Within the last week or so, a few things have led me to deep and critical thought about the art world and the market that is attached. Steven Zevitas' article in the Huffington Post is one, and Tony Tasset's Artists Memorial at the Whitney Biennial is another. The artists withdrawing from the Sydney Biennale (and the subsequent resignation of the Biennale chairperson) due to funding from a company called Transfield Holdings and Transfield Services, a company that is contracted for immigrant detention centers in Australia is also on my mind as I work through living and working as a professional artist here and now.
I've heard a number of people mention that if artists in the U.S. started boycotting exhibitions funded by ethically questionable companies, there would be very few art exhibitions and events. Zevitas' article is much needed to increase the dialogue between artists, curators, collectors, and museums and questions the high price tags of art works as of late. The most difficult thing in all of this is, though, is that the art market is inflated and large amounts of money are exchanged for artwork, the money is almost certainly coming from less than ideal sources. Even if we take the money's origin out of the equation, income inequality is a difficult hurdle to overcome when it comes to the amount of money that is being paid for works of art.
I'm not sure that I can solve these problems in this post, but I want to take issue with a part of Zevitas' article, in particular his call to how artists should deal the problems prevalent in the art world:
To artists I say: Keep making art and make it because you have a deep NEED to, not
because you WANT to. Follow your own unique visions and not current consensus. You
are the bedrock (Zevitas, "The Things We Think and Do Not Say").
I understand and appreciate Zevitas' sentiment here, but it is incredibly problematic. It presupposes that artists are actually not working (in the sense that workers get paid for the work that they do) and rather doing what they do purely out of "need", which is a misnomer. I have, absolutely, said that I NEED to make work in the past but in reality could also, absolutely, sacrifice studio time to help a friend, spend time with family, etc. I'm not even convinced, on a biological level, that it is a core need of human beings--I do believe some sort of aesthetic output or beautification of objects to be a part of most cultures, but this is far from an individual artists toiling away in the studio (which, I might argue, is a highly privileged and Western view of what art is and can be). I digress, though--my biggest issue with this call is that the need for artists to make a living off what they do trumps any vague, lyrical claims for an artists to "keep doing what you are doing" (and things will work themselves out the implication). We cannot keep doing what we are doing unless we get paid to do it, and can make some kind of living off of doing it. Let us be honest about all of this.
Secondly, I think artists should do what they want to. Zevitas' statement takes away artists' will, and implies that artists WANT to follow current consensus, but NEED to "Follow our own unique visions".
Thirdly, this statement reinforces the hierarchical nature of the art world and the art market. Simply replace "bedrock" with proletariat and we are workers supporting a market that Zevitas is rightly calling out. Bedrock is demeaning, too, as it implies that artists do not know the cultural value of their work--leave that to the other people in the market (that are the subject of Zevitas' critique).
I could go on...there are many things I take issue with in this article. I am happy that it is being shared on social networking sites and many people are reading it. The implication of the article title, though, is that no one is talking about these things, and I know a number of artists that have conversations about this frequently, and I've given talks at conferences on this precise topic. I am an artist that does what I WANT, talking about how screwed up the market of my profession is. We are all talking about it. The people that matter are talking about it and have been talking about it for some time. Artists deal with this every time they sell a work of art, either through a gallery or not. Any artist that has assessed their career goals has thought about these issues and worked towards developing their own outlook on how to navigate the art world.
Tasset's work at the Whitney Biennial, then, is something of an unintentional answer to Zevitas' article for me. The Artists Memorial, listing over 390,000 working artists and dead artists names on site of the future Whitney Museum of Art is something of a memorial to what IS the art market--not the bedrock, but the essence. Without artists everything else just becomes a commodity game of wealthy adults.
There are many other content-related issues to discuss with Tasset's memorial, but for such a great gesture to artists who often feel under appreciated in their field, the memorial is a key into a world that many of us will never see. This is one great example of artists taking responsibility for other artists and continuing the profession in a way that is sustainable.
I often feel fortunate to be a professor of art--one of the reasons is that I have the ability to teach about the issues of the artist in the art world (and market). I have had the opportunity to work with a number of incredibly talented, driven, and interesting students that I hope continue to find ways to make work--but, perhaps most importantly, find ways to contribute to society as artists. I'm not talking about socially-based art work, but rather being responsible citizens and artists. I will always be a part of working with younger artists, as I think it is my answer to the commodification of art and the discontent I feel about the market side of my profession.
In the spirit of discussion, I want to formulate my own call to arms for artists, in which I would propose is a better song to sing as we toil in our studios:
To Artists, I say: make work and fight for acknowledgement of our profession in ways beyond the
art market, because it will not last as it exists now. Contribute to intelligent discourse about our
profession--we are responsible for our ideas and thusly must be able to communicate them in some
form. Any person other than ourselves that speaks for us has motives separate from that in which
the art work was made, and can offer interpretations, which are not the same thing as our ideas and
intentions. We are the essence of the art world.
 |
| section of Tasset's Artists Memorial, 2014 photo credit: Kendra Paitz |
No comments:
Post a Comment