an upcoming show, and I can not stress enough how a little effort on your end will endear you to the lowly peon tasked with presenting your work to the higher-ups in the arts food chain.

Imagine you’re applying for, say, a popular group show at a local arts institution that requests a disk with 5 images and a resume, statement, and slide list. Your cd is going to end up in a pile with potentially hundreds of other artists, then most likely, all of your images will be gathered together for presentation. Let’s start with when I put your cd into my computer. The icon pops up. And what is it called? In my real world experience I’ve seen unnamed (implies you don’t understand how to perform basic computer tasks) the date the disk was made 12/14/09 (hmm, finished a day before the deadline – don’t think this is important, eh?) cutsy names that have nothing to do with the work PurpieX (seriously?), the name of the show being applied for Show Title (great for you, but I already know that I’m working on this show, so not the best choice.) So what should it be? Your full professional name (not Jo or Kitty, Joseph M. Smith or Katherine Cooper) the name you would like to have associated with your work and then if there’s room, the show being applied for or the body of work. Ah, I see you’ve named your disk properly. I have high hopes for you. Then I open up the disk.

(more…)

The Collective Issue – Are Sales a Goal?

Thursday, December 3rd, 2009

In the ongoing investigation of art collectives in Philadelphia, I sent out a mess of questions to some seven different collectives, and waited to see if anyone would send anything back. I have a lot of peripheral observations about the prevalence of collectives in this city, and how the operate, and I was curious. A month or so later I had some responses, but they are in no way intended to be indicative of the varied opinions of the collective in the city.

Working at the gallery, I constantly worry about sales. Both for the desire to pay the bills, but sales also support artists, allowing them to keep creating, and in turn to pay their bills. Trust, that BFA isn’t the ticket to fame and fortune you may have been lead to believe it would be in art school. Good luck getting any arts related job that allows studio time. If you can actually make some cushion money by selling work, it means you can devote more time to developing it, and inching towards the dream of being able to live off of your art. Sales are also a concrete form of validation; someone thought this was worthwhile enough to take it home. (more…)

Art : Fashion : Performance : Objects : Context

Sunday, November 15th, 2009

Discuss:

McQueen Spring 2010 Shoes

McQueen Spring 2010 Shoes