Where's my mark?
Gatekeepers, Hobbyists, Intermediaries and so forth define the success of Art/Culture as described by Elizabeth Currid. A reading I enjoyed, which as of late- is becoming a regular thing with my attachment to Tze Ming Mok's 'Race You There'. If Mok was my past, Currid is my present. Although not a present I am particularly settled with. These Gatekeepers, Hobbyists, etc. all go through a number of systems Currid mentions- but yet never actually defines the system itself. To form my own opinion of these systems, they are purely based on (like I just said) opinion. If it is a curator, a dealer and so fourths opinion of me that will lay down my future- I am worried to wonder what my future is exactly within the art world.
Death to the extrovert, I am not one of them, and we have all seen how far extroverts can go. If the events, openings etc. are the ground in which Gatekeepers feed from the Hobbyists, and the Intermediaries, this scene is where you need to be in order to survive. At some point in our lives, we have all seen the scene. In fact, most have probably been apart of it for a brief period- it's out fifteen minutes of fame. We are all slaves to the scene; if we defy it then we are the minority that the scene will eventually become. We know this is true from all the fan boys who have now lost their status and hierarchy because of Hollywood’s comic book-movie adaptations, much to the respect of Michael Jackson’s enormous overnight sales topping records since his passing.
I for one, am not particularly interested in gallery openings- for a social factor it isn't exactly my fortay, and your chances of actually taking in the works are slim with the mass crowds of extroverts all trying to dry hump the next curator. If this scene is where the cross fertilization, weak ties of the century happen- where would an introvert make his or her mark? Incapable of sparking a conversation to a stranger, incapable of the approach, there is nothing left for you (..And me) here. Outside of the event, outside of the scene, is there any other way in to the art world? I don't know anyone who's made it. If it's meant to be, if we're destined to make our mark somewhere down the line, how do I make mine?
Elizabeth Currid, "the Economics of a Good Party: Social Mechanisms and the Legitimization of Art/Culture", Journal of Economics and Finance, vol. 31, no. 2, Fall 2007, pp.386-394
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There is a big difference between an opening and a show, if you ask me. One is to be seen, the other is to see. But in saying that I'm not too sure one can exist without the other. The 'rock stars' are nothing without their opposite. The deep contemplation of a silent room and white walls is nothing without the aftermath of a who's who gathering the night before. Am I making any sense? I think half the issue is that there are too many ways into the 'art world' now.... too many marks in too many types of pens are made. Get me?
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting discussion, and is especially important for us to think about now if we have any intention of having a career in the art world. I personally am with you on the not being into openings side of things. Its been said that to be successful in any career you have to schmooze, go to Friday drinks, etc. Basically kiss ass. If you're not about that, I guess you have to hope your work can speak for itself. Not that you seem to be having any problem in that department. Maybe putting your work out there is more important at the end of the day...
ReplyDeletePatrick Reynolds said something interesting in his Tuesday lecture, he said that he believed good work will make it on it's own.
ReplyDeleteI write this in the position that whenever I have personally tried to approach galleries/people of importance, it has always ended in fail- but every time I don't (not necessarily stop trying, but put it second towards my goals) something does eventuate. If there are too many pens, not enough 'space' for our generation, I don't think selling yourself could be the best option- or not from my experience anyway. Given the recent (informal) polls of our year, and the year below- it seems most aren't out to make it as artists. If the ones that are, are they out in the galleries? or is it the one's who aren't which are?
Maybe it is just a careful balance, as like kate said- you can't have rock stars with out fans.
I think it is very trivial to consider every opening an opportunity for all the "schmooze (ing)" to take place. It is a very narrow minded way to look at the function of an opening. Sure, that is one of its functions, without a doubt, but in no way the only function. I also think it is narrow minded to "hope your work can speak for itself", as pessimistic as that sounds. As I said before, one can not survive without the other. And I'm ok with that. I think the biggest struggle for us young artists is to admit that in order to be part of the game, we must actually play the game. I don't think this is a negative thing, but rather a fact of life. Why can we not take an opening for what it is - a free drink. Have your free drink and small talk and more on. Lets not all sit around crying over the small percentage of schmoozers, but just fucking enjoy ourselves for once. Brooding young artist aside..
ReplyDeleteCurrid's point, I think, is that if we assume that most artworks are essentially similar lumps of used art materials, the assignment of value comes from the discourse that occurs around them. No discourse, no value. So one way or another, the work must not only be seen, it must be talked about. Patrick Reynolds is being cute when he says good work will make it on its own - he is the master of schmoozing. But there is some truth in the sentiment. When earlier this year, a certain senior Elam lecturer was plied with cocktails in a Manhattan bar and quizzed by a group of art hopefuls as to what we needed to do to "succeed as an artist", he sagely replied "first, be a fucking artist".
ReplyDelete