ATC or MOMA by William Dolan
I’ve been in a few discussions lately about careers and goals for artists. There seems to be some confusion as to what is important for an artist. Most of us start with some talent, ability and the passion to create objects that communicate in a visual sense. So we go to school to learn how to hone our crafts and then spend some time developing our voices.
It would be nice if this was all we have to do to be artists, but it’s only half of it. If art is a form of communication, at least two parties need to be involved in order for it to be so. It’s the old “tree falling in the forest thing.” Communication is a connection between, in this case, artists and viewers. So we have to ask ourselves a couple of questions. Who is our audience and how do we reach them? Do we dream of art historians someday earning their PHDs by writing their dissertations on us and our work hanging in the most important museums; our work becoming important cultural treasures? Or, is it the accolades from our family, friends and peers? Or do we want to be “rock stars”?
A lot of artists strive to make their mark in history and/or become well respected in the art world. Unfortunately, reaching this goal is a huge undertaking for all artists especially if they are from middle-of-the-road art programs in middle-of-the-road U.S.A. It’s a necessity to be part of important exhibitions and curated shows, write-ups, respected galleries, etc. if an artist wants to make a name for themselves in the art world. This takes a lot of time and effort…so much so that sometimes it may feel like a pipe dream. So what do we do to help further our careers when the prestigious shows and respected galleries are too difficult to attain?
Well, there is an abundance of community art exhibitions. We show in coffee shops, bars, vanity galleries, local yearly shows and street fairs. Our resumes become littered with this stuff. After a decade or so, a long resume of library and cafe shows can look quite impressive—that is, if you don’t actually read it. If artists would stop and think about what a resume like this says about their work, they might think twice before they send in their CD of JPEGs to the art fair selection committee, even if the jury is comprised of esteemed local art dealers.
Now, there is nothing wrong with a career of art fairs and cafe shows. It’s honorable and can be rewarding. However, if artists want to end up closer to the top of art world, they have to stop fiddling around with the junk at the bottom. I know a few artists that want to be in the important Biennials, but in the meantime, they show at pubs and cafes, etc. thinking that at least they are getting their work “out there.”
This is where the confusion comes in. These type of shows and venues have openings, have post cards and all of the trappings of major gallery exhibitions. Artists feel like they are doing something…”getting their work out there”. Exhibiting at a cafe or a show like Around The Coyote (ATC) every year will not lead to retrospectives at the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA). Grabbing for the low-hanging fruit is easier than going for the brass ring. Immediate satisfaction should not be as important as reaching your goals. So don’t stop at the drive-thru on the way to the 5-star restaurant.
Category: Articles, Essays 22 comments »
September 4th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Good article. Reminds me of a conversation I had with an artist recently. She said that she wanted to “play with the big boy” artists and was aggressively pursuing her art career for the past five years. I later checked out her resume and it was complete shit. Cafes, artists sidewalk shows, a vanity gallery, etc. I was surprised to see these types of shows on her resume because she used the word “aggressively”. That really irritated me. Like the article states there is nothing wrong with cafe, street fairs, etc shows. It’s just that if you are “aggressively” seeking shows and all you get are cafes and coffee houses you are doing something wrong.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Thanks.
I just received an email from the Toronto Artist Project. Based on some of their pitches, it appears that they are appealing to the beginner artist. One thing that bugs me about stuff like this is the “beginner” feeling that is attached to everything. I think it implies “lesser” and cheaper. The viewer, and certainly, critics, curators and dealers arrive (if they bother at all) with the work already tagged as not ready. Doing this stuff pigeonholes artists as “beginners” even if they have been doing it for years. This is why it is bad to do these things and especially continue to do these year after year. How long does it take to “emerge?”
September 4th, 2008 at 11:03 am
You bring up an interesting question in your comment concerning “emerge”. It’s interesting, for instance, that an artist who has been creating for 25 years but was unfortunate in not having any decent exhibitions in their career but then finally lands an important show would still be considered “emerging”.
September 5th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
it would be great if another word or concept could replace ‘emerging’. I agree, its tainted with the suggestion of mediocrity, or juvenile progress.
Kinda like myspace. Myspace was great early on as a ‘business card’ for musicians (who the site was originally designed for) and creative types.
as more and more people joined, the ‘prestige’ that came with a myspace music portfolio became watered down by millions of just plain awful stuff.
And now, when someone mentions a myspace link for art or music, it almost beckons a scoff at the ‘unprofessional’ and ‘juvenile’ suggestions.
the solution to myspace is to join other, more focused, portfolio networking sites. So i wonder, what will be the solution for ‘emerging’?
September 5th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
quite well written article too, by the way!
September 5th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
I don’t think the word “emerging” in itself is tainted. It’s fine to describe a recent grad or someone that’s been creating for a few years as “emerging”. The problem lies in using the word to describe someone that’s been creating for 15, 20 or 25 years. That’s where it seems tainted, or in your words j beckman… “juvenile progress”.
