My world is still very round
As always, in regards to my last post, Eric plays the John to my Samuel Adams, offering a more reasoned approach to the Austin landscape. I agree with him that every city is provincial in its own right. Work from New York can still look very New York - witness the "trash sculpture" movement taking place. But despite assertions that the world is getting flatter and closer together, distance and power still matter. A movement that may begin as local in New York or London can end up being global thanks to the power of those cities. When we compare ourselves in status to the art centers of LA, New York, and London it's because we want their money, visibility, and success. We all want to show our work and build a collector base inside and outside of our community, but we need the infrastructure to do that.
Talking to one of my studio mates a month ago he mentioned that there are maybe ten people here that really support the local scene, and maybe two or three that spend on a regular basis. And by local scene, I mean the two spaces that provide a serious outlet into the market for the emerging artist set I include myself within: Art Palace and Okay Mountain. But while these spaces provide opportunities for commercial exposure, they are only two. Art Palace can only have so many shows in a year, and it has shown an admirable and important commitment to its roster. But what about the rest of us? The handful of collectors our galleries rely on? What happens when their stocks are full? What are the rest of us who aren't on the radar supposed to do? The common answer is to do-it-yourself. The punkish appeal of starting your own space is quickly lost in the reality that collectors rarely part with a dollar if you don't have the time to build their trust. This is a process that requires a significant amount of time, money and energy that most of us who want to dedicate ourselves to making things don't have. This doesn't even include the video, installation and performance artists. If we have a hard time scrounging up people to support potentially decorative paintings and drawings, it's doubly so for work that might not physically exist. However, it is important that people in our community continue to try these ventures. Camp Fig, Okay Mountain and MASS prove that they are possible, if uphill battles.
All of that considered: location still matters, and building relationships are what provide the gateway to gaining success, and relationships that count are built in person. We look to New York and Los Angeles as models because their artists have a better chance to thrive. They thrive because there is enough money, people and space in those cities to allow for more opportunity. It is this opportunity that Austin sorely lacks. This is why the battles outside of the University halls are just as fierce as those within. We all fight over table scraps. We look to the University, and the museums, as potential beacons to draw interest to our city, and to educate future collectors. We want UT to look like UCLA, Columbia, or Yale. We want AMOA to be our MoMA. We want these institutions to excite people about supporting the visual arts, and to bring collectors to Austin. The truth is that this model will probably never materialize. UT is too conservative and sluggish at its core, and Austin lacks real estate and money old enough to be spent on culture's edge on the large scale required to provide us all with local opportunity.
My predictions and advice for Austin have always vacillated between the sunny and constructive to the overly critical and pessimistic. But developments of the past few years have shown me that it is always possible to build something where seemingly nothing could have existed. This is why I am now cautiously optimistic about the future of this town. If Art Palace, Okay Mountain, D Berman and Lora Reynolds can all find room to thrive, maybe more spaces of the like can do the same. Maybe in 15 years, after the face of contemporary art has changed again, the University will have caught up to where we are now. I'm excited to see what things will look like, but I'm also glad to leave the fight over leftovers for a heartier meal elsewhere.
Talking to one of my studio mates a month ago he mentioned that there are maybe ten people here that really support the local scene, and maybe two or three that spend on a regular basis. And by local scene, I mean the two spaces that provide a serious outlet into the market for the emerging artist set I include myself within: Art Palace and Okay Mountain. But while these spaces provide opportunities for commercial exposure, they are only two. Art Palace can only have so many shows in a year, and it has shown an admirable and important commitment to its roster. But what about the rest of us? The handful of collectors our galleries rely on? What happens when their stocks are full? What are the rest of us who aren't on the radar supposed to do? The common answer is to do-it-yourself. The punkish appeal of starting your own space is quickly lost in the reality that collectors rarely part with a dollar if you don't have the time to build their trust. This is a process that requires a significant amount of time, money and energy that most of us who want to dedicate ourselves to making things don't have. This doesn't even include the video, installation and performance artists. If we have a hard time scrounging up people to support potentially decorative paintings and drawings, it's doubly so for work that might not physically exist. However, it is important that people in our community continue to try these ventures. Camp Fig, Okay Mountain and MASS prove that they are possible, if uphill battles.
