Deborah Thuman on sat 5 nov 11
I always thought juried art shows were subjective, and then I got to
listen to a juror explain why s/he accepted some pieces, didn't accept
others, and why s/he chose the winners. Turns out s/he didn't like
figure forms (a figure form won the viewer's choice) and did like
birds (which is why a piece with a couple birds won first prize). Oh.
I guess juried shows really don't have much to do with the quality of
the work.
There's a juried show in my town that has space for a specific number
of artists. There can be no extra artists squeezed in. The show
benefits local art programs. Therefore, all spaces must be filled.
It's expensive to set up at this show. Jim was juried in three times,
and sold less each time. I was juried in the only time I applied. It
wasn't worth it for me. We've stopped applying. Actually, a lot of
artists have stopped applying. So..... every artist who applies gets
in because the spaces must be filled. There's a parking charge.
There's an admission charge. That's at least $15 spent before a couple
gets to the first artist. As it happens, the show is this weekend and
it's outside. We're having 60 mph+ winds, it's cold, and I can just
see the artists having problems keeping the EZ Up up. We live in a
desert. Know what happens when there is major wind in the desert? All
the sand, dirt, dust, pollen, whatever flies around. This flying stuff
gets in your eyes, in your nose, and between your teeth (no, I am not
making that up). We'll be spending the weekend at the clay studio
rather than going to the show.
I've had my fiber art in juried shows. I've had times when I honestly
looked at my piece and the piece that won and could see why the juror
picked the winner. I've had times when I've honestly looked at my
piece and the piece that won and walked away in disgust. I was so
disgusted, I didn't bother to try to enter the next time the show was
held.
We received a flyer for a juried show locally that will be held
inside. We know the juror. The deadline for entries was yesterday. A
couple days ago, I received an e-mail that the deadline had been
extended (translation: there weren't enough submissions). I'm taking a
pass on it.
I've gotten cynical about juried shows. There's no joy in being juried
into a show only because all the spots had to be filled. I do
appreciate being juried in when the acceptance letter says there are
only X spaces and there were X+200 entries.
Just my $1.52. (Inflation.)
Deb Thuman
http://debthumansblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=3D5888059
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Deb-Thumans-Art-Page/167529715986
Vince Pitelka on sat 5 nov 11
Deborah Thuman wrote:
"I guess juried shows really don't have much to do with the quality of the
work."
Hi Deborah. I appreciate your comments about juried shows. My reply was
inspired by the line quoted above but is equally a response to other people
making negative generalizations about juried shows. It all has to do with
the venue, the organizers, and the juror, and thus the broad variability in
shows. There are a lot of really excellent juried shows, and as an example=
,
the Strictly Functional Pottery National has become one of the leading Nort=
h
American juried shows of pottery. I think that the SFPN jurying has
generally been excellent. Consider that juried shows are often how the
best-known ceramic artist have made their name - through sheer persistence,
getting their work into a long series of the best shows. You cannot
understate the importance of that.
Sometimes you do get a juror who has an especially big ego and/or
misunderstands the whole point of jurying, and they allow their personal
tastes to strongly influence the choices. Also, one of the key difficultie=
s
of juried shows is that the work is almost always selected from slides, and
if the photography is excellent, a bad piece can appear very good. Once th=
e
piece is accepted into the show you have to live with it no matter how much
of a disappointment it turns out to be when you see it in person.
My one real gripe with major juried shows is the frequent tendency to admit
well-known applicants even if the particular piece submitted isn't very
good. That's just a little too inbred. It looks great in the list of
participating artists, but it doesn't make for a very good show, and it
denies opportunity to less-known applicants with genuinely good work.
That's why jurying is best when the juror(s) only have images of the pieces
with no other information - not even the name of the artist.
Of course the work of many of the best ceramic artists is so identifiable
that you immediately know who's work it is, and in regards to that I have a
question for any juror and anyone who puts on juried shows. If you see a
pot and immediately recognize it as the work of a particular potter, it
might mean that their work is not evolving and they aren't taking any
chances, and is that really the kind of work that should be admitted into a
good juried show?
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
Vince Pitelka on sat 5 nov 11
I said, "Consider that juried shows are often how the best-known ceramic
artist have made their name - through sheer persistence, getting their work
into a long series of the best shows. You cannot understate the importance
of that."
That should have been, "You cannot overstate the importance of that."
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
Hank Murrow on sat 5 nov 11
One of your best posts, Vince....... among many.
