Thursday, December 25, 2003

Merry Xmas!
As promised, the first one of ten steps (in no particular order or ranking) to kindle the District/Maryland/Virginia (DMV) art "buzz" into a roar:
Number 10
The Universities
There are several important, major universities in and around the DMV area. In most cases each is working, as most universities do, their own, individual visual arts exhibition program, which is normally mix of exhibitions by their students, faculty and invited artists.
Almost without exception there is very little coordination between the different venues, which in some cases boast some of the nicest exhibition spaces in town. This is not unusual, as I imagine that in most cities this is also the same case, as the focus of the university gallery is in fact the university.
And here is where we can make a major change, and use the extraordinary resources afforded to our area by these venues, and their academic standing, to help Washington expand its worldwide visual art standing.
What we need to happen is for one of the local university art school chairs, or college deans, or even university gallery directors, to take the initiative to start coordinating a joint effort to create one annual combined, joint exhibition that synchronizes a focused exhibition that is spread throughout the Greater Washington area.
Imagine a national survey of art, with a good title and perhaps even a good, donated chunk of money as a prize. Say we call it “The Capital Art Prize” (OK, OK we’ll have to work on the title) and because good ideas sometimes attract funding, maybe we can convince a major local company like Lockheed Martin or AOL or Booze Allen and Hamilton, or (be still my beating heart), The Washington Post, to help fund it on an annual basis.
This synchronized event can be modeled somewhat on what the Whitney does, but better. The Whitney Biennial’s Achilles heel is its over-reliance on hired curators. Unless an artist lives and works in NYC, LA or SF or is already in the local radar of one of the curators for that particular year, chances are slim to none that the artist will come to the attention of those Biennial curators. Hence great art and potentially great artists may be ignored.
In addition to the use of invited curators, also imagine that this event puts forth a national call for artists, independent and museum curators, schools, art organizations and galleries to submit works for consideration. Send us your slides, CD ROMS and photographs (and a self addressed, stamped envelope for their return).
Anyone can submit and in a fair selection process, since art is truly in the eyes (and agenda) of the beholder, anyone can be selected to exhibit. A truly American concept for a national American art survey that will leave the Whitney and other continental Biennials in the dust.
And because the exhibition venues are spread around the capital area region, in galleries at Georgetown, George Mason, George Washington, American, Catholic, Howard, University of Maryland, Montgomery Community College, Northern Virginia Community College, and the many others I am sure to be forgetting momentarily, we could put up one of the largest, most diverse, and influential American art surveys in the nation.
This will take a lot of work to set up initially, as one key university person needs to take the lead and emerge from the pack of largely unknown, anonymous group of academics currently running our area’s university art programs. On the other hand, this could be an exhibition that can and will put names and faces on the international art world map, much like the Whitney Biennial sometimes elevates its curators a notch above the rest
Some universities will resist, as the easiest thing to do is to do things as they have always been done, and not really create “new” work. But given that a strong leader among our academic community emerges and takes the lead for this idea, then even if we start with a set of four or five venues, in a joint, coordinated effort, others will follow.
This will not be an easy job to do, and as it grows, so will the burocracy around it. But starting it up will be the hardest part, and as momentum grows, things will become easier. Whoever, if anyone, takes this idea and runs with it, will face many huge obstacles and many negative people. He or she will need to convince other university/college gallery directors to participate. They in turn, will have to convince their superiors, who will, in turn have to approve (and perhaps help kick-start the funding) the joint project.
This leader will also have to coordinate the approach to get a local giant to fund this effort, but I suspect that once he has aligned a few colleges and universities, this may become easier (it’s never easy) as the “buzz” and need for the event develops.
This is all a lot of work, and initially, until a burocracy is established around the annual event, many, many volunteers will be needed. I hope that some of these can be drawn from the school’s student body, alumni who are artists, and other local artists, much like Art-O-Matic draws from the collective muscle of our area’s significant artist population.
Our area universities and colleges already have significant media resources at their disposal, to help spread the word. They run school newspapers, radio stations, etc. and also provide a constant flow of new blood to our major mainstream media.
The goal (or perhaps “the dream”) would be a national level survey of art, which may look, review and/or jury the work of maybe 50,000 artists around the nation, and select perhaps 100 each year, showcase their work around a dozen academic galleries, and award a $100,000 cash award as the Capital Art Prize, plus various other awards (Emerging Artist, Young Artist, etc.). Art of a nature and scale that will attract visitors to the university galleries, attention to our area, piss some people off, excite others, create interest, discussion and buzz around Washington and our art scene.
There’s nothing more empowering than an idea whose time has come.

Wednesday, December 24, 2003

Tomorrow I will post the first of my ten step plan to help make the Washington art "buzz" into a roar. Suggestions and ideas are still being welcomed.

Opportunity for Photographers:

Deadline Jan. 12, 2004 - "Regional Juried Photography Exhibition" - Open to all residents of MD, DC, DE, PA, VA, & WV. All photographic work accepted, including digital and alternative processes. $25/4 slides, $5/each additional slide. Washington Gallery of Photography. Show February 13-March 7, 2004. Acceptance notification by January 15, 2004. All photographs judged from slides. Cash prizes and exhibition opportunities for first, second and third place winners. For entry form, see www.wsp-photo.com, or send SASE to Washington Gallery of Photography, 4850 Rugby Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Tel: 301.654.1998. E-mail: wspinfo@aol.com

and also...