All of that considered: location still matters, and building relationships are what provide the gateway to gaining success, and relationships that count are built in person. We look to New York and Los Angeles as models because their artists have a better chance to thrive. They thrive because there is enough money, people and space in those cities to allow for more opportunity. It is this opportunity that Austin sorely lacks. This is why the battles outside of the University halls are just as fierce as those within. We all fight over table scraps. We look to the University, and the museums, as potential beacons to draw interest to our city, and to educate future collectors. We want UT to look like UCLA, Columbia, or Yale. We want AMOA to be our MoMA. We want these institutions to excite people about supporting the visual arts, and to bring collectors to Austin. The truth is that this model will probably never materialize. UT is too conservative and sluggish at its core, and Austin lacks real estate and money old enough to be spent on culture's edge on the large scale required to provide us all with local opportunity.
My predictions and advice for Austin have always vacillated between the sunny and constructive to the overly critical and pessimistic. But developments of the past few years have shown me that it is always possible to build something where seemingly nothing could have existed. This is why I am now cautiously optimistic about the future of this town. If Art Palace, Okay Mountain, D Berman and Lora Reynolds can all find room to thrive, maybe more spaces of the like can do the same. Maybe in 15 years, after the face of contemporary art has changed again, the University will have caught up to where we are now. I'm excited to see what things will look like, but I'm also glad to leave the fight over leftovers for a heartier meal elsewhere.
posted by Raymond at
12:30 PM
4 Comments:
"They thrive because there is enough money, people and space in those cities to allow for more opportunity."
What about those that don't find success there?
Maybe I'm being cynical here, but those places also have more artists. Isn't the problem the same, except on a larger scale?
Excellent post Raymond, i could not agree more.
The difference I perceive, Salvador is that even if the success rates aren't much higher as a percentage (and I think they probably are) you don't have everyone living on top of each other. You may still have a ton of shitty artists for everyone one who is decent, but the perceived chances of success are higher since there are more possible outlets and more distance between one another. I've always noticed when I go to Houston that the animosity levels between artists in my set are much lower, and I've usually attributed this to perceived opportunity.
You also have a better chance at meeting and befriending people who have the access to help your career in a major center. How many people in Austin can give you a show worth a crap? Two, three? In Houston? Six or Seven? In the major art centers those numbers are much higher, I'd estimate. In LA alone there are probably four or five gallery centers at 15 to 20 galleries each: Culver City, Santa Monica, Pomona, Bergamot Station, etc., and all of the people attendant to those spaces. Your odds of meshing with a director or owner are going to be better.
interesting post, i tend to agree with you. but i do think that any "prestige" the university could create is still completely a market-driven oddity... meaning, if UT became an awesome video/performance destination and something like fort thunder in providence formed here as a result, the interest of larger institutions from bigger cities in would be the only thing to propel the scene. and i guess that makes it pretty clear that the only thing to make austin better is way more MONEY. we don't have a real museum here because of lack of funds and galleries only exist when the owner can consistently collect his or her half. and i dunno if that is going to happen in austin, because this money isn't coming from some rich suburbanite that work at dell, it comes from old-money, oil-money etc... which isn't really the demographic here
also, i think the one thing that we can do to change the money situation in austin, is reaching out and dipping into the real coffers that are dallas and houston. i think the texas biennial should be in houston not austin, and at the CAMH not bolm. i think arturo is doing this with the Road Agent, and also with DOMY being here. if we interconnect three growing art scenes within texas, there will be more money to go around, which will create more interest from the rest of the US.
Post a Comment
<< Home