Furiousdreams

Reposted from ArtFagCity.

As another step in its history of supporting the art community, Pernod Absinthe has kicked off its 2nd annual contest to find great original art inspired by both the classic liqueur and the year 1805, when Pernod Fils began distilling in France.

The Creator Of Art Contest is an open call for artists to create their own Pernod-inspired works, just as the absinthe-aficionado Impressionists did in their own day. Art history superstars Henri Toulouse-Lautrec, Picasso and Van Gogh were all big fans of the drink.

First place winner in the Creator Of Art Contest will take home $1,805, with a second place prize of $1,000 and third place prize of $750.

Artists can submit their original works via Pernod’s Facebook page atwww.facebook.com/pernodabsinthe, choosing from several media categories, namely: Painting, Illustration, Photography and Video, Digital/Animation.  Just be sure to include the founding date of 1805 in your entry. Judging will take place in February 2011, followed by the announcement of winners in March 2011, as well as a celebratory event during the Armory Show in New York City.

Dan Sabau, last year’s first place winner in Pernod Absinthe’s Creator of Art Contest, took top honors for his exceptional watercolor entitled “1805 Absinthe Masquerade.”

Pernod Absinthe recently sat down with the winning artist to talk about his work in this video.

a repost with comments;

I follow the art blog, Neoteric Art and this particular post by WIlliam Dolan hit home for a lot of us artists who exhibit in various spaces. Worth reading for the comments, too.

In September 2008, Damien Hirst bypassed his galleries and auctioned his work through Sotheby’s. This and other events in the last fifteen years have created a belief that there are other options to show one’s work—alternative spaces—and that the gallery system itself, is broken,  bankrupt or just doesn’t serve artists as it should. Therefore, many artists choose to “buck the system” and do for themselves.

However, what do they mean? Showing in bars and cafés, art walks, store windows, theater lobbies, boutiques, consignment galleries, local art centers and online shopping carts such as Etsy.com have all been recognized as alternatives to showing in galleries. Most of these options are a great way to show work to the casual viewer, family and friends but will help little in building a successful career, gaining real recognition, or getting you into art history? These alternatives spaces are also not a reliable stepping stone for getting into the gallery system because the more years one spends in these alternative spaces the more their reputation becomes tarnished. If one plans to show in bars or store windows for 20 years…well good luck with that.

What then, does a gallery do for an artist? First of all, a gallery can sell work at a higher price level and create the opportunity to be reviewed in major publications. A gallery is also a link to museums, major collectors and curators. And most importantly, a gallery can help build an artist’s reputation. The above mentioned alternative spaces don’t even come close to offering this to an artist, unless you’re Damien Hirst, who actually built his reputation through the gallery system, anyway. So how can artists really buck the system?

22 Responses to “Gallery or No Gallery – That is the Question by William Dolan”

1. Norbert Marszalek 
   October 9th, 2010 at 7:12 am

   You are correct Bill, when an artist shows in a bar or has an open studio they really are just showing to their friends and a few casual viewers; these people can’t do anything for their career. I’m sure also that artists showing in these alt spaces are waiting to get “discovered”—so they can move into the ranks of a “real” gallery…and as you mentioned that usually never happens either. So it seems if one is truly “bucking” the system they may be truly “fucking” their career…

2. Emily Rapport 
   October 9th, 2010 at 8:18 am

   Hosting open studios is exhausting – and while I would agree that most of the visitors you’ll see during an art walk won’t do anything for your career – the value of the open studio (for me) – is that you are providing a real art experience for regular people, the community. Not curators or or speculators on the art market. These experiences broaden the appreciation and understanding for what we do. And, I also think its interesting to see how the public responds to the work.

   Yes, I want to be a “real artist” and I recognize that showing in bars and restaurants ultimately devalues the work (making it the same as any other unvetted artist that might show there). I also think that art is for the people – I want them to see it, whether or not they like it or “get it” or buy it. The gallery system is no longer enough. There is no formula for success as an artist…

3. Norbert Marszalek 
   October 9th, 2010 at 9:06 am

   Emily, I understand your position but I believe Bill is posing a larger issue that all artists should think about a little deeper.

4. bill Dolan 
   October 9th, 2010 at 11:58 am

   What I’m asking is not whether or not an open studio has value, but rather doing these kinds of things instead of working toward something more rewarding–something more at a level that an artist creates their art–will work.

