ART IS NOT ABOUT COMPETITION
Judging any work of art at a public event, I believe, is a very questionable activity that raises many concerns. A close look at the competitive art culture reveals a process that works more to the favour of event organisers and arts festivals than to the welfare of individual artists.
Following are some concerns I have about the art contest:
An art contest involves winners and losers. It involves some form of judgement about the relative merits of each artwork. Yet art by its nature is subjective. It is an individual’s subjective response to a particular emotion, idea or experience.
Publically judging one art work to be better, or more worthy than another requires a benchmark against which both works can be measured. If we were comparing sacks of potatoes a benchmark could be provided by the relative size and weight of each sack. A simple comparison would reveal which sack contained the greater amount of potatoes.
Art however, is not something that can be weighed and measured in the same way as a sack of potatoes. It is not a simple question of relative volumes or sizes.
In art there are few constants or absolutes. The work of one artist can vary enormously from the work of another. Different artists create different things, in different ways, and for VERY different reasons. On this basis alone, judging the work of one artist to be somehow superior to the work of another is impossible because there are too many variables to be taken into account.
In many cases the only common factor linking the work of different artists is their choice of media. The subject, the idea, the motivation, the execution or meaning can all vary enormously. What is seen as ‘good art’ in the eyes of one person is the next person’s talentless mess. What is understood and fully appreciated by one person, can be completely misinterpreted or missed by the next.
Reducing art to a competition fails to recognise the many things which distinguish the two. It is a failure to recognise the many variables and differences which mark out each work of art as unique and individual.
In a nutshell, objective judgements cannot be made about something which is subjective.
Expressing your personal opinion is one thing, imagining your views to be the absolute truth is another.
In many cases art judges are not personally familiar with the artists they are judging. They are not privy to the background of knowledge, experience and ideas that have inspired the creation of a particular artwork, and they do not necessarily know about or understand the chosen subject.
Some artworks include subject matter that is quite complex, and require a specialised knowledge to appreciate or understand. Many artists (myself included) have spent years studying a particular interest or subject and have incorporated a multitude of ideas and symbols into the artworks they create.
Without a knowledge of each artist and their subject, no judge, indeed no person, can pretend to make an informed judgement about a particular artwork. No one can stand in judgement of someone or something they do not fully understand!
In reality, art judges make entirely personal and subjective decisions. They favour those artworks that appeal to their personal senses and aesthetic tastes; they make decisions based on choices of their own invention rather than upon an informed understanding of the ideas, symbols and experiences expressed by the artist.
In practice, many art judges do not necessarily have the same talent, knowledge or experience as the artists whose work they are standing in judgment of. This fact, I believe, raises serious questions about the suitability or capability of many art judges.
How can someone who does not possess the same talent or experience pretend to stand in judgment of something they cannot do themselves - particularly something they do not understand?
Judging an artwork in public is a process that is neither objective nor informed and pretends a deeper understanding of things that cannot be weighed or measured. In a nutshell, judging the work of someone you do not know personally, have never met before, or do not necessarily understand, is plainly ridiculous; it is an assumption so vast and conceited that it barely deserves serious consideration.
An art competition is a power structure.
All the decision making processes are in the hands of the organisers who have complete control over the running of the event. The individual artists taking part in these events, have little or no say about how things are run.
How many works each artist can submit, the size of each artwork, the subject matter of the work, where each work is hung, how the event is promoted or advertised, who gets first prize, how much they will win - all these decisions (and more) are made by the organisers of the competition.
Any art work deemed unsuitable is rigorously excluded.
This effectively robs those artists who participate of influence. It creates a hierarchy where artists submit themselves to be judged by others. Simply by entering an art competition, artists are subordinate themselves. They are handing control of their work to the organisers of the competition and submitting their work to be publicly judged before an audience of onlookers.
They are giving away their right to be seen and heard on their own terms.