Cheers, Hank in Eugene
PS: I almost never enter a show which requires a fee for being juried, =3D
and always look for an occasion where the work is 'juried in the flesh'. =
=3D
Slide reviews are no substitute for 'blind' and tactile assessment. =3D
Guess I will never 'get famous'. I am going to post a poem by Naomi =3D
Shihab Nye called "Famous", just to offer an alternative view on 'fame'.
On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Vince Pitelka wrote:
> Deborah Thuman wrote:
> "I guess juried shows really don't have much to do with the quality of =
=3D
the
> work."
>=3D20
> Hi Deborah. I appreciate your comments about juried shows. My reply =3D
was
> inspired by the line quoted above but is equally a response to other =3D
people
> making negative generalizations about juried shows. It all has to do =3D
with
> the venue, the organizers, and the juror, and thus the broad =3D
variability in
> shows. There are a lot of really excellent juried shows, and as an =3D
example,
> the Strictly Functional Pottery National has become one of the leading =
=3D
North
> American juried shows of pottery. I think that the SFPN jurying has
> generally been excellent. Consider that juried shows are often how =3D
the
> best-known ceramic artist have made their name - through sheer =3D
persistence,
> getting their work into a long series of the best shows. You cannot
> understate the importance of that.
>=3D20
> Sometimes you do get a juror who has an especially big ego and/or
> misunderstands the whole point of jurying, and they allow their =3D
personal
> tastes to strongly influence the choices. Also, one of the key =3D
difficulties
> of juried shows is that the work is almost always selected from =3D
slides, and
> if the photography is excellent, a bad piece can appear very good. =3D
Once the
> piece is accepted into the show you have to live with it no matter how =
=3D
much
> of a disappointment it turns out to be when you see it in person.
>=3D20
> My one real gripe with major juried shows is the frequent tendency to =3D
admit
> well-known applicants even if the particular piece submitted isn't =3D
very
> good. That's just a little too inbred. It looks great in the list of
> participating artists, but it doesn't make for a very good show, and =3D
it
> denies opportunity to less-known applicants with genuinely good work.
> That's why jurying is best when the juror(s) only have images of the =3D
pieces
> with no other information - not even the name of the artist.
>=3D20
> Of course the work of many of the best ceramic artists is so =3D
identifiable
> that you immediately know who's work it is, and in regards to that I =3D
have a
> question for any juror and anyone who puts on juried shows. If you =3D
see a
> pot and immediately recognize it as the work of a particular potter, =3D
it
> might mean that their work is not evolving and they aren't taking any
> chances, and is that really the kind of work that should be admitted =3D
into a
> good juried show?
> - Vince
>=3D20
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft
> Tennessee Tech University
> vpitelka@dtccom.net
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
>=3D20
Dannon Rhudy on sat 5 nov 11
Vince said:
...Once the
piece is accepted into the show you have to live with it no matter how much
of a disappointment it turns out to be when you see it in person.....
No, Vince. Not so. I've coordinated a lot of shows, and the prospectus
(sometimes, not always) will specify that if the work in the slide and
the actual work differ greatly in quality, the juror can refuse it. They
sometimes, though not always, do so. And sometimes a piece will arrive
damaged, either in transit or in a place not visible on the slides. Those
don't go in, either.
.....jurying is best when the juror(s) only have images of the pieces
with no other information - not even the name of the artist........
Generally the juror does NOT know the name of the artist, unless the
juror happens to be familiar with a particular person's work. That
can't be helped - I recognize a lot of work myself, and you must do
so also. That doesn't mean the artist is stagnant - just that it is
recognizable. Sometimes (several instances come to my mind) a potter
does indeed submit the same or near same work again and again, and
sometimes they get in anyway. Up to the juror; their job to pick the
best work for a particular show. Once the juror is chosen, it's their
baby - and usually they do a good job. An exhibit becomes a work of
art in itself, aside from individual pieces, if the juror is good at
what they do, and if the installation is well done.
regards
Dannon Rhudy
William & Susan Schran User on sat 5 nov 11
On 11/5/11 2:26 PM, "Vince Pitelka" wrote:
> Deborah Thuman wrote:
> "I guess juried shows really don't have much to do with the quality of th=
e
> work."
>
> Hi Deborah. I appreciate your comments about juried shows. My reply was
> inspired by the line quoted above but is equally a response to other peop=
le
> making negative generalizations about juried shows. It all has to do wit=
h
> the venue, the organizers, and the juror, and thus the broad variability =
in
> shows. There are a lot of really excellent juried shows, and as an examp=
le,
> the Strictly Functional Pottery National has become one of the leading No=
rth
> American juried shows of pottery.
I agree with Vince on this one.