   Trying to work the system is exhausting enough, of both time and energy. To me, putting a lot of energy in these other things is a distraction.

5. Dee 
   October 9th, 2010 at 12:23 pm

   It’s rare, but I know at least one artist who ended up in a decent gallery after someone from the gallery saw her work in a restaurant. You’re right, though, about artists needing to decide where to put their time and energy — she put almost all of hers into her body of work (which is very good and consistent), and she did not have a history of showing in restaurants, etc. She also got lucky.

   Open studios are different — you are going to be there any how; it’s just a matter of letting people in. Don’t see how that hurts. Some “apartment” galleries can get curators to attend and can build respect, depending on who is running the “apartment” gallery. Some art needs physical venues in which to make the work that becomes the body of work. It’s also worth noting that a lot of “galleries” cannot and do not really do the things you list.

6. Norbert Marszalek 
   October 9th, 2010 at 3:31 pm

   Hey Dee…open studios run in the same vain as art walks, weekend shows, etc, it all seems the same to me. Also, a good gallery will provide those things on the list…find and hook up with a good gallery. The thing is it’s not easy, actually, it’s not easy at all…that’s why we have all these alt spaces. Like I said before, an artist needs to find their own path through trial and error – -

7. Dan 
   October 9th, 2010 at 8:27 pm

   I contacted Sotheby’s about Hirst, they told me it was their decision based on their belief that the artist has reached the highest stratum in the art world. They were aware of their changing policy and were not making it a rule for any artist.

   They have since auctioned other artists’ work, names I don’t recall now.

   P.S. I have works in museum collections and it does not seem to make a hill of beans to galleries, even tho I come with provenance, go figure. This may have to do with why the gallery system is waning.

8. Norbert Marszalek 
   October 9th, 2010 at 8:48 pm

   Thanks Dan.
   I’d like to hear more on why we think the gallery system is waning and what other real alternatives there are out there – -

9. Victoria Webb 
   October 10th, 2010 at 6:22 am

   There are so many gifted ‘working artists’ and yet most do not make a decent living from their work, let alone gain any recognition akin to Mr. Hirst’s notoriety.
   I’m reporting back from my two month long stint in a Williamsburg, NY ‘window’ gallery. Nada. Some interest expressed to the owner but nothing confirmed….and then I drove in to pick up the paintings. That said, other artists have sold in the space, it gets good foot traffic, and gallery representation resulted for at least one artist showing there.

   My own strategy has been out of necessity; I’m selling my work online. After 30 years of having been included in museum exhibits and gallery shows, I can count the number of paintings sold in those venues on two hands. I agree that a good, honorable and passionate gallerist can help an artist’s career, but unless that artist stays in one place and builds on a reputation, it’s very difficult.

   I can’t say if the system is broken but I do know that the public is interested in art, whether or not it’s legitimized by curators, critics or museums.

10. Norbert Marszalek 
    October 10th, 2010 at 7:53 am

    Hey Victoria, thanks for your comment.
    I know plenty of artists who have sold more than “two handfuls” during a duration of just one show…and who have also gotten into larger museum collections because of the gallery connection. I guess it just depends on any given situation. I also know artists who do the art walks and window shows, etc. year after year and basically go nowhere. Like you mentioned, one of the artist showing in the windows in Brooklyn led to a gallery…that’s the point. One is not going to show in windows all their life…you have to keep moving forward.

    This all boils down to building one’s reputation and recognition so prices increase, etc. It would be very difficult for an artist to command prices of 15,000 to 20,000 (+) per piece on their own…a “reputable” gallery needs to be in place at some point.

    I don’t know if the gallery system is waning, broken, etc. or if I even agree with the gallery system. Bill’s article is just looking at the facts. We as artists need to decide where and how to further build our reputation- -

11. Bruce Thorn 
    October 10th, 2010 at 8:46 am

    Whatever road you take, the keys to success are:
    1. the quality and appeal of the artwork
    2. the integrity and professional attitude of the artist

    Keep in mind that:
    1. the path of the non commercial artist is always tough
    2. these are exceptionally tough times and
    3. The field is over saturated, standards of excellence have suffered
    4. Nobody owes you anything

    It is not at all unusual for artists representing themselves to command very solid prices for their work. Professional attitude and quality of work make this possible.