I believe, one of the main reasons artists (on average) are amongst the poorest, least influential members of the wider community, is because we give it away! We hand control and responsibility for our hard-won labours to someone else and in so doing we impoverish ourselves.
Art competitions impose their own culture upon the wider art community.
In many cases art competitions and major art festivals are the largest, most influential events on the arts calendar. These events often determine which artists gain acceptance or recognition and which artists do not. This encourages an ‘arts industry’ approach which establishes art as a financial enterprise that raises foreign capital and invests power in those who make the key financial decisions.
It also imposes a culture that requires artists to scrabble and compete for the attention or favour of the event organisers. Intentionally or not, art competitions function on the principle of divide and rule. They pit artist against artist and impose a hierarchy in which artisans are positioned as competitors on a playing field and excluded from the major decisions affecting their career.
To be part of any organised event requires the participating artists to follow the rules and guidelines. It also requires them to conform to certain criteria and to present works of art that complement that event. Any subject matter that is deemed offensive, controversial or inappropriate by the organisers is actively excluded.
The real power in the industrial-art culture are the gallery directors, managers and bureaucrats who organise and finance the largest shows.
I believe the interests of individual artists are best served by NOT subordinating themselves to this competitive culture. I believe artists are better served by staging their own exhibitions in a non-competitive environment where they can retain control of the decisions directly affecting their work.
The best, most effective way to circumvent the influence of these major art events is to do just that - don't participate!
BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER
Each person’s reaction to a work of art is different. Each person understands and appreciates art in different ways. Often a person’s reaction to a particular work of art is emotionally based, or is triggered by influences that are neither rational not intellectual in nature.
In this sense, beauty truly does reside in the eye of the beholder and any reaction we have to art is first and foremost a private, individual one.
To pretend there is a way of looking at or understanding art in a way that holds true for everyone is ridiculous. To pretend there is a single, absolute method for assessing art that is repeatable from one work of art to the next is equally ridiculous.
In truth art is judged by individuals who make decisions based upon their personal likes and dislikes. Regardless of how informed these individuals are intellectually, their reaction to a work of art still takes place in ways that cannot be easily measured.
Judging a work of art to be better or more worthy than another is something we all do. Imagining our personal judgements to be applicable or relevant to others however, is another matter. Although each of us makes judgements in private, imposing our decision upon others at a public event involves those who participate to recognise and honour our authority.
Art contests take place because the artists who participate in them are willing to submit their work to the will of those judging. Merely by participating, artists sanction such events and invest them with authority.
Rather than establishing an authority of their own, artists frequently surrender any influence they may otherwise have had to the organisers of cultural events. This is why the most powerful and influential people within the art movement are not artists, but administrators, managers, gallery directors and dealers.
Such people are empowered because their authority is recognised and supported by the wider art community.
The fact that this process does not benefit most artists is evidenced by the percentage of artists who live at or below the poverty line. Despite billions of dollars of public money being invested each year in the arts, the average artist is amongst the poorest members of the Australian community.
The only way to change this situation is for individual artists to stop participating in events organised by others and to establish a creative platform of their own.
So what alternatives do artists have to avoid the art competition?
What measures can someone with limited resources take to re-claim control over how and where their art is viewed or experienced?
Following are some practical suggestions:
Rather than submitting your work to be judged by others you can establish an independent approach that places YOU in control of your own art. This involves being prepared from the outset to pursue your own agenda and to be seen on your own terms.
Achieving genuine independence requires discipline, determination and a clear idea of how you wish to communicate yourself to an audience. Balancing between your passion and the day to day needs of surviving requires a grounded, consistent approach.
Once you have established a clear direction in your own mind however, you can set about attending to the practical challenge of making your art accessible to the wider world.
Staging your own show or exhibition need not involve the use of an art gallery - there are many other venues where your work can be made accessible to the public. Cafes, shop windows, studios, vacant shops, private homes and rented spaces are all examples of venues that do not necessarily require a large outlay of money.
