Open Questions on Artistic Practice: New Releases
A few days ago, some artist-friends and I got into some post-game commentary over beers at Congress about a show we’d seen earlier in the evening. We’d all seen about half of the work before other other venues around town within the last year. In the heat of the discussion, I agreed with them that seeing replays was kind of a turn-off and just brought down the presentation as a whole. Now I’m not so sure how much it really matters. We’re hardcore art nerds and go to nearly every show that we can so we probably see, and I mean really look at and remember a lot more art than most people. I think this cross-pollination exists only in our little unofficial ivory tower, since we’ve strayed so far from the casual art appreciator who may visit one gallery that caters to the tastes of their particular social scene, but not another. With this in mind, I’d like to pose a few questions to artists, gallerists, academics, and art professionals:
- Do you let your work “leak” on the web (your personal site or Facebook, Flickr, etc.) before putting it in a show? Or do you reveal it publicly in an exhibit, then put it up on the web?
- Do you prepare a body of work, then share it online? Or do you post images as you complete each piece?
- Are there (loose) professional standards for any of these practices, or are they still developing as technology expands?
- To what extent does revealing your work depend on context? For example, if you have work in a major show, do you keep everything secret until the opening? If it’s a less-important show or a short-run, do you recycle old work?
13 comments
Hey TuScene!
Personally, If I have a new body of work, I’ll release one or two images on-line and around town via advertisements and or a flier, but that’s all. After the exhibit, I post all the rest of the work on-line. Art should be experienced first hand to truly appreciate it. Then, later, when you see it on-line, it still resonates (hopefully). As for standards, well if there is any, artist can and will break them.
I’m with Ruben. I like keeping it fresh, new ideas, new colors. online showing is beautiful. couple teaser pieces, then after the show is down blow it up. people from all over get on here. free advertising…can I get an AMEN
As an artist and gallery owner, I’d prefer that the work is reserved for the exhibit and after it closes then the work should be allowed to circulate to smaller venues where you’d only see one or two pieces at a time. I also believe that’s it’s important that the work should sit unseen for a time (locally) after it’s initial showing to keep it fresh and not over-shown also posting just a few new pieces online for the same reason. I do post “in progress” cropped images to gage interest in new work.
Great post – I think the gallery scene is continuing to change with all the technology and social networking. I love that the artist has more control over the “revealing” of work and I believe that the role of the gallery is to support the artist – not just the art. I agree a few teasers for an exhibit gets folks interested and I agree that work needs to “rest” after an exhibit. Thanks for the forum to talk.
Those are all excellent questions, and something I wrestle with frequently. Like most commercial galleries, I have artists I represent long-term, and also short-term shows. I hate taking down work that I feel is strong just because it doesn’t fit the parameters of a certain show, but I also don’t want my clients to feel like they are always seeing the same stuff.
As far as previewing the work online, I take the approach of movie trailers; show a few pieces to entice visitors, but don’t give away the entire show online. And let’s face it, the attendees of shows are rarely the buyers. Sales usually happen after I make a few phone calls. The show itself is mostly for the joy of seeing people respond to the work, and to give legitimacy to the art.
Well, that’s my knee-jerk reaction to the questions. I’m pretty hopped up on Red Bull and little sleep, so I hope some of that was coherent.
Thanks for the input, everyone. I guess *I* need to improve my artistic practices! I update my Flickr with a new piece nearly as soon as it’s finished, however I feel like I’ve been on there long enough to “know” them, most of my contacts are from all over the world, I know very, very few of them personally, and the groups I interact with are also global, so I don’t think that many people see my work there who’d see it in real life. I hardly ever post art to Facebook albums or post links in the feed to my artist website on FB. Although I put unshown/unbooked work up on my site after a few months, it’s kind of done in almost a blog format because as a slow artist/writer, it takes time for me to reflect upon and articulate what I really want to say about the working process, and art in general as a I make it. But as with Flickr, I don’t think very many people I personally know read my website regularly. Perhaps I’m overanalyzing, but I really think these nuances deserve to be addressed. Especially for you gallery owners, because really, it’s [almost!] as much about your business as it is about the art/artist. Add’l thoughts?
How do you (addressing readers generally) again feel when you see several pieces of art in a group show that you’ve already seen in recent memory? How generous should we be?
Complicated series of questions to answer and will take time to formulate a complete and comprehensive answer. I will have to submit my writings later as this will take some contemplation.
• Do you let your work “leak” on the web (your personal site or Facebook, Flickr, etc.) before putting it in a show? Or do you reveal it publicly in an exhibit, then put it up on the web?