Certainly the are jurors that come to the process with certain biases, but
if we have such a person come in to judge our student show, they will not b=
e
invited back and if anybody asks about this person as a juror of an art
show, I will tell them exactly what I think.
I have been on both sides of this issue, entering pieces and being selected
and rejected.
I have also served as juror for local, regional and national fine art and
ceramics shows.
I try to be as objective as possible - I think 34+ years of teaching and
holding critiques helps me to look at something with more of an objective
eye, though I know I have my own personal preferences, even when I try to
set them aside.
Bill
--
William "Bill" Schran
wschran@cox.net
wschran@nvcc.edu
http://www.creativecreekartisans.com
KATHI LESUEUR on sat 5 nov 11
On Nov 5, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Deborah Thuman wrote:
> I always thought juried art shows were subjective, and then I got to
> listen to a juror explain why s/he accepted some pieces, didn't accept
> others, and why s/he chose the winners. Turns out s/he didn't like
> figure forms (a figure form won the viewer's choice) and did like
> birds (which is why a piece with a couple birds won first prize). Oh.
> I guess juried shows really don't have much to do with the quality of
> the work.>>>>
>=3D20
I've juried a number of shows over the years, and for several, one of =3D
the Ann Arbor summer shows. My experience is far different from what you =
=3D
and others describe. All, including the Ann Arbor jury were extremely =3D
well run but, like all juries, there is not a lot of time to consider an =
=3D
applicant so your slides better be top quality. In the Ann Arbor jury, I =
=3D
believe there were eight of us. There was someone from every medium to =3D
answer technical questions. I didn't get the impression that anyone took =
=3D
the task lightly or that they were working to get their friends in.
Two things are going on with shows. Those that are still good sellers =3D
are seeing more applicants. That means the competition is really tough. =3D
Others are seeing declining sales. With fixed costs they end up letting =3D
in exhibitors that wouldn't have made it ten years ago. They have no =3D
choice if the show is to survive. There are people with really dynamite =3D
slides. They are well lit and in focus (duh, you say, but not all are) . =
=3D
You can see all of the detail of their work. The booth slide is =3D
informative and gives a good idea of what the range of work is. Others =3D
have lousy slides. They haven't a clue about presentation. They =3D
photograph their work sitting on rocks or up against trees. The booth =3D
slide is taken at a show, with a jumble of stuff in it. Paper for =3D
wrapping, drink cups, their dog. It makes it hard to see the work.
Even then it is hard to pick really good work. Shows rarely check to see =
=3D
that the work in the booth is the same quality submitted to the jury. =3D
One of the worst examples I've seen was a glass blower. A booth slide =3D
wasn't required then. Just four slides. Those four slides were really =3D
nice. The booth at the show had those four pieces on a pedestal. They =3D
were unsigned. The rest of the booth was Christmas ornaments. Did that =3D
artist even make those four pieces?
Work slides should be taken indoors with good lighting. Close up. Fill =3D
that frame. As for the booth slide, Vince and I disagree on this. I =3D
believe, from the experience sitting on juries, that a booth slide =3D
should NEVER be taken at a show. Set it up in your back yard or =3D
driveway. Shoot it facing the sun dead on early in the morning so that =3D
you don't get harsh shadows. Look through the view finder constantly as =3D
you set out your work to make a good composition. It will take about a =3D
third of the pots you put in it at a show to have a good photographic =3D
representation. Don't worry. It will look full. You want every pot to =3D
be seen clearly. This means putting nothing in front of it to block the =3D
view. Make a good composition. Look at that slide as if it is a =3D
painting. All of the same elements of light and dark, space, eye =3D
movement. Do not put a sign with your name in the booth.
This may sound like you are cheating. You aren't. If you take that shot =3D
at a show the camera will give a false representation of what the eye =3D
sees. It will shorten the distance, make pots like like they are sitting =
=3D
on top of each other and look amazingly crowded.=3D20
Last week I helped another potter take a booth slide. She has great pots =
=3D
and her work slides are good. But, her booth slide was holding her back. =
=3D
She wasn't getting into shows. We spent three hours on her booth getting =
=3D
it just right and taking many, many shots. In the end we got a great =3D
shot. It's easy to see the quality and range of the work. It looks =3D
professional. It will be interesting to see what happens as she applies =3D
to shows that she's been rejected to the last few years.
Even with all of that, jurying is a crap shoot. Jurors will do their =3D
best to leave out personal feelings. But, it is hard. We all have likes =3D
and dislikes. It can be as simple as hating a color and the painter's =3D
work is dominated by that color. We may not even realize what we are =3D
doing.=3D20
KATHI LESUEUR
http://www.lesueurclaywork.com
Lee on sat 5 nov 11
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Deborah Thuman wrote=
=3D
:
> . I do
> appreciate being juried in when the acceptance letter says there are
> only X spaces and there were X+200 entries.
