oliver bliss gatekeepers or open access with watermark
DESCRIPTION
The review focused on representation of collections in public art galleries, exploring the responsibility of those involved in collection and selection management and how those who are sexually diverse are included in this process.TRANSCRIPT
Page 1
Oliver Bliss
Arts Management
Gatekeepers or open access: Does the process for selection for public
collections offer the best opportunity to reflect diversity in society?
Historically collections grew through the personal interests of wealthy individuals.
Since the 1900’s public funding has been a major contributor to the art market and
this review considers how spending decisions are made based on the decision
makers attitudes to social diversity.
Challenges experienced by artists wanting to enter the arts market are explored.
This literature review will also be exploring systems and professionals who permit or
restrict access to an artist’s progression within contemporary visual arts.
Because the motives of collectors in the public and private sectors are different, the
focus here is organisations receiving public funding from tax payers. Art Council
England (ACE) has been a significant influential force in setting standards when
considering diversity within artistic practice.
Public funded bodies have to be mindful of the Equality Act 2010 because it protects
the following characteristics: Age, disability, gender reassignment, and civil
partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation.
(Legislation.gov) The Equality Act means that there is a duty for public bodies to
consider and apply fairness and equality, especially in making decisions or policies
such as ACE. I have focused my examples to refer to representation of sex and
sexual orientation.
The Gate keepers
Page 2
Morris Hargreaves-McIntyre’s report Taste Buds 2004, identified the art eco-system
model which illustrates an artist’s journey into the arts market (Figure 1).
Figure 1
The model provides an overview of those who determine artists' trajectories as they
accrue endorsement or subscription. These institutes or gatekeepers included:
‘Academics, curators, dealers, critics, and buyers, provide advocacy and
endorsement for an artist's work through exhibitions, critical appraisal and private
and public purchases.’ (Hargreaves-McIntyre’s 8)
Arts Council England
Ensuring Equality and diversity is a concern for ACE. Mahamdallie 2010 discusses
how a new conversation is needed to ensure that diversity is fully integrated into the
Page 3
agenda of any artistic programming and collecting. He cites Foster’s audit of Tate
collections as an example of women artist’s previous inequality and lack of
recognition. Foster found that ‘women made up fewer than eleven per cent of the
artists represented in the Tate (there were 316 women and circa 2600 men) and they
only represented around seven percent of the collection’ (Mahamdallie 119).
ACE is not only concerned with diversity in collections but among its workforce:
‘We will support leadership and the development of a more diverse workforce in the
visual arts. We will work with partners, to ensure there is an improved range of
pathways into the profession – particularly those from culturally diverse
backgrounds. We will help create more mobility between national and regional
organisations’ Arts Council England ,Visual Arts policy, (2006 7)
A culturally more representative workforce offers ACE more natural opportunities to
tap into diversity across the country.
‘We want to see a more confident, diverse and innovative arts sector which is valued
by and in tune with the communities it serves.’ Arts Council England, Arts policies,
Developing arts practice and engagement, (2006 4)
I would like to see diversity at the heart of everything cultural…nothing can be
excellent without reflecting the society which produces and experiences it.
(McMaster 2008 11)
A male dominated arena and alterative voices
Page 4
Although policies have been put in place to promote equality and diversity the white
male gaze has historically, and continues to, dominate the arts scene. Parker and
Pollock’s 1981 Old Mistresses discussed how ‘the Director, curator, artist and even
spectators of the artistic realm were predominantly male’ (115).
‘male establishment not only determined the criterion of greatness but also had
control over who had access to the means to achieve it.’ (Anderson, 1992, 14)
Whithers 1988,‘What do These Artists Have In Common? (Figure 2), listed
contemporary male artists who collaborated with galleries that showed no more than
10% women artists or none at all… Their early works as a group effectively scolded
male artists, art galleries and critics for their meagre or non-existent commitment to
women artists’. (1988 285-300)
Figure 2: First Guerrilla Girls poster, first appeared in New York in 1985.
