Had my regular dentist checkup yesterday, and got one of the nice hygienists that like to chat. She asks how our art fairs are going and I reply as best I can "rowh ayy". She asks about our next show and when my mouth is empty of metal devices I tell her we'll be exhibiting in Ann Arbor.
It reminds her of a ceramic pair of cruets that she purchased from a potter at the Ann Arbor fair last year. She loved them, bought them for $100 and upon wishing to use them in her kitchen, found that one had a stopper that didn't fit, and the other one leaked. She tried switching the stoppers which didn't help, and spent time examining the other to find the source of the leak to no avail. So neither was functional. She contacted the artist and although he said he would do something, he did nothing instead. She called again and did not get a response.
So after she's done with my cleaning, we talk about it a bit more and she says something that rather startles me - and asks if the people that put on the show can stop this potter from exhibiting. My initial reaction was that they would not, and probably could not, do anything other than perhaps help her find the artist, and she already had his contact information.
She presses, and says that since it's a "juried" show, because this potter sold her "a bill of goods" shouldn't the show essentially blacklist him?
I ended up advising her to see if he had his events posted on his website and if possible to visit him in Ann Arbor again and take the pieces with her. Assuming he is a stand up guy, he would probably make things right for her.
But remembering the conversation still hurts my head. First, my opinion is that jurying is just the selection of pretty images, and has nothing to do with the work. The juries cannot tell the size, weight, material, craftsmanship or if the stoppers fit, and "art" is forever subjective. A totally different subject. But blacklisting an artist because one set of cruets does not perform? That introduces a whole new set of rules about functionality, intended purpose and defects that some shows may write about in their contracts - maybe a small paragraph - and that no show would ever try to manage, not that I would want them to!
Still, it makes me feel for the customer that has little other recourse and it reinforces my beliefs that like Paula Deen, your empire can come crumbing down by saying or doing one stupid thing, and you should always put out only good work that you believe in and can stand behind.
Comments
I have only once stopped working with an artist because of poor customer service. I don't consider that to be a jury issue. I have also not included food vendors and even sponsors if their behavior does not live up to my expectations. When this is looked at as a jury issue it makes it more complicated than it need be. None of us want to be associated with someone that is not ethical.
Several of the shows I attend do take customer comments seriously, whether it be product issues or interaction issues. I know of one person who at last count has been blacklisted from 19 shows due to her behavior towards other exhibitors/management and spilling over into the attendees. It has been painful to watch her steady decline.
Better that your hygienist keep communicating with the artist. Artist will do nearly anything to keep people talking nice rather than poorly about the quality of their work.
I don't know how she paid, but thanks for that reminder.
Did she pay with a credit card? She can contest the charge.
I know that I have a few friends that have told me that they would not purchase at art shows for similar reasons. I always assure them that they can always contact the artist and have things made right. This story is disturbing because unfortunately we are all judged on the customer service that artist give. One bad apple can ruin it for many. Don't know the solution