The Day After: Love Notes and Thank You's

Thursday, September 01, 2005

I came home from jurying Wednesday and gave Steve the spousal priviledge of hearing about my judging. After venting at him for a good hour or so, I finally let him respond. "So, when are you going to tell me about what you picked?" he asked.

The ones that got away had stuck to me. Am I being overly defensive, am I feeling guilty? Maybe. I think its just part of the process for me of chewing on my selections, of checking myself for my predilections.

Looking through the art work I became aware of several operational modes that I employed.

  • If I was familiar with an artist, I was often more critical of their artwork.
    I would find myself asking if I had seen better artwork of them. In most of the cases the answer was yes, and they didn't receive my vote. Interestingly, the case was often that Mr. Vitri and Mr. Walsh ended up giving these artworks in question their votes, thus giving the artwork a place in the show.

  • Art work completed in a style or medium similar to artwork I have made, were given a more critical eye for detail.
    Some may think that this is a given with judging, but I have recalled moments where as a submitting artist, I have looked up further information on a juror of a show I wanted to be accepted in. Perhaps I simply wanted to know more about the juror, but I bet that I was also interested in what style of art interested them. As a juror, I found myself wanting more expressive, more unique art... aspects that I identify with in my artmaking- which isn't to say that I was looking for art similar to what I make. If a piece of art approached a medium I am accutely familiar with, I picked it up, fondled the piece and often found I had seen better and didn't think it was the best in quality of work. I enjoyed several of the works that fit in this category, but could see that there was much growing and developing yet to happen with the artwork.

  • Art work in a bad frame, or distasteful frame was not viewed favorably by me.
    On one hand I can hear the arguement that it shouldn't matter what the frame looks like- its the art that counts. However, if you choose to frame an artwork, that structure becomes part of the art and is the art. If it is not the best quality, then it isn't the best of quality and I found myself moving on to the next piece. Shoddy framing indicates a lack of completion and a lack of care about the art. With some artwork this may be the calculated intended effect- however the artwork in the submissions with bad framing just struck me as that: bad framing.

The art submitted to the Mayor's Art Show was fantastic! If this was a cocktail party- it wouldn't be breaking up till the wee morning hours. Looking through all of the submissions was such an honor; I can already tell I'll feel myself twitching to get a glimpse next year with out juror's privilege. Not to mention I admitted today to wanting to already start on art specifically for Mayor's Art Show consideration next year!

Many artworks I was charmed by or interested in did not get accepted to the Mayor's Art Show. I took photos of details of several of them and plan on scrapbooking them here just in case the art doesn't make it into the Salon. In the capacity of good cop, bad cop, I can blame the size of the Jacob's Gallery... it simply isn't large enough to hold all of my choices. The process of spending time with the non-admitted works as I wrote my thank you notes, really impressed onme the importance of the Salon. It is not simply the show of rejects. It's the overflow room. It's a secondary set of conversations. It's an opportunity for established artists to be a good example to other non-admitted artists and the viewing public in general, when their city-know art is not accepted into the Mayor's Art Show.

But most of all, the Salon is fuel to the whispered sentiments of
... who the heck are these jurors and what do they know about art?

I'm really looking forward to the preview night!