The Guerrilla Girls was a group who reacted against the absence of women artists
within gallery spaces. Founded in the mid-eighties their first poster campaign was
Page 5
distributed in the public sphere within the streets of New York. While they claimed to
doing a public service by challenging male dominance, artists such as Silvia
Kolbowski questioned the motives of this group commenting that ‘they are not
questioning the market place. They are accepting the validity of the institutions and
structures.... What’s missing is the critique of these structures’ (Whithers 1988, 300).
Araeen, 2010 introduces the notion of a ‘master’ and ‘slave’ relationship. By this he
means that those in a position of power dominate and are referred to as ‘masters’,
those without power who have to adopt the rule of a ‘master’ are ‘slaves’.
‘Master and slave can indeed speak to each other, both have their voices, but only
one has significance- that of the master. The master can speak even with the voice
of the slave and sympathetically represent the predicament of the slave. But the
slave must not claim any subjectivity or agency that might threaten or undermine the
power of the master.’ (23)
Returning to Foster’s report on the Tate collection Foster was told that:
‘The Tate’s position on gender equality was that the collection was just a ‘natural’
reflection of art history, and that the situation would change naturally’ (Foster op cit.).
The Tate, as an institution has taken the role of ‘master’ and has absorbed the voice
of the female ‘slave’, by justifying their position in accepting that women have been
excluded from their collection.
Women, although compraising 50% of the population find it difficult to get their
voices heard, minority groups must not be forgotten because they find it just as
problematic. Homosexuals are a minority in the population and to a certain extend
Page 6
are a marginalised group who, along with all other minority groups, struggle to get
their voice heard.
Elmgreen and Dragset in Alonzo, Bieber, and Krohn 2011 say that ‘the artists may
produce work which reaches a gay audience’ and it is ‘ important to create
something that connects with a certain definite identity’ it is also important to ‘ create
a certain increased understanding for that identity in wider social spheres ‘( 46)
A New Vision: Equality, Change and Selection
Mahamdallie (op cit.) As a Senior Strategy Officer for ACE, discussed his three point
approach for progressions of change. First, ‘Equality’ means, removal of barriers in
the arts to allow artists to realise their potential. Second, ‘Recognition’ through the
resituating diverse artists both historically and theoretically at the centre of British art.
Thirdly, creating ‘A New Vision’ he says ‘there must also be the construction and
dissemination of a new framework …that takes it out of negative or ‘deficit’ model …
Diversity becomes not an optional extra but part of the fabric of our discussions’
(105-106).
However Mahamdallie does not include a framework for input from the general public
in future discussions. His is a top down approach where information is disseminated
down to organisations and out to the general public. Ultimately this still excludes
those outside positions of power in established institutions. Without giving the public
the opportunity to contribute equally within this framework, the public funders remain
‘slaves’ and ACE, continues to dictate as the ‘master’.
Page 7
The 2011 Liverpool Biennial of Contemporary Art’s publication, Touched an interview
contributor Lynn Hershman-Leeson, in conversation with Alison Rowley (RAW!WAR
website, partnership funding with Stanford University Libraries) discussed the fact
that Rowley’s work aimed to inform the public about dangers of censorship, prejudice
and freedom of expression( 52). Rowley’s work strives toward making others
understand the importance of the history of women’s ‘paralysing’ struggle for visibility
in the art world which she describes as ‘an inspiring story of freedom, despite the
existing politics, oppression, discrimination and over-riding attempt at historical
erasure’ (54)
Rowley’s ambition for her website is that it is a vehicle for a democratic, self-curated,
global collection of work, where ‘future generations are able to add their voices, art,
stories and information into an on-going collaborative archive‘(57). Rowley
recognises the new growth opportunities for artists to exhibit work. This open
resource allows artists to contribute without restriction of institutions which previously
oppressed the likes of the Guerrilla Girls. This approach alters Rowley’s position as
‘master’ because, although she has created a forum for others, she has handed over
the power the public to contribute and build its future. This creates an open platform
for the wider public to enter which address’ part of the imbalance of power of the
artist (slave) and the gatekeeper (master).
