RE: First gallery ' experience'

I wasn't going to chime in here, but I've decided to only because I've gone through all this too, but at the same time, I understand the gallery's reaction.

It's sucks that you had such a rude experience (it reminds me about applying for an assistantship right out of school for a guy who shot Walmart-like Sunday inserts of jewelry and when I showed him my school portfolio, which was art, he said that he couldn't use me for his $7 and hour job of mostly sweeping his studio, and that if I could afford it, to keep going with my "HOBBY"). Ten years later, I have an appointment tomorrow to finalize a show for the fall, I'm still broke (much more), still have yet to sell a piece, but of course I think I'm amazing, just not yet discovered, and that my work really belongs in the Whitney. But isn't this how EVERY artist thinks?

But...

Just because I'm doing and living my life as an "artist" doesn't guarantee me anything, even if my work is worthy, let alone to show in a gallery. You have to remember that each gallery isn't the "voice" of the gallery scene, so to group all galleries in to one lump, as most reactionaries do, isn't right either (although it's a great venting experience when you have been personally rejected). There were probably many possible reasons this person said what he said to you, so instead of gathering sympathetic voices to feel better and to easily dismiss what he said, think about why he said what he did. This isn't some conspiracy of gallery owners "controlling" art, that belief is usually coming from someone who is constantly rejected and feels like their sh*t don't stink so they have the opinion of "screw the gallery owners they don't know art anyways because they don't make it, la la la". Reality: some gallery directors show "tough love", to make you prove to them that you believe in your work and what you are doing. Some are telling like it is, and that might be something you don't want to hear, but, maybe you have to listen. Some are just jerks, but ALL have to answer to their group of buyers, art trends, what the public wants, or they go out of business. This is a business after all. Do you know that is cost 1000's of dollars to put on a proper one-month gallery show in New York City? And that's just for a basic show with very little publicity and an opening with food and wine. In fact, most galleries are making emerging artist payment as least half of the costs now (that's what I'm running in to, it will probably cost me at least $1000 to put on this show in the fall) and still taking 40%-50%, and these are not those so called "vanity" galleries that are doing this. It's the reality of the times because they know most likely you are not going to sell anything at your first group of showings. It's the reality.

I think many of us still hold to this dream that you make great work, some gallery discovers you, signs you, shows you and you have this amazing opening where the director of MOMA comes and wants to put some of your pieces in their permanent collection, and you're off and running. I have this daydream all the time. But it doesn't work that way. It's a HUGE game, and if you're going to play it, you have to play by the rules and you have to understand what the movers and shakers are reacting to, and that you are an ant to them, until, you have something they want or they think they want.

Now all this doesn't mean anything when it comes to art. Art is something totally different and as an artist, you have to decide to play the gallery game or not. It's mutually exclusive and this is what most artist don't understand.

-Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Kate Mocak [mailto:kate_mocak@zoznam.sk]
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 2:28 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: RE: First gallery ' experience'

Hi all,

I'd like to thank you all very much for your support and encouragement. Your
responses made me feel much better, even though it is sad and very
frustrating to hear that many of you have gone through the same unpleasant
encounters with photography 'experts'.

There's a lot of interesting reading in your mails and I'd like to reply to
you offline in the next few days.

Best wishes,
Kate

----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Huber" <shuber@ssisland.com>
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Sent: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 05:07:34 -0800
Subject: Re: First gallery ' experience'

> Hi Kate,
> Hang in there, it has taken me 30 years to get anywhere and that is not
> even being really famous! The gallery owner in Bratislava is ignorant- he
> is embracing 'art' to be provocative because he offers no 'real' art.
> Find a decent gallery and then let us know about it- as there re very few
> that don't try to cheat you in some way...
> Susan
> www.susanhuber.com
> www.whyte.org
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ender100@aol.com
> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 8:54 PM
> Subject: Re: First gallery ' experience'
>
>
> Kate,
>
> Don't be too sure about that-I think you'll find plenty of gallieries
> in the US that are pretty dumb about what is good "fine art photography".
> Don't be discouraged, there isn't a person out there that hasn't been
> turned down by a gallery and probably more than once. Frankly, I don't
> understand why about 3/4 of the art of any kind that is hanging in
> galleries is worth the space on the wall. A year or so ago I saw a show
> of polaroids thumbtacked to a wall in an upscale gallery and they were
> priced at $3,000 each. The gallery owner came up to me with this big
> smile and said "aren't they fantastic?". Well, I will have to commend
> him for actually approaching someone who entered the gallery and trying
> to push the work-many gallery owners prefer to sit at their desk and
> ignore you when you walk in to see a show. But anyway, I stared at him
> with pained disbelief and asked him when he was taking down the proofs
> and putting up the final prints.
>
> I think that alt photo is experiencing a resurgence rather than the
> other way around as the gallery owner you quoted said.
>
> Mark I. Nelson
> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
> PDNPrint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
> In a message dated 2/7/06 2:56:42 PM, kate_mocak@zoznam.sk writes:
>
>
>
> Finally I picked up all my courage and showed my alternative prints
> (gums
> and gums over cyanotype) to the owner of the gallery specialized to
> photography ("Central European House of Photography" in Bratislava).
> The
> response I got was approximately as follows: he didn't see any added
> value
> in doing 19th century processes in the 21st century. They are
> obsolete. He
> didn't see any 'author's statement' in photographing industrial
> architecture
> because this topic was fully exhausted in the 70s and 80s. On top of
> that,
> what on earth is the reason to combine old processes with industrial
> architecture. Etc, etc...
>
> I can accept the fact that my photography lacks the 'author's
> statement'.
> (Even though until now nobody has been able to explain to me what
> exactly it
> is.) But saying that alternative processes and pictorialistic
> photographs
> have nothing to tell to the today's audience is a bit 'too strong
> coffee' as
> we say here.
>
> I'm frustrated and have to sleep on it. Just wanted to share this
> experience
> with you. Hopefully there are other parts of the world where we are
> not
> regarded as retarded.
>
> Kate

--- reklama -----------------------------------------------------
Nájdi už konečne tú správnu cestu!
http://mapy.zoznam.sk
Received on Wed Feb 8 14:43:28 2006