William F. Stapp, who served as the National Portrait Gallery's first curator of photographs (1976-1991) and is now an independent curator and consultant will jury the 2004 Bethesda International Photography Competition. Most recently he curated the traveling exhibition "Portrait of the Art World: A Century of ARTnews Photographs."

The Bethesda International Photography Competition is our worldwide annual call for photographers. Nearly $1500 is cash prizes are awarded as well as a solo exhibition in our Georgetown gallery for the Best of Show winner. The exhibition will take place in our Bethesda Gallery from March 12 through April 7, 2004.

The 2003 juror was Philip Brookman, Curator of Photography and Media Arts at the Corcoran Gallery of Art. The 2003 Best of Show winner was Bay Area photographer Hugh Shurley, who will have a solo exhibit in our Georgetown space in 2004.

Tuesday, December 23, 2003

According to the Guardian, who is a member in good standing of what I call the "Fake News Industrial Complex", the exhibition of Victorian art from the collection of Andrew Lloyd-Webber at the Royal Academy has been one of the most successful in the past decade, and yet it has been "disemboweled" by the critics. One wrote: "Really useless. Why can't the man keep his private collection of saccharine Victorian art private?"

I used to think that Victorian art was saccharine until I read this incredible, eye-opening book by Bram Dijkstra. It is titled Idols of Perversity: Fantasies of Feminine Evil in Fin-De-Siecle Culture and it offers a provocative analysis of the unprecedented eruption of misogyny at the turn of the 20th century in the works of the key artists of the age, including most Victorians. Never again will one see most Victorian paintings as "saccharine" once you read this book.

Monday, December 22, 2003

Not much time today - between Xmas shopping, plus a newspaper deadline for a column, plus two magazine deadlines that have passed (but editors keep coming back with "add-ons") I have been super-busy.

Don't miss Blake Gopnik's interesting and touching article on the subject of Christmas.sculpture by Moe

I know that we tend to put Blake under the microscope for everything that he writes, and this is a warm and fuzzy piece - and yet I find these lines in the article quite interesting:

"My Christmas-crazy family refuses to play carols written after 1900; our favorites predate the Enlightenment."

And on Friday, Michael O'Sullivan had an excellent review of Ledelle Moe's room-size "Thrust" sculpture in the Gallery at Flashpoint at 916 G St. NW. That show goes through January 3, 2004.

Sunday, December 21, 2003

The Guardian has its second Best of British BLOGs annual award. The winners are listed here.

Rob Gardiner at nyclondon.com won for best use of photography. The best written award went to a London call girl.

The current issue of the Washington City Paper has a piece on page 48 by Dave Jamieson titled "Photo Opportunity" that raises (at least in my mind) some uncomfortable issues about copyright and art and more importantly, the lack of clarity in the law as to what constitutes copyright infringement in the visual arts.

The piece discusses "a controversial painting method" employed by artist Barbara Beatty, currently on exhibit at Foundry Gallery in the Dupont Circle area. Beatty paints from photographs, which is neither controversial or new.

But according to the article, Beatty "pores over the Washington Post and the Washington Times each morning" essentially searching for photos that she then uses as the basis to create paintings. I don't know enough about the law to figure out if this would be or could be interpreted as walking on copyright's thin ice, as the variables are too many, but it does bring up the point that artists should always be aware of what copyright means in the visual arts.

There is also a great article on the subject in the current December issue of Art Calendar Magazine. This monthly publication is a great resource for visual artists, as it focuses on the business of the arts, rather than art itself.

Anyway, on page 29 there's a great article by Attorney Elizabeth Russell on the subject of Art Law.

According to Ms. Russell, the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (or USC 106A) is an amendment to the US Copyright Act designed to protect artists' "moral rights," which are the artists' personal (as opposed to economic) interests in a visual work of art.

But the most interesting issue addressed by VARA (at least to me) is that since 1990 the law has defined what constitutes a "work of visual art." And the following are legally defined as not being "visual art": "poster, map, globe, chart, technical drawing, diagram, model, applied art, motion picture or other audiovisual work, book, magazine, newspaper, periodical, data base, electronic information service, electronic publication or similar publication."

And equally eye-opening is the fact that the law defines (17 USC 101) a "work of visual art" as follows:

(1) A painting, drawing, print or sculpture, existing in a single copy, in a limited edition of 200 copies or fewer that are signed and consecutively numbered by the author, or, in the case of a sculpture, in multiple cast, carved, or fabricated sculptures of 200 or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author; or

(2) A still photographic image produced for exhibition purposes only, existing in a single copy that is signed by the author, or in a limited edition of 200 copies or fewer that are signed and consecutively numbered by the author.
A work of art does not include --
(A) (i) any poster, map, globe, chart, technical drawing, diagram, model, applied art, motion picture or other audiovisual work, book, magazine, newspaper, periodical, data base, electronic information service, electronic publication or similar publication;

(ii) any merchandising item or advertising, promotional, descriptive, covering, or packaging material or container;

(iii) any portion or part of any item described in clause (i) or (ii);

(B) any work made for hire; or

(C) any work not subject to copyright protection under this title.


Is this eye-opening or what?