12. Joyce Owens 
    October 10th, 2010 at 9:58 am

    This is a constant concern for artists. I agree with some previous insightful comments. One major issue is certainly, “What is good art?”
    I wrote about this topic in 2008. Please take a look.http://monroeanderson.typepad.com/joyce_owens_on_art/2008/06/art-business-ga.html

    I personally prefer galleries, some art centers and museums, but was recently asked to be in a show that I assumed was at a gallery (since the person had one) but was, in fact, in a wine shop. I ended up doing it because (I had said “yes”) and I respected the gallerist. I found out Tom Burtonwood, Audrey Niffenegger and other notable artists also exhibited work. No reviews, no purchases, but what are name-dropping rights worth?

    I really don’t think artists’ “talents” or “gifts” mean much.

13. Norbert Marszalek 
    October 10th, 2010 at 1:03 pm

    Thanks for the comment Bruce.
    Hey Joyce, I don’t think we will ever determine what is good or bad art…but that doesn’t stop us from trying. I was recently at the Art Institute and walked through the Donna and Howard Stone Collection Exhibition in the Modern Wing…what a bunch of shit! It actually ruined the rest of my day because I was thinking about too much! But I’m sure there are plenty of people who thought “what a wonderful show”…and remember this is major work in a major museum with a major collector. There is no right or wrong here. So what does it all really mean…?

    Another thing that cracks me up is when some people give the sage advice of: make the best work you can make. What does that really mean? A well crafted painting can be considered “your best work” and rubbing feces on yourself can be “your best work” and they both can end up in some museum. On some level it’s all a crock of shit.

    I just know that it is more prestigious to be hanging on the wall of the Art Institute than hanging on the wall of the Wishbone restaurant on Lincoln avenue. I didn’t make that rule…it just is.

14. Joyce Owens 
    October 10th, 2010 at 6:54 pm

    I think I clearly agreed that galleries, some art centers and museums are my preferred venues for showing my art work. . In my 2008 blog I said so.http://monroeanderson.typepad.com/joyce_owens_on_art/2008/06/art-business-ga.html

    Norbert, some art is bad! There is even a museum of bad art. That’s not to say people don’t like “bad art”, or don’t know the difference.

    Successful artists know the right folks and those folks like them. Good art sometimes coincides with success during the life of the artist, but sometimes not. . Juried shows seem fairer except in tight communities where the same people enter the same shows juried by the same judges…

    I make art because I make art and set goals/standards for myself.

    There are many kinds of artists who approach their careers in as many varied ways…that’s life. I always say artists are like everyone else, some are tall, some are short, some are fat, some are thin, some are young, some are old, some are liberal, some are (well, you get it.)

15. Dan 
    October 10th, 2010 at 9:17 pm

    I agree with Victoria’s comment “people like art”. If we can step back for a bit and look at some basics, 1.People like art and choose what they like. 2.Not every artist’s work is shown by galleries and museums, which means there is artwork that is not seen by the public. 3.Galleries are motivated by whatever they are motivated by. 4. Galleries are running a business, thereby needing sales. 5.Higher priced artwork needs to be substantiated (ie; galleries, museums, collections) in order for a buyer/collector to be able to justify a purchase/investment. 6. An artist selling their own work is a bit akin to the trench coat street salesman selling watches and jewelry.

    Now lets start to put something together. 1.We as artists will rarely if ever see a big price tag on work we sell ourselves. 2.Galleries are like any other retailer. If they sell coats, their buyers come to buy coats, so it may be difficult selling hats. The difficulty for an artist comes when a gallery sells red coats and you have to convince them your maroon coat is still a red coat. 4.Then again galleries/art dealers in turn have to convince their buy, “this coat is indeed red also”.

    I recently read two books about art dealers speaking themselves, about running their businesses. I apologize for not having the names, etc. here, but will post them in the next day or so. In brief what I gleaned is that an upper end artist is also rare for them. Also there is quite a bit of sculduggery among their clan, over artists when they become big.

    Adding that there is little to no regulation in this industry, in short this is a very iffy business from top to bottom. Just a little footnote bidbit to close with, I read, our own Chicago Jeff Koons had very little success early on for many years, till he decided to do what ever it took to get in with the right people.

    wow, that was a load, thanks for your time!