September 5th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Oops – and I’m showing at ATC next month (in a new venue location – west loop all under one roof). Is it the most serious show I’ve ever been in – nope, but I wanted to give the new location a try and as always I know the show will be what I make of it. I started exhibiting in 1994 – around 2001 I dropped out of the scene because of my own situation and now I have a big gaping gap of time on my resume. Was I emerging in 94 – definitely. Can someone be emerging twice? I really hate those labels, but maybe that’s because when most artists were getting their careers on track – I was drinking mine away. I get what you are saying about the cafes, coffee shops, pubs etc…No doubt that is not a fast track or any track to a serious painting career. The questions I grapple with is that we live in a very different world now with the internet and the emergence of the seemingly all powerful, non self-regulating art fairs which is very alluring way to “shop” from a consumer’s point of view. Straight out of art school – I thought the art fair model was an abomination and that the only way to properly view and understand an artist’s body of work is in a gallery or museum solo exhibition. I still believe that is true. As far as curated shows go – just went to the much lauded one at the new Sullivan Galleries on South State Street and was mostly under-whelmed, but that is another conversations entirely.
September 6th, 2008 at 7:54 am
Pamela, gaping holes in the resume where life overtook the rigid demands of the profession is not the exception fortunately. Can you imagine Van Gogh tying to get a show at the MCA today? ” Well except for the institutional time there is not much here to indicate a professional commitment….”
Thanks Bill, great article and advice, some I could have used along the way.
September 6th, 2008 at 8:05 am
Hey Pamela,
“The questions I grapple with is that we live in a very different world now with the internet…”
Another interesting question: How has the internet fundamentally change one’s art career?
I view the internet as making things easier. It’s easier now to apply for grants by uploading instead of mailing, it’s easier now because we have websites and don’t need slides, it’s easier now to get information out by starting blogs as opposed to dropping leaflets off at local coffee shops, etc.. etc..
I’ve read articles about the internet “changing” things in the art world but the articles really only mention the things that I just brought up. Making things easier and more accessible does not translate to radical change in the art world. Not yet…at least.
September 6th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Thanks Ted. I’ve made all of the career mistakes I’m talking about in the article. I’ve come to realize it hasn’t gotten me anywhere and won’t.
Even though it seems easier to go after bar shows and street fairs, it does take time to do this — submitting applications, getting the work ready, mailings, etc.. This is time better spent pursuing better opportunities — research, mailing , writing, etc.
While I think the internet has certainly made it easier for people in the art world to connect, I don’t think it’s caused any paradigm shifts in the art world. Art is still experienced and traded in person.
I’m glad ATC is remaking itself. It’s still going to be an entry-level show and is something a serious artist should graduate from. It can be a good and respectable beginner show, though.
September 6th, 2008 at 10:47 am
“career mistakes”
It does take time for artists to realize that these types of shows (coffee houses, etc) are mistakes. Others just never get it.
“While I think the internet has certainly made it easier for people in the art world to connect, I don’t think it’s caused any paradigm shifts in the art world. Art is still experienced and traded in person.”
I agree. I would still like to hear a few examples of how the internet has really helped someone’s career. For instance, has a curator ever come across an artist’s website (by chance, not by referral) and put that artist in an important show?
September 6th, 2008 at 10:48 am
I think the ATC should remake itself by just going away – -
September 6th, 2008 at 11:35 am
I would rather see ATC made into something viable. I’m hopeful that it will be. Moving it from Wicker Park to the Plumbers’ Union Hall and making it smaller is a start. With the 4-foot thick walls to protect the building from bomb blasts, it even seems a little dangerous.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:44 am
It does seem like ATC really does want to make some changes. That does sound like a good thing. Maybe we should check it out this year to see what’s what!!??
That’s bombs from the mob not terrorists – -
September 6th, 2008 at 11:51 am
I’m looking forward to it.
For effect, they should park a mid-’70s Cadillac or Lincoln in front with some suspicious-looking wires hanging down from the chassis.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:54 am
“mid-’70s Cadillac or Lincoln”
Most of the artists that will be at ATC were not even born yet!
September 6th, 2008 at 11:56 am
ATC is for emerging (there’s that word again) artists, which is why an artist shouldn’t do it every year. It’s also why I would rather see it be something better; something that would be a better start to a career as an artist, than the crappy little street fair it has become. I think that is what Jim Happy Delpech had in mind when he started it.
What that is, I don’t know, but I’m glad they are trying something new.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:59 am
“Most of the artists that will be at ATC were not even born yet!”
Now, you’re sounding like a crotchety old man.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Nice.
Hey, I’m just stating a fact – -
September 6th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Hi Ted –
Your Van Gogh analogy is great – makes me smile. I think having the wheels come off has made me more open to experimentation and not taking myself so seriously. Life has become interesting again, like when I was a kid, and I love that outgrowth. When Rauschenberg died I read in one of the articles that he had said something to the effect that it is extremely important that (his) art be unjustifiable – I’m not sure what triggered that thought, but I dig that kind of driving force.
January 13th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
Informative and enjoyable article and discussion. Also, true. (At least from my perspective of 40 years of making art, associating with artists, and researching “making it.”
January 13th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
“…if artists want to end up closer to the top of art world, they have to stop fiddling around with the junk at the bottom.”
worth repeating – -