>
> Just my $1.52. (Inflation.)
Deb, I've juried State Arts Board grants and also for the best one day
fairs in Minnesota, organized by The Artists Circle. (the competion here in
the pottery category is at a very high level. And it, along with jewlery,
are the biggest categories at the fairs. So most of the people cut are in
those categories. In both situations, excellent artists and craftsmen
are tuned away. Also, in both situations, the judges panels are
hardworking and dedicated. They really do their best to choose the best
artists.
In the State Arts Board, the jurying board is very diverse. We
depended upon each other's expertise. I am especially tough on clay,
especially expecting some evidence of craft, but was able to help folks
understand things they had no experience with, like wood fire.
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
"Ta tIr na n-=3DF3g ar chul an tI=3D97tIr dlainn trina ch=3DE9ile"=3D97tha=
t is, "T=3D
he land
of eternal youth is behind the house, a beautiful land fluent within
itself." -- John O'Donohue
Vince Pitelka on sat 5 nov 11
I said:
"Once the piece is accepted into the show you have to live with it no matte=
r
how much of a disappointment it turns out to be when you see it in
person....."
Dannon Rhudy said:
"No, Vince. Not so. I've coordinated a lot of shows, and the prospectus
(sometimes, not always) will specify that if the work in the slide and the
actual work differ greatly in quality, the juror can refuse it. They
sometimes, though not always, do so. And sometimes a piece will arrive
damaged, either in transit or in a place not visible on the slides. Those
don't go in, either."
Hi Dannon -
I guess I wasn't very clear. I was assuming that people already knew those
things. An exhibition venue will often refuse work that is different or of
lower quality than what was submitted as a slide or digital image, and of
course they have the right to refuse work that arrives damaged, but those
circumstances are not what I was talking about. Sometimes when the
photography is really excellent, a piece that isn't so good looks fantastic=
,
and the juror might accept it on the basis of the image. When the work
arrives at the exhibition venue and it is a big disappointment but is
clearly the same piece that was in the application images, they have little
choice but to put it on view. It is just the risk that venues and jurors
take when they are jurying from slides or digital images. We have all see=
n
this happen many times, even in some of the best shows like SFPN and the
NCECA National.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
Lis Allison on sun 6 nov 11
On November 5, 2011, Vince Pitelka wrote:
>>
> Of course the work of many of the best ceramic artists is so
> identifiable that you immediately know who's work it is....
>
Unless it is someone emulating (I am avoiding the word 'copying' for
obvious reasons) the well-known artist's work.
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
KATHI LESUEUR on sun 6 nov 11
On Nov 6, 2011, at 7:21 AM, Lis Allison wrote:
> On November 5, 2011, Vince Pitelka wrote:
>>>=3D20
>> Of course the work of many of the best ceramic artists is so
>> identifiable that you immediately know who's work it is....
>>=3D20
> Unless it is someone emulating (I am avoiding the word 'copying' for
> obvious reasons) the well-known artist's work.>>>>>
When I was on the Board of the Michigan Guild I often supervised the =3D
Standards Review and jurying for the smaller shows. As such, I would =3D
have a list of each exhibitor as the slides came up. At more than one =3D
such review slides that were similar or nearly identical to previous =3D
ones came up. A common comment, "Look this potter is copying that one we =
=3D
saw earlier." I had to caution that the first set of slides wasn't =3D
always the original creator of the look and to judge strictly on the =3D
work presented. I often knew who was copying who but didn't feel it was =3D
my place to say. In most other settings the person running the jury =3D
wouldn't know that information.
KATHI LESUEUR
http://www.lesueurclaywork.com
Lee on sun 6 nov 11
One of the things that happens with recognizable work, is that you may know
the maker's reputation and history, which might give you more information
than a 2D slide will.
But just being well known is not enough, especially in the State
Arts Board competition. People certainly do read the grant applications
and if they are not compelling or feasible, it doesn't matter how good
your work is or how famous you are. It new fly in the ointment where
State Arts Board is concerned, is that it is now supported with
Legacy Amendment funds, so every grant is required to have a public
component. It can be as small as a show, but more creative events for the
community is a plus.
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
"Ta tIr na n-=3DF3g ar chul an tI=3D97tIr dlainn trina ch=3DE9ile"=3D97tha=
t is, "T=3D
he land
of eternal youth is behind the house, a beautiful land fluent within
itself." -- John O'Donohue
| |
|
