I've always thought that there are two types of people who do art shows, and probably many that fall in between. Most are those that are creative and can take advantage of the concept of art shows by using that creativity to earn a living and support a family. And there are people that cant deal with the real work world and don't get along well with others. Its relative easy to tell which type that is when you're set up next to someone you either get along or don't get along with.
I became interested in photography in the early 1970’s and found that I had an innate understanding and love of the medium. I carried a camera everywhere and took pictures every day. It became an obsession. I spent a few weeks one summer on Monhegan Island (Maine) and ran into a woman who was selling her etchings. She had them spread out on a bench in front of the restaurant where most of the people ate. Intrigued by the concept of selling artwork, the following summer I brought a few boxes of my own matted photographs and the sales paid for my summer vacation. That same woman told me about a few shows in New York City that she had been exhibiting at. I made some calls and got the applications and I once I did my first show I was hooked.
Back then everything was low tech. There were no professional looking displays, everything was hand made. My first display was built with 1x2’s and pegboard with clear plastic thrown over the top if it rained.
There were no uniform bodies of work and no jury slide photographers to photograph them. Those specialties didn't exist yet. And it was relatively easy to get accepted to almost every show you applied to. You learned about shows by word of mouth from other artists, and once I learned about Sunshine Artist Magazine, I would pour over it from cover to cover looking for shows to apply to. I moved from doing mall shows to outdoor shows where you could earn more money in two days outside than for a week in a mall where you spent most of your time reading books and eating.
Once I started doing art shows on a regular basis, I became part of a "family" of artists. Friendships developed and we looked forward to seeing the same people from show to show, maybe sharing breakfast or dinner with them and you watched each others family change and children grow up. Doing art shows was a fun way of earning a living.
Technology started to affect the art show business, as it did everything else in our world. Displays began to look more professional. Bodies of work became tighter. Shows started getting more competitive. Even vehicles became more suited for transporting art.
Things were good through the end of the 1990’s. Some artists consider 9/11/2001 as the date things began to slide downhill because people cut back on non essential spending. But if you think about it, change was inevitable. Art shows became more about the money than about the art. Baby boomers were starting to age, they were the artists and the buyers of the artwork. The Internet had a substantial affect as people began to make purchases on line. You could find all sizes of art at very low prices at the big box stores. Costs related to art shows began to rise as sales dropped and artists began to earn less money. Then the move to online applications happened and the number of people applying to shows increased making it more difficult to get into shows where they would earn less money.
For some, the move from 35mm jury slides to digital jury images and the online application system became the reason or blame for the downhill trend. Better quality images of your art were now within reach of everyone, not just those artists who had hired a professional jury slide photographer in the past. With higher quality images being prepared by more and more artists, it was inevitable that applications would become more competitive.
So where will it end? Shows are no longer fun to do and artists no longer are able to make the money they did in the past. And that's where I'm going to end this essay.
Larry Berman
Digital J u r y Services
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
There IS a lack of imagination going on here. In this case, it is by a callow artist who can't imagine that not every work of art must "comment on society" or "attempt originality." It's silly to claim that in order to be called art, something must slavishly adhere to a "tradition of dissent, rampant individuality and treatment of our wealthy and powerful patrons with the disdain that that (sic) the rest of society is afraid to show them." It is also naive to think that all art must aspire to "greatness." Those artists who Aaron Wallis respects may not have been primarily motivated by selling work, but I doubt they were primarily motivated by "greatness," either. Those who became great did so because they crafted art that touched people's hearts and minds. Often, this art was a rebellion, a "dissent," an expression of "rampant individuality," but not always. I do love artists and art. I don't know Aaron, but perhaps I would like him and his art, too. I am sorry to tell him, however that his rebellion here is trite and commonplace. The path he follows in this piece is familiar and well worn. And while it may be heartfelt, it is hardly original. His art may be the real deal, but this tantrum is craft at best.