Staging your own exhibition affords you the luxury of being seen on your own terms and allows you to exhibit and promote your work in ways that are controlled by you, rather than by contest organisers or gallery directors.
This affords you the freedom to choose what, how, when, where and why you exhibit your own subject matter without requiring the judgement or approval of others. It also allows you to avoid a raft of administrative guidelines and bureaucratic red tape that often accompanies government-funded institutions.
Establishing a professional quality web site can be expensive. In my own case I was able to barter my time and labour in return for having my own web site built from scratch. Bartering is a useful means of acquiring those materials and services that would otherwise prove too expensive.
Once established your own web site provides a ready, affordable means of showing your art to the world. It gives you a forum where anything that is seen or written about is controlled entirely by yourself. Creating your own web site also allows you to discuss the various aspects of your work and to describe in detail what you are attempting to do or say.
Building an editable web site also provides a means of marketing your work. Everyone who enters your site is a potential client who can order something simply by e-mail or credit card.
Self-publishing your own book, album, calendar or promotional material is more accessible than ever. There are now various computer software programs that allow you to write and design your own material which can be printed at home or delivered to a commercial printery. Many traditional forms of commercial printing have given way to computer-based systems that provide small, cost-effective print runs. This allows you to print a limited number of copies of your work for exhibition or distribution.
Publishing your own material is another means of maintaining control over how and where your work is seen in public. It gives you control over the creative process from beginning to end and any profits go directly to you.
Teaching is a useful source of income for many artists and writers.
Using your talents to help others develop their own creative skills is a positive and practical way of being involved in the wider community. Like anything you do in public, running educational courses allows you to promote yourself on a face to face basis.
Introducing yourself to your students provides an opportunity to showcase your previous achievements and to broaden your audience. The questions asked by your students are often challenging and require you to research your subject carefully. This in turn helps you to broaden your knowledge and discover things that would otherwise be overlooked.
Artists have as much right as anyone else in the community to speak on matters of public interest.
Writing letters to your local paper or participating in various web-based forums are other ways to promote yourself and your art. The written word is a powerful tool in the right hands and allows you to be heard by a larger audience.
Artisans are well placed to comment about matters of culture and identity. Your experience as a ‘primary producer’ affords you a practical knowledge in these matters and distinguishes you as an authority.
To realise this authority however, you need to speak out and give expression to the hard-won ideas and experiences you have gained.
For many artists the most important aspect of their work is its content or message. This message is a highly personal and subjective expression about the artist and their encounter with life.
In most cases art judges do not take into account the content and meaning of the works they are judging. The artists ‘message’ is often ignored or misinterpreted and instead only technical or aesthetic values are considered.
In a very real sense art contests do not take into account the whole picture, but are limited by the personal tastes and bias of the presiding judge.
Rather than submitting themselves to the judgement of strangers, artist can take control of their career. The best, most effective way to achieve this is to remain independent.
Taking charge of your creative passion allows you a greater say in how you are viewed by an audience. It allows you to claim control of your art and provides you a greater share of the profits your art generates.
Achieving this requires courage and determination.
It requires artists to avoid placing themselves into a subordinate role where the key decisions affecting their art are made by others.
In most cases, art competitions effectively control artists and rob them of any real influence. By submitting their work to be judged by others, the majority of artists deny themselves the opportunity to be seen and heard on their own terms.
Independence, on the other hand, provides an opportunity for artists to take responsibility for themselves and their work. It gives ownership to individual artists and empowers them.
R J Poole offers one-on-one private tuition on any aspect of Digital Photography and Adobe Photoshop CS - CS4. Phone and make a booking any time and arrange to have private lessons at your own convenience. For more information usethe CONTACT button at the bottom of this page,or you can contact the following:
Ph: (02) 6622 1858
E-mail: rjpoole12@yahoo.com