Haregreaves-McIntyre 2004 highlights the limitation of the internet for those
intending to sell work; although it is efficient is in raising awareness and at ‘selling
well-branded editions. When it comes to original works, most buyers want to see
work 'in the flesh'. Successful internet sellers tend to also work in partnership with
physical galleries.’ (18)
Page 8
Rowley aimed to create a forum for artists to enter without restriction from a
gatekeeper. The intention of her website is to allow open access to all artists
however; they would have to find other routes to generate income because work
cannot be viewed in person.
Economic sustainability
Snoddy 2006 raised the issue of buying of contemporary art and said that for
managers it should be considered ‘at the top of their institutions agenda…An early
purchase of an artist's work can be of immense economic value.’ (16-17)
He believes that directors have a responsibility to play a positive role in a leading a
region's aspirations in cultural development and social engagement (16-17). His
stance on leadership is similarly recognised by Marjorie Allthorpe-Guyton 2003
‘Buying works of art for a public collection is a responsibility that requires knowledge,
diligence and tenacity’ (6)
Snoddy (op cit.) discusses the opportunities for collections to support economic
resilience and sustainability for the institution in the longer term, at the same time
recognizing that this does not have to jeopardize the integrity of other public duties in
the process.
‘I believe strongly that regional museums and galleries must balance their public
duties regarding exhibitions, education, interpretation, social inclusion and equality
with responsibility for acquiring contemporary art - art that creates a history and a
legacy for the future’ (16-17).
He recognised how institutional directors are influential leaders in other areas of the
market place. He said that directors have the opportunity to be pioneers in
Page 9
discovering new and diverse work through supporting, developing and buying work
at the early stage of an artist career. Institutions can gain financial return, build the
artist’s reputation as well as their own and lead the future of the market of
contemporary art.
However this paper does not discuss how an artist’s work is identified as a suitable
investment. In public organisations funding come from a silent majority who are
unable to participate in the decisions to justify which pieces should be brought for
long term benefit. Snoddy insists that it is the director’s responsibility to make these
choices unlike Rowley’s RAW!WAR website. Unfortunately the website does not
provide storage and maintenance of a physical work of art therefore works cannot
been seen or touched by a potential buyer nor can this model save works of art for
prosperity, the archive is representational in a digital format.
The artist and the collector
Mansfield 2010 provides an example of how the role of gatekeepers can support
artists and influence an artist’s career. For example he cites David Hockney
acknowledging; his ’significant contributions to British Pop Art’ (181), Gordon Burn
also acknowledges Hockey’s extraordinary raise to fame in the 1960s (Hirst and
Burn 2001) ‘Not since the emergence of David Hockney in the early 1960s had a
British artist's passage to fame been so rapid and spectacular’ (41).
Hockney’s work was collected by a number of curators working with public spaces
including, Wolverhampton Art Gallery, Cartwright Hall in Bradford and more
significantly the Walker Art Gallery, in Liverpool. Walker Art Gallery is home to the
iconic Hockney painting, Peter getting out of Nick’s pool which won the 1967 John
Moores prize. Hockey was the winner out of 1,813 entries selected by a panel of five
Page 10
individuals including John Moore himself (Liverpoolmuseum. 2012). John Moore was
concerned with London’s increasing domination of the national arts scene and
developed the biennial painting competition as a means to draw focus to the North
West. (Mansfield 191).
The fact that Hockney was a ‘northern artist’ having been born in Bradford, may have
influenced the panel when considering the winner. In Hockney, John Moore had a
worthy winner with a growing national and international reputation.
The Walker Art Gallery has automatically added the first prize-winner to its collection
since the 1980s (Mansfield 191). This may be due to the realisation that a piece of
art can be a significant long term financial investment. Artists, whose artistic
interests are, aligned to decision makers aims and interests are more likely to be
selected for permanent collections. For example, the John Moores collection has
some of Hockney’s early work, A 1963 piece sold for 3.28 million in 2005 (Galenson
2005 46) Supporting Snoddy’s suggestion of the importance of collecting work early
in artist’s career.