This all depends on the intention of the piece. If it is considered a minor work, or an experimental idea, or a study, then it is easily put on the web for public display. If the work is produced within the context of a themed exhibition then the work will most likely be held from public viewing; although people visiting the studio will have access to it. I will invite people in who’s opinions I respect (and some not so much) to have a look at work in progress and finished work for impute outside of mine own. Some artists cover up their work while people are visiting, I don’t. I never take myself that seriously. I’m an artist not a secret weapons manufacture. The only reason I might cover a work is to keep the dust off or if someone is way too prudish.
• Do you prepare a body of work, then share it online? Or do you post images as you complete each piece?
Most of the time I share online when I get around to it, or find it necessary to do so in order to promote the opening of an exhibition.
• Are there (loose) professional standards for any of these practices, or are they still developing as technology expands?
I have not come across any professional practices or standards. I believe it to be each individual’s or organization state of functioning. I have applied for many art related opportunities and will have to state that there are absolutely no industry practices or standards; because of this I wish (unfortunately) there was.
• To what extent does revealing your work depend on context? For example, if you have work in a major show, do you keep everything secret until the opening? If it’s a less-important show or a short-run, do you recycle old work?
First define what “Major” means. To a novice getting their work into a coffee shop is a “Major” event. For me a twenty-five year oeuvre at the Modern in NYC would be a “Major” event. I’m not secretive about much, so no. Yes, I recycle work if I feel that a piece has not gotten enough exposure and/or if it belongs in a new exhibition. Sometimes recycling your “old” artwork into a new exhibition can be called a “Retrospective.”
I only post teaser photos of my work on my blog and facebook. 99% of my work has not beem online.
Re: the gallery owner’s comment above — I think it is unrealistic to think a computer savvy artist would post nothing online. Cross-publicity is a good thing.
I don’t like repeat art either, but I have done it a couple of times.
In a smaller local scene, I don’t mind seeing “recycled” work too much, although it can be overdone. In the past, I was always trying to make new work, because I was (subtly) taught that you shouldn’t re-show work. But sometimes making new (good) work doesn’t happen so fast. I think every re-showing of work has at least one new audience member and that’s worth it in my opinion. Often it seems that in a bigger cultural scene/city, the underlying (or overlying) competition of galleries and artists doesn’t really allow you to “recycle” with showings. I never put my artwork online unless it’s on my artist website, simply because I think peeps pay a little more attention when it’s an art-specific site, not just a social networking site. If it’s just up to the artist, “recycling” work seems to be as delicate an issue as is pricing. Galleries that contract with the same artists in NYC seem to rarely re-show the same work, except in a group show, but that’s a much different scene than Tucson. Re-showing can certainly be overdone, and this is where the studio tour seems to fit in well.
I’ll put up a few small clips of pieces, snippets of the whole and then the day or soon after the show release the full images for people who can’t make it. I think it’s best to give a little and leave them wanting to come experience the whole. AT the same time though, a “leak” in art can be just as viable a tactic as it is in music – it’s certainly another tool you could use to promote a show in sort of non-tradition / asymmetric way.
We’re probably all guilty of recycling a little. Usually if a recycle happens it’s because I’m putting a piece from a larger show into something small – if it’s a larger show it’s all going to be new. Like Mark was saying I have no problem circulating pieces to smaller shows after a larger showing.
Recycling can also be a personal thing as well – as artists I’m sure we’ve all had those pieces that we felt were awesome, for whatever reason – like maybe you finally nailed THAT technique or maybe it just all came together perfectly, etc…..annnnnd, unfortunately, the vulgar mob just doesn’t agree and people just aren’t into it like you are. SO maybe you want that piece to get around a little more.
Or maybe getting a piece recycled is part of the work itself – maybe part of the message is repetition. Being a street stencil artist like myself means recycling is bread and butter.
Good questions and thank you for providing a means for like minded people to converse.
-Dave Carender
I have exibited the same works in different places, this seems pretty common in the art word, art works and installations that are significant works get shown and recreated in more than one place. I do like to show something new, but some place has to want the work. I tend to share as much of my work online as possible, in progress works to images/videos of installations. I see it as a way to get my work out to be seen, to share ideas and get feedback and develop a dialog with others. Marketing work is more controlled and has a number of concerns which require this controlled distribution and presentation of work.
Great post – I think the gallery scene is continuing to change with all the technology and social networking. I love that the artist has more control over the “revealing” of work and I believe that the role of the gallery is to support the artist – not just the art. I agree a few teasers for an exhibit gets folks interested and I agree that work needs to “rest” after an exhibit. Thanks for the forum to talk.
Leave a Comment