A few weeks ago I wrote about my love of the artist collective. Well, I have now found out what one of the downfalls of the collective can be. It seems that a set of policies or guidelines is essential to handle situations like the one in which I found myself last week. I went into the gallery for a meeting with a handful of members who also showed up. Before the meeting, one of the members said she did not jury me in for paintings in any style other than the architectural pieces and that she felt that should be the only work in my booth. I agreed to remove all other work, since I had been planning to bring in some new work and remove other pieces in the interest of a more cohesive presentation. I had planned to handle this change on my next work day which was to fall just a couple weeks before my show at EurekaThyme opens. So, brief conversation with member unhappy with my booth (which by the way, I paid for) and then I am rushing to get the stuff down and into my car before the meeting and other members begin asking why, oh why? They preferred the work being taken down to what was left in the booth. Meeting begins, official business is covered and floor is opened to member issues. I present the dilemma which I am faced with and the group begins offering comments as to which of my work they like and think should be in my booth. Of course, none of them agree and I become very confused as to what is happening and I begin to cry. Yes, cry. I do that a lot. I assure everyone that I cry, I’m fine, it’s my way to deal with stress but all are clearly uncomfortable. And my stress level rises with them all trying to get in their two cents and all staring at me. The lovely folks who began this coop venture take turns trying to sum up the situation, and one follows me with a load to my car and tells me it is good the members are uncomfortable about this situation and that they should be since it needs to be addressed. The member who started this process finally makes eye contact with me, but it’s only to attack me. She rather fiercely states that as an artist I should be able to handle criticism of my work. I tell her she offered me no criticism of my work, there was no critique of any of the pieces. She does not reply. I continue to load the stuff out and cool artist guy is trying to find a solution. He suggests that I share my space with an incoming artist until I have more to bring in to the space that is like the five architectural pieces which remain. I point out that this would not make for a more united display which seems to be what would serve us all best. I made a statement to the group that most members are not present and that it is not acceptable to me that each painting be juried into my space and that if that is how they want it to be I will not be able to participate. Not to mention, none of the members present even agree as to which of my paintings are the best. The offended member offers to email the group. I offer to leave the gallery and do so. One of the organizers follows me out with an offer to return to participate in the future. I like these people and their concept a lot. I’d love to be a member of such a cooperative venture, but as long as there are no guidelines or policies in place, the group will be run by whichever member is the most agressive at the time and that will seldom be someone who has a clear agenda. It was a very interesting day and I have thought a lot about why I was crying in there. I realize that I went into that gallery with nothing but positive and warm expectations and was taken by surprise when I encountered the abrupt and confrontational attitude of this member who sought to remove my landscapes and abstract pieces. I regret not having the clarity of my little godson who said, “What? She doesn’t get to decide!” I am glad not to participate until there is a policy in place. It could be as simple as it is for other jury processed shows, jury in for painting, show paintings, period.
I’ve been thinking about how groups can function to create benefit for all members and found it interesting to attend a gathering of artists and gallery owners in my town who are working to create a directory. This meeting did provide an agenda and some reference to rules of order, but was still very informal. In that setting, once again, whoever is the most assertive takes over and that is typically the individual who has the most invested in a particular outcome. The all inclusive directory which was the vision of the individuals who gathered this group has shifted to a directory of any artist or gallery who wishes to purchase ad space. I find it disheartening that the good will and hard work of those who have the vision to create what could be a phenomonally powerful statement about the vitality of the arts in town has been taken to produce another advertising piece which will not be inclusive. On the other hand, there will be other projects which have been spurred by this activity and all of the results, scattered or not, will help promote our town as an arts destination. It is a mistake in my opinion, for a vendor to sit on a committee and to take over the handling of the meeting. And I keep wondering what happened to the bidding process. I feel grateful to Robert for those Rules of Order and want to see at least a little more attention to protocol at meetings. Those pesky little things like officers, mission statements and bylaws keep groups functioning cohesively. Informal is nice and seems to work fine for groups of four or five, but anything larger is much more easily managed with structure.
Post a Comment