Welcome new readers.
This is the third part of a series of writings on the subject of art and money. You can find part 1 HERE, and part 2 HERE.
Remember, this is my Private View. Feel free to add yours in the comments box.
Does adding money to the art world mix encourage the creation of mediocre art? Maybe and sometimes.
Recently I visited a local art gallery to view a biennial exhibition of new artists to the gallery. What a boring room of art it was - bland and lacking in any passion or conceptual underpinning. It was a room of tasteful, immediately forgettable, couldn’t-offend-anyone art. Certainly, there was skill in the art making, but skill alone doesn’t make an exciting or even interesting piece of art. Unusually for me, there wasn’t one piece I wanted to take home. And I started to wonder why that was: why artists create easy-looking art and why a gallery would put together such a vanilla display.
We know the answer though, right? Because that’s what the local art market wants to see and buy.
Artists often forget that a gallery is simply a shop. It exists to sell a product, and that product is art. The gallerist is a shopkeeper, a store owner, a purveyor of goods, and despite some of their best efforts to persuade you otherwise, they have to fill their walls with art that will sell quickly and consistently. The art you see in the gallery is more a reflection of the tastes of the local art collectors, interior designers, and homeowners than it is of the gallerist or the local art scene. Further, showing art that might be politically or socially divisive, or anything that might ruffle the feathers of potential art collectors, becomes a risk too big to take, especially in these financially precarious times. And this is how you end up with a gallery full of uninspiring art.
I don’t blame the gallery - it’s the kind of art they have to show to make the business work. I don’t blame the artists - it’s the kind of art they have to make to sustain themselves financially, and I’ve certainly made my fair share of boring art. It’s just a shame that money drives mediocrity. But we see that play out throughout our capitalist economy, don’t we? Runway designs get watered down and mass-produced to appeal to a broader audience; raw food is processed, sugared and salted to entice as many mouths as possible; fine art is filtered and replicated as cheap decor.
Yet, walk into any grassroots, not-for-profit art space, artist-led collective, or cooperative - in other words, take the profit out of the equation - and you will still find triumphant, jubilant, passion-driven art. Critically underfunded those organizations may be, but boring, absolutely not. I used to find fresh and challenging art all over Instagram too but nowadays generic, templated Reels are increasingly nudging out the quirky, the unique, and the original. Social media feeds off homogeneity. Templates, lenses, and pre-designed filters are all tools to create homogenous content. Even the word “content” from the Latin contentus - ‘contained, satisfied’ - suggests a neutral state: neither good nor bad, just okay, satisfied. Is that the best the online world can offer us? Are we now happy with viewing mediocre feeds? And if so, how does that impact the art that is made for those platforms, and then how do those platforms impact the art that is shown and sold in physical spaces? How are art consumers being educated about the value of art when popularity is the number one measure?
[An algorithm is] an opinion embedded in math.
Cathy O’Neil (see short below)
So where does all this leave us as artists? Well, I guess the first point I’d like to offer is that if you get rejected from a gallery you might want to take that as a testament to your art being too bold, colorful, political, gloriously different and radical for your local art market. As I’ve said before HERE, geography matters: you may do better applying to a gallery in another city or even country. Second, if art can’t offer a challenging viewpoint, a counter to the norms, a vision of an alternative future, then what can? What was the point of Surrealism, Dadaism, Absurdism et al if we’re now content with creating art to appease an algorithm? Third, let’s stop holding up galleries as temples of “the best” art available and gallerists as expert gatekeepers and judges of “good” art - neither of those is true. Fourth, as artists we need to resist the templates, persist in making unique, original art, and self-organize to ensure the vibrancy of our local art landscapes and the welfare of fellow artists. There is no art world without us.
Until next time.
JC
Something to inspire: The Power Of Art: An Instrument For Activism & Resistance
Something to help with organizing (I recommend this book regularly):
Something to resist perhaps ;) but interesting to read so we know what we’re up against: https://www.contemporaryartissue.com/how-to-develop-a-consistent-art-style/
Something to support persistence and resilience: How Creativity Builds Resilience in Times of Crisis
Something to understand about algorithms - LOVE this short video:
I think this post is wonderful. When we took a walk through our local art crawl where all the galleries are open and new exhibits are highlighted, I was astounded once again at the difference you point out! We went into a gallery with all the work for sale. It was mundane and eye catching (pleasant) but definitely art to decorate with. When we took the journey up an old elevator shaft to a 4th floor, tiny art exhibit, there was a combination of paintings in a hallway and an interactive video with self-recording piano loops to layer in this artists showcase of his trail cam capturing wildlife in the urban environment. It was a statement of course on the trail cam being used to capture said wild animals. He wanted to speak towards animal rights and his paintings included the cam view with black border and date details. I was really moved by his concept and presentation. Even though I'm not a vegan, I really appreciated the creativity and effort this artist put in. I know he was paid through a grant, but was it enough? Likely not. Was his work seen by more than a few who ventured up the old building stairs? Not likely. Yes, he has a ig account where he sells his work (https://www.instagram.com/brianlongfieldart/) and I still find provocative art, but I find it by getting out into the artist-run spaces more than scrolling. I wonder if you do as well?
This is one of my favourite artist-run galleries, https://www.instagram.com/urbanshamangallerywpg/