Tom Lucas, Preston Jackson, collector Robert Derden, Joyce Owens,
Barlow at our 2007opening, Nicole Gallery
No artists = No galleries!
Can you imagine? NO art on the walls. No sculptures on pedestals. No installation work or videos on display in an art gallery?
As a conceptual idea, OK. It could signify the death of art. Again! On various levels...suggesting various ideas...but that's not where I'm going with this. And even with much art being virtual, another possible implication that art (as we know it) is dead, I'm not going there, either.
ARC Gallery, my work on back wall.
Taking this out of the conceptual realm, I have noticed a dynamic between some artists and galleries that suggests there is a deep pathology that needs surgery, or at least, "meds" in order to stave off some sort of art gallery tragedy! As they close one after the other, now may be the time to think about what we can do to improve conditions and make them artist-friendly.
Artists have other choices, so I hope the galleries will listen up! Most artists I know do prefer to show in galleries, at least, sometimes!
I just don't get why some galleries persist in treating artists as if they are secondary and not the reason for a gallery's existence! Here is my partial list of the "how comes" that artists (and galleries) can consider:
1. Why are artists made to quake in their boots when they approach some galleries?
2. Why don't all gallerists divulge the names of buyers to the artists?
3. Why don't all galleries consult with and/or respect the wishes of artists on how their work is displayed?
4. Why do some galleries discount from the artist's portion of the sale, too and not from the gallery commission?
5. Why do some galleries not publicize the exhibitions and promote artists they show?
6. Why do some galleries ask artists to pay for photography and publicity on top of the commissions?
7. Why are some galleries not run as other businesses are, keeping regular hours, etc.?
8. Why do some galleries delay paying their artists when work is sold?
9. Why don't artists get paid interest on monies galleries have held back over 30 days?
We have established that anyone can open a gallery with no training in art or even business, so maybe we can address a couple of other questions:
1. Should galleries be rated on the care and handling of the art and artists they show ?
2. Should there be a system to rate galleries such as the Better Business Bureau or something like Angie's List
or the equivalent of Rate Your Professor/teacher sites for college professors? Artists could then anonymously give galleries a thumbs up or down. Services such as these would forewarn other
artists if their brethren didn't get paid for sold work, were not
treated well in general, had work damaged or stolen and other atrocities that have
been reported in the press and shared word-of-mouth.
One game some
galleries play is the same one that some mothers tell their children.
If you miss one train (boyfriend/girlfriend) another one always comes
along. Just wait. Galleries know that there will always be artists
willing to put up with, and be grateful for, gallery exposure, so if
one artist stomps out in anger and feeling mistreated, another artist is waiting to be next!
OH NO! Bad behaving artists?This had to come up next! Difficult
artists give gallerists and curators the blues. They should also be
outed, although as we all know, difficult artists often get rewarded,
not restrained. The "talent" is enough to make excuses for bad behavior
and the audiences are mesmerized by behavior outside the so-called
norm. That's why we fixate on these reality show folks and other train
wrecks (don't want to get sued so I won't name names...) that we can't
keep our eyes off...actors, politicians, golfers and others who
misbehave mesmerize us!
Professionally run, artist-friendly galleries should be rewarded! And there are a lot of those; Parish Gallery in D.C. is one. Nicole Gallery in Chicago is one. Homewood Studios in Minneapolis is one, Woman Made Gallery in Chicago is one, and there are many others! I hear Packer Schopf is one and Ann Nathan, too. I know Robert Henry Adams, now closed, was one. June Kelly is one.
Collectors, you have the power to change this bad behavior as well. I know the artists tell people about the bad behavior. So supporting the "good" galleries to buy could help; artists look for
representation at the good galleries and respectfully speak out when a gallery treats you or your work badly! Sometimes the ONLY education people running these places get is from their artists!
So many guests at Richard Hunt's N'Namdi Gallery opening it was hard to see the art...
I wish I had a top ten artist-friendly galleries in every US city, if not globally. I found this post on Art business.com that explains the ideal gallery and artist/gallery relationship. If you're not getting this you may be getting the short end of the stick!
Not only is art education in public schools on a resuscitator that is malfunctioning, but regular education in America is a joke!
Frustrated with the lack of curiosity, commitment to hard work, respect for others, respect for time, inability to follow simple instructions and difficulty completing simple tasks that our students display, I have been trying to figure out what to do! I'm proud to say my hometown, Philadelphia has a plan.I have been teaching in some capacity for much of my life. And I enjoy it very much, especially seeing students develop self confidence as they acquire new skills. But I am appalled by the various deficits students arrive with from their high schools, and though I understand it can be embarrassing to be unable to produce a result that others around you can, I am puzzled about the indifference to learning I perceive from some students.
I have never thought the schools had to teach EVERYTHING! But how to use a ruler! How to follow simple directions! How to construct a grammatically sound simple sentence! These are skills that many students do not have.
I think the problem is that people who want to teach go to public school and are not taught the basics because they have teachers who have not been taught the basics so they can only teach what they know and think is correct methodology. There has been created a perpetual cycle of mis-learning and bad teaching by mis-taught teachers, who don't know any better. The cycle spirals out of hand until the standards are lost into just teaching to the test.
So this is another reason why the arts are essential. In visual art there is always more than one way to achieve the goal. In art there is a possibility for personal expression, so students can purge themselves of every day stress. They develop problem solving skills that can be applied to all areas of their lives. There is also a need to be able to calculate and measure, for example if you work in watercolor and need a border on your paper or you learn to cut a mat for the watercolor when its done, or you draw in linear perspective. Students mix chemicals when they work with clay or paints and printmaking. They write about their work, and critique it verbally so they learn to speak in public. There is an opportunity to develop critical thinking as students learn to choose a way of working and method of evaluating what they have created.
Students can share their concerns, their anger, their confusion, their hopes, dreams and doubts through the arts (visual, music, theater, dance). That ability to release emotions through art might stem the high tide that brought us almost 30 deaths of school age students in the first 3 months of 2009 in Chicago.
So people, lobby for art at all class levels, bringing art teachers in to all schools, not just the rich neighborhoods, and the special schools for the smart kids!
If we want to build a smarter nation, with people who have skill sets that will help us progress as we encounter the various changes the 21st Century is bringing, we have to educate ALL!!!!!!
Top: CSU students learning about art by visiting the President's Gallery during an exhibition honoring Hispanic/Latino Heritage Month in 2008.
Bottom art: Allen Moore, a Chicago State student produced this 16" x 20" acrylic painting for a 2008 student exhibition on campus.