Unwritten Rules
The New Contemporaries, an organisation that selects work to enter an annual
exhibition of emerging talent, hold a basic principle of a constant open and
democratic exhibition, ‘fundamental belief in a truly democratic selection, without
knowledge of school, sex, or age, is based on the premise of fairness where work
can, itself, without the anecdotal support of connection and context, triumph.’
(Craddock, New Contemporaries 2010 3).
Page 11
New Contemporaries work is selected from students who are undergraduate and
postgraduate, as well as people a year out of art school. Because selectors do not
have prior knowledge of the artist, judgement is only made on the basis of work
submitted. However, there are unwritten rules that bar certain artists from
participation. For example some applicants who were attempting to renegotiate
relationships to identity did not get into the final exhibition, because selector Mellor
acknowledged:
‘Currently identity politics is perceived to be somewhat dated. I’m interested in what’s
failed, in terms of why it fails. For example, if you are living in some Northern town
and you want to deal with class, and you are told that’s no longer an issue in this
country, I don’t know how you deal with that’ (New Contemporaries 2010 5)
If identity politics is of no interest to the selection panel it will not be selected and
therefore becomes invisible. Selector Kuri noted that it was inevitable that she
reflected on her own practice and saw similar shared concerns in other’s work, whilst
Mellor states that she ‘aims to remove as much subjectivity as possible’ (New
contemporaries 2010 7). Unlike a director’s motives for selection, Snoddy (2006) the
selector shows conflict between individual perceptions of excellence and how they
individually judge merit to artists work.
As all the selectors have artistic backgrounds rather being a panel of people from
different professional fields, while agreement may be easier it could result in a less
diversely representative portfolio because collectively they represent a small
segment of society. A panel of professionals from different fields may place
importance on other works.
Page 12
An attempt has been made to create a system of presenting work for selection that
tries to be more democratic in its construction but the weakness in the process
overall is that without a truly diverse panel there is little democracy. The public
remain excluded from input to the selection process and so selection is dependent
on the discrete tastes of the selectors. Unlike the RAW/WAR online exhibition which
allows anyone to upload content, New Contemporaries continues to act as
institutional gate keepers to who is considered worthy and excellent.
Summary
The issues that have been discussed demonstrate what a rich and complex area this
is. Concepts that have been explored include the exclusivity of the art institutions,
funders opportunities for voicing their opinions on how their money is spent, and how
to include them in the decision making process, ensuring that there is diversity in the
collections that reflect the diversity in society. It is certainly necessary to have
knowledgeable and educated decision makers to run the institutions and panels, it is
also important to prevent individuals or interest groups from dominating selection
panels. Alonzo, Bieber, and Krohn 2011, note ’Regardless of whether individuals,
who are the decisions makers, have the appropriate qualifications, within the system,
an individual’s presence can be influential through driving their own agenda on
selection panels.’(5)
Another issue that has arisen is the need for compromise with traditionally excluded
groups. The Guerrillas Girls group has highlighted the lack of representation from
50% of the population because of the hegemony of men in the art world as artists
and buyers. Without such issues being raised the established elite remain unaware
Page 13
and lack insight into the need for reform, this was seen in the Tate’s response to
Foster.
There are issues for how work is selected, it is usually by ‘expert’ panel members
and all institutions have been criticises for their exclusivity and the limitations of
individual panel members. To address this Rowley’s established her loosely
structured website. Unfortunately this could lead to a model that is oversubscribed
but also chaotic with work that is indiscriminately placed. There may be a diminution
in the interest because of the lack of discrimination by Rowley if too much poor
quality work dominates her site. This is a paradoxical situation for her and it difficult
to see how it might be overcome.
Directors of institutions need to examine how panel members are selected; they
need to ensure diversity rather than a comfortable homogeneity of members from
their own class and educational background.
Alonzo, Bieber, and Krohn (op cit.) discuss the fact that the selection process of any
given collection can be in danger of non-democratic selection from a ‘privileged or
preferred few with relative power…’ ( 5).
