PLEASE COMMENT
How does everyone feel about the issue of having a Juror for the show? The deal is that if we have a Juror, they might want to pick who shows, meaning not everyone will have pieces in the show.
Or we could try to instruct the Juror to pick Best in Show, or Award categories.
Or, if we get a Juror to pick who shows, that show could be on for the first half of the week, and then everyone could show for the second half of the week.
Let us know how you feel about it so we can try to find someone that fits everyones wants.
Thanks!
Drew
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think having a Juror for our show will not only legitimize our work by putting it on the level it deserves to be on at this point, but also will psychologically push us all to create the best work possible. In regards to how the juror functions, I think that will be a discussion whomever we request will want to weigh in heavily on.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of having a best in show. I understand that having a competition would push us as artists, but I also think that having friends & family at the final show is a major part of it.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of "Best in Show" or maybe even a couple of Award categories.
I like the idea of having the juror pick who shows the first half of the week and then letting everyone else show for the second half. I agree with Kathleen, having a juror will push everyone to make the best work possible and it will be a good experience as well.
ReplyDeleteditto what Katie said.
ReplyDeleteJuror pick first half and everyone the second is the best in my opinion. That way everyone has at least one show on their CV and everyone will work harder to produce great work.
ReplyDeleteI'm fine with the idea of having a juror pick for the 1st half of the week. I do feel, however, that excluding anyone is basically a slap in the face to the growth that the individuals have made over their time in the department. Additionally, it would mean that some individuals are expending an inordinate amount of time and work on something, in which, they do not take part. Therefore, the most productive and fair thing to do would be to split the show based on the juror's decision.
ReplyDeleteI'm in agreement with Katie/James/etc... I think we need competitive drive, but it would be completely unfair if not all of us could experience the setting up of work for a gallery presentation. That process is crucial as well as rewarding and we all deserve it after the years of work we've done to get to this point. Splitting the shows into two groups would be ideal if we decide on award categories, and having the awards would make it that much more exciting.
ReplyDeletei agree with katie, james, and blair not having everyone in the show wouldnt be fair (since they are taking part in planning the show that they may not be in doesnt seem nice)
ReplyDeleteI agree with idea of having the first half be the juried show and everyone else getting to show the second half.
ReplyDeleteHaving a juror is a great idea. I think competition is very important to all of us making better work. But I think all of this depends on the space we end up with. Switching out the art after whatever amount of time sounds like it could be a logistical nightmare but I am optimistic.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of Juror to pick Best in Show or Award categories the best.
ReplyDeleteI think the Juror picking Best in Show is the best. I agree with Zach that it would be a total nightmare to switch out art during the week. I mean it seems like a good compromise between having everyone show their work and only a few people but it sounds like a disaster.
ReplyDeleteI want to have a juror pick the show and I do not want to have two shows.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of two shows should be discussed with the juror we pick. Maybe he/she will agree to putting everyone in the show and we won't have this issue. We don't know what the space is like yet either. Maybe the juror will pick two pieces from each person so everyone would be included, the juror would still have control, and everything will fit in the space. Maybe the space is big enough to where the first show wouldn't have to be taken down and rearranged to include the second show if we decide to do a second show.
If it does come down to a juror only picking select people- if your work doesn't get picked for the show it doesn't mean it's not great work. Do we really need our work to be shown to feel like what we made was worth it? Doesn't a degree, an impressive portfolio, and a fulfilling four years of education mean anything? There are problems with having a second showing. If you are included in the first show and there is not enough room for the second you would have to take down your work and possibly re-paint and re-hang everything to make room. Then there's the catering issue, and the time we would all have to spend working and monitoring a show and selling books and things for that long. When the time comes and everyone is burnt out from all the work leading up to it, that is the last thing anyone is going to want to do. Are visitors who come to see the first show going to come again to see the second? Probably not.
I am conflicted because if there are people left out it would be a shame for everyone to spend their time on committees and bake sales and designing if they weren't going to benefit personally from it all. This is why I think we should discuss this with the juror.