16. Victoria Webb 
    October 10th, 2010 at 9:19 pm

    Norbert, I agree with you to a point. But we might contemplate what a gallery does for an artist and why. The history of institutionalized patronage has not especially benefited a large number of artists at any given time in a culture. One has only to recall Rothko’s tragic experience to recognize the downside.

    The market may have been built on honest intentions, but on the whole it’s about scarcity, creating and increasing revenue through transactions (to subsequent collectors/museums) that happen more and more rapidly – without giving the (usually young) artist a chance to develop fully.

    The reality is that a potential collector depends on being educated by a gallerist or museum curator, just as a shopper depends on being informed by a trusted brand. There has been a sea change through technology, in that customers of all kinds can more easily make informed choices.
    This can be just as applicable to the art world as anywhere else, albeit the educated elite make a case that theirs is the ‘right’ choice. While I have the greatest respect for some critics and curators, my argument is that history shows this axiom is not always true, and that the reverse can occur.

    This phrase, ‘Successful artists know the right folks and those folks like them’ could be turned on its head – so many artists were not successful in their lifetimes, only to be revered once they’re dead. Is that success? Yes, but folks sure didn’t like their work or their personas when they were alive!

    I think Bruce makes a good point in that many artists are taking responsibility for their own reputations and careers. Either with or without a gallery’s help.

17. Norbert Marszalek 
    October 11th, 2010 at 6:46 am

    Well said Dan and Victoria.
    “this is a very iffy business from top to bottom” – so true

18. Donna Hapac 
    October 11th, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    I am afraid that there are no “rules” or “formulas” for success. It always “depends” on many factors, some of which the artist has some control over. It is always a process and involves learning from experience what actions work for you, the artist. I just participated in Art Prize in Grand Rapids, thinking that it could lead to something even if I don’t win a prize. Well, there is so much “noise” at Art Prize and it depends to some extent on where your work is shown. If you don’t know the space, and you agree to it, you may be happy with the results, or have regrets on the showing it provides for your work. I just keep making the stuff and trying different ways of getting it out there and meeting people. And, I know I am going to keep on doing this and try to get smarter about it.

19. Norbert Marszalek 
    October 11th, 2010 at 10:07 pm

    from their site:

    “Collected here are works by artists who are forgotten, under appreciated, or little known to the mainstream. There is incredible quality to be found out there beyond the big name artists in the big shows, whether it is one exceptional painting, one area of an artists oeuvre, or an entire career worth re-examining. The focus here is primarily painting by 19th and 20th century artists but everything is fair game.”

    http://artinconnu.blogspot.com/

20. bill Dolan 
    October 12th, 2010 at 11:40 am

    Just because one can sell work through a gallery, it doesn’t mean that an artist’s work is going to a good home.

    http://themadnessofart.com/2010/10/mao-or-later/

21. Sandra Flood 
    October 16th, 2010 at 11:26 pm

    I think it depends on what you want out of your career. Large scale recognition and running with the big boys ( which is really tough) or getting through this life doing what you love to do.

    I have and continue to work with galleries and I also rep myself. I have found that I can do a much better job of selling my own work then a gallery. The clients really love meeting the artist, smelling the paint, seeing the process and asking questions that quite frankly someone sitting in the gallery cannot answer. I ask the same price for my work as the gallery and there is no commission to split so that is a nice plus.

    Your studio/gallery needs to be in an area where people can see your work (not hidden away in the woods) if you are going to represent yourself.

    Having a website has lead to many inquiries from galleries and gallery representation over the years but the thing I will not do is the restaurants, cafes, etc, ( unless one has actually bought a piece and they hang it there) or the out door venues.

    I just don’t think there is one path to success and an artist has got to do what works for them.

22. Norbert Marszalek 
    October 18th, 2010 at 9:55 am

    Gallery oh Gallery where for art thou Gallery

Courtesy Hrag Vartanian’s Hyperallergic. In two weeks, #TheSocialGraph will open at Outpost in Bushwick, Brooklyn. Curated by Vartanian, he says; 

What is #TheSocialGraph? It is an evolving exploration of the burgeoning field of social media art and the relation of contemporary art with this populist tool as a medium, facilitator, and subject for art.

Related article.