Snoddy’s contribution to the discussion on the economics of managing a gallery has
inherent tensions. His suggestion that work is bought early in an artist’s career
places a great weight of responsibility on managers to not only spot artists whose
work may rise in value, but also predict future trends and tastes. Collecting early
work is a gamble. Another tension is the selling of work once an artist is established.
Selling a piece, while immediately raising much needed revenue, may be detrimental
in the long run, visitors attend galleries to see particular works of art. If key pieces
are sold then that may reduce revenue from future visitors.
Page 14
Much of the research appears incomplete because it is without the voice of a major
funding contributor, the tax payer. It is difficult to see how to directly tap views from
the public except to rely on their elected representatives, the politicians; this is why
ACE is ultimately responsible to the government of the day. Future research may
explore how to engage in a more direct and meaningful way for getting public
representation on to selection panels. Regional pilot studies may be a way forward.
Word Count: 3, 193
Page 15
Bibliography
Allthorpe-Guyton et al, Marjorie. Arts Council Collection Acquisitions 1989-2002,
London, Hayward Gallery 2003. Print
Alonzo, Pedro, Bieber, Alain, and Krohn, Silke. Art and Agenda, Political art and
Activist. Ed.Klanten et al. Guestalten, Berlin 2011 Print
Anderson, Heather, Art Education, Vol. 45, No. 2, National Art Education Association
1992, 14-22 Print
Araeen, Rasheed Cultural Diversity. Creative and Modernism, Beyond Cultural
Diversity the Case for Creativity. Ed. Appigananesi, Richard. London, Third Text,
2010. Print
Arts Council England, Arts policies, Developing arts practice and engagement,
London 2006 Web.
www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/documents/.../phpiz2yUb.doc 06 Jan 2012
Arts Council England. Visual Arts policy, London 2006 Web.
www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/.../visual_arts_policy.pdf 06 Jan2012
Craddock, Sacha, New Contemporaries 2010, New Contemporaries, London, 2010
Galenson, David Who are the Greatest Living Artists? The View from the Auction
Market, NBER No. 11644, Massachusetts, 2005 Web.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w11644.pdf 04 Jan 2012
Page 16
Hargreaves-McIntyre, Taste Buds, How to cultivate the art market, executive
summary, Ed. Hadley, Janet, Arts Council England, London 2004 Web.
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/documents/publications/tastebudssum
mary_php7xDjDe.pdf
Hershman-Leeson, Lynn, touched, Ed.Domela, Paul,Liverpool Contemporary Art,
Printed DeckersSnoeck, Antwerp, Belgium 2011
Hirst, Damien and Burn, Gordon. On the Way to Work, Faber and Faber, Alibris UK,
2001
Legislation.gov Equality Act 2010
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/4.Web.15 Jan 2012
Liverpool Museums. Liverpoolmuseum.org. Johnmoores n.d. Web. 07 Jan
2012http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/johnmoores/fact_file/fact_file6.aspx
Mahamdallie, Hassan Breaking the Code: New Approaches to Diversity and Equality
in the Arts. Beyond Cultural Diversity the Case for Creativity. Ed. Appigananesi,
Richard. London, Third Text, 2010. Print
Mansfield, Laura. Contemporary art society, the guide to public collections of art in
the UK, Ed. Byatt, Lucy, the Contemporary Arts Society, London, 2010
McMaster, Brian Supporting Excellence in the Arts: From Measurement to
Judgement,Dept. of Culture, Media and Sport, London, 2008
Mulvey, Laura, Visual and Other Pleasures, Basingstoke,Macmillan, 1989
Page 17
New Contemporaries 2010, New Contemporaries, London, 2010
Parker, Rozsika and Pollock, Griselda. Old Mistresses, Pandora, London, 1981
Snoddy, Stephen ’Prepare for the future’ Museumsassociation.org 106/9 2006. 16-
17 Web. 15 Dec. 2011 http://www.museumsassociation.org/archive
Whithers, Josephine, The Guerrilla Girls, Feminist Studies, Vol 14, No 2, Feminist
Studies Inc 1988, 285-300