Artomatic 2007, door sign by Dhyana Mackenzie for Room 6Y17, Tammy Vitale and Dhyana Mackenzie’s art

Artomatic opened yesterday.  I went straight to the 8th floor where I had not yet visited to take pictures and after about 10, my batteries died.  So I have no way to show you the throngs that were packing the halls when Dhyana and I left around 9pm having arrived just after 4pm.

I did much more looking around – amazing how much work went up in the last 3 hours Wednesday after I left my shift at 8pm.  But, alas, not much more picture taking.  Needless to say there are those I want to go back and check out and photograph. 

I was tired.  I spent the last 3 hours sitting in our gallery room visiting with people  who came through.  Both of us are delighted with the responses to our work and to new connections made.  I sold Bronze Age IV (on the right here), which someone else later wanted (I have their phone number and will make something like Bronze Age IV, which is a series of individual masks anyways), and perhaps yet another mask.  Interest was taken in Corn Woman raku mask which is a part of a torso set.  I have SW Shaman, finished in copper patina (both masks below left, in order of call out), which I emailed off to them this morning to see if they would like that one, and then offered to break up the set for them (it’s Art4Ever’s (Michael Auger)wife.  Since he has interviewed here – and really early on – we are now officially art buddies in my book, and I make exceptions for art buddies).

Yesterday’s post has been very popular.  Six year old Angie C’s art and interview touched a lot of hearts.  Which got me to thinking about "criticism’ – do we need it?  Who is "we" if we do need it?  What is it’s purpose? – all those heady philosophical type thoughts.  My own take on criticism is that it is detrimental to the development of art because, "helpfully" given at the wrong time it can crush a budding art spirit who will go into hiding forever.  I cannot tell you how many people tell me, when looking at my art:  "I don’t have an art bone in my body."  I have to wonder whose story they are listening to.  Because I guarantee you that given two hours I can teach them otherwise – get their hands in mud, and leave them with something they love.  For me, "art" is between the viewer and viewed.  I don’t need an art critic or an art agent or a gallery owner to tell me what I should buy.  My body does that.  When I look at a piece of art and my body is physically drawn into it, I buy it (if I can afford too).  That simple.

Which got me to thinking about art, how it is presented, where it is shown, why juried is supposedly better than unjuried, and, of course, ArtOMatic.

Interestingly enough, there is a fascinating story from right here in Washington DC about a man (I am not a classical fan, so I have to go on the buzz here) who is probably the world’s current greatest violinist, Josh Bell, playing a Stradivarius violin at a Metro station (like a lot of other street musicians). Only one person recognized him here, out of the concert hall, only several even stopped to listen.  There is a YouTube video of the event here.

Shan Bryan-Hanson comments on this event (from Texas – it’s definitely getting around the blogosphere) in Art and Context on her April 13 blog Simple Beauty: Our brains are also hard-wired to expect certain things at certain times in certain places.  We don’t imagine a world-class violinist would play in a subway so when he or she does we simply don’t notice.  We expect great art to be at an art museum and when we see it there, we believe it.  If we see the same art in a different context, maybe on the laundromat wall or in a subway tunnel, we immediately question its greatness, or at least its authenticity.  The context doesn’t support our preconceived notions about where greatness or beauty or importance is found.

Lenny Campanello, a DC art blogger and critic, wrote about ArtoMatic 2004:  …The cake is taken when a Washington Post art critic wrote a dismissive small pre-opening review, again without actually ever setting foot in the place….And, as far as I know, there’s nothing like [ArtOMatic] anywhere else in the nation, possibly the world.  And here’s where the key to ArtOMatic bashing lies:  If the event took place in London, or New York, or Madrid, or LA or San Francisco or even Chicago, it would be lauded as a good thing for contemporary art and artists.  I can see the headlines now:  "Los Angeles’ Art-O-Matic is The Place To Discover the Next Generation of LA’s Artists."

At ArtOMatic yesterday I picked up a newspaper by John James Anderson (funded by The District of Columbia Council on the Arts and Humanities, and with no contact information anywhere that I can find).  He interviews Alice Denney (founder of WPA/Corcoran), who says"  Artists need critical feedback to know that, ‘well, maybe this isn’t working.’"    [ed note:  I will confess ignorance of the folks who created the DC art scene , such as it is, mainly because it feels like they all are happy be to ignorant of me.  It’s a hard scene to break into, and living 1.5 hours away doesn’t help any.  Hence ArtoMatic interviews here work not only to let you see "our" art, but also to help me reach out and perhaps a bit into the community – the only way I know to start any relationship.  And of course if I could find contact information, I would very much like to engage in a discussion on criticism with Ms. Denney]

Then I picked up my April 2007 Ceramics Monthly this morning and read this Comment by Jim Romberg.

…Any mention of the "C" word, as it is now known, seems to strike fear in the hearts of some, disgust in others.  At the mere suggestion of the critical, some become puffed up peacocks fanning our their "higher" intellectual knowledge in sparkling array, self-assured that their musing are the only truth in the field, while others lob globs of "the real stuff" asserting the need for truth to material and tradition…The discussion [in this instance, about creating a new criticism for ceramics, but I think we can read this generically about all art critiques] must move away from the imposition of a pyramidal structure of aesthetic relevance that many have declared to be the way forward…We need to move beyond critical writings that dwell only with process, personality, laudatory description and promotion.  Articles by friends and colleagues about friends and colleagues and their work, or articles by gallery owners about artists they represent, are not always critically rigorous….

So, dear readers, I’m all ears here.  What is art?  What is the basis of critiquing?  Who gets to do it and why?  Was there ever a time when criticism helped you?  Do we need someone to tell us what is good and what isn’t?  How many art critiques have you read lately that you agreed with?  How many with anything you personally would consider art?  Do you feel that some things should be labeled "good" or is it all just marketing and hype – someone creating someone else for their own gain?  You tell me.

thought for the day:  When is comes to confronting the owners or directors of galleries for the first time, you must be in possession of the ability to survive repeated, and not always tender, rejection:  in other words, you must have emotional resiliency and some perfectly intelligible evidence of what your work is about…A voluminous body of slides presented to the dealer may fatigue her in advance…most dealers will not enjoy a deployment of works..it is imperative that you make a full survey of current exhibitions in the various galleries to try to determine from what is shown the approximate style of art the dealer prefers.  Documentation of your previous exhibitions, achievements, and criticism may be offered.  But a dealer with strong convictions about what is important art is not likely to be impressed by such material.   Lee Caplin, The Business of Art