I make it a point to drop an e-mail message to anyone I review, even if the review is not extremely positive. I think that criticism is important both as a review for people not involved in the work and also for the creative people, who can benefit from having someone see their work from outside. (I honestly wish more people would review my work because I'm really curious about what different people have to say.) Of course, if my review is really negative or insulting, then I keep quiet about it; there's no need to get someone's attention just to pick on them. That's kind of rude.
Usually I get fairly positive e-mail back. Most gallerists and artists seem genuinely happy that I took the time to mention them, even if I'm not as glowingly positive all the time as I might be. But recently I received a very negative message, and for what I thought was a positive review, no less.
I wrote a quick note off to Matthew Smith's gallery to let him know I'd reviewed his work; I've had no word that he's even seen my review, but the woman who answers his e-mail, one Kim Gallant, replied to me, and she was very unpleasant. I'm not sure what bothered her so much, but in the interests of showing my readers that I'm not ridiculously full of myself, I thought I'd post her message as a rebuttal to my review. So here goes.
Wow Chris, what a review! Or should I say a ghastly rant about nothing, You know first and foremost let me just say that I think blogs are completely ridiculous and good for all of you who are out there writing a million of them a day for your friends to read. You might actually think you are sharing something important with the rest of the world. First, Glad you enjoyed the work and it moved you so much to write about. Please get informed first before you make the general realization that they are on the border of "posters". They are limited edition, hand-made prints in an edition of 300, which is as big as a hand made printer usually makes...we work very hard to educate the collector purchasing the work that it is a hand-made piece, which so thankfully you were able to notice from the hand signed pieces. Secondly, I will be the first to admit the web-site is ghastly...a project started about 10 years ago and never updated. I guess I could take personal offense about it, but I can't because I admit it is bad and we are currently working on a new one to launch in August. So please check back so I can have your 'opinion' on how good & how unprofessional it is, and if you want to chalk up some money to make it 'professional' then we will accept donations. Thirdly, Most people who are really curious and interested in Matthew's work, visit the gallery, call or email questions to find out more. I really wish you had before you wrote such misleading crap about it and before you understood some of his story. I know you can't get that all in a gallery but it seems you did some research on the articles and you might have gotten a little more of a clue. Finally, we have never had anyone take images off the site without asking first.... you even took an image that had clear copyright on it? Right now you are using images with out the consent of the artist. I am not sure what you do, if you are an artist making a living or just someone who likes to comment on artwork, but please try to have a little more info before you write such strange crap about someone who you know nothing about. A simple email out to us would have given you a lot better insight on Matthews work. Okay...so your blog worked you got a 'reaction' Sincerely, Kim Gallant Sales @ QPPW
That's an excellent response Chris! I love getting those!Congrats!
I do so want everyone to like me. It bugs me when someone doesn't. It's dumb, I know.
HI Chris, Responses like that do make me personnally not want to communicate anymore....at least for a couple of days. ANd then I remember that the response is that person'sand though it may be directed at me.....it may be more about the person giving it. Hey Chris...I like you.
Wow. . . well. . . not really wow. I am no longer astounded by the blogger divide. The gap between the people on the bus and off the bus is getting bigger exponentially. I am no longer flummoxed by people at parties who stop me mid-sentence and ask, "Now, what is a blog?" I wouldn't take this response as "unpleasant", just panicky. You represent something Kim doesn't understand, so she lashed out a bit (in a fairly controlled way actually). This should be water on a duck's back for you. I was intrigued by two things: 1) people's idea of what a copyright is, and why they value that idea and 2) what steps are you taking to exhibit your work (beyond blogging) so that people might review it?(I wish the comment sect9ion had spell check)
Hey Chris,I think she had a valid point about getting more information. But then the stealth thing does not work as they know your going to write about them. Galleries want you to write nice things for reviews.I have seen this happen first hand.I like the first gut reaction to it. I just read this thing by Taylor Davis who thinks more artist should have blogs.The gallery(Kim Gallant) does not get it.(blogs)As for the excusse for the REALLY BAD WEB SITE!@#%*...Lame, and let me state again for clarity, LAME.I was a web designer and I know how long it takes to a make a small gallery web site. 2 weeks give or take. There is no excuse for how unprofessional it is, to quote Ms. Gallant.They have had that sorry ass thing up for 10 years! This is funny stuff.They are very lazy or they don't care.The would be better just having nothing.
Steve asks:what steps are you taking to exhibit your work (beyond blogging) so that people might review it?Very, very small steps. These things take time. I'm worming my way into the art world, meeting people, making contacts. I've shown a small sample of my work to one gallerist, and I had a curator visit my "studio" (my bedroom, actually). And Danonymous and Serena got to see one of my paintings at the salon.As I make friends I'm slowly getting more feedback. It's not quite the same as a review by someone who doesn't know you, but I'm getting there.
What steps are you taking to get your work shown???Chris, this may be helpful ( I hope) to getting your work (anyone's work) shown.STeps.There are many not for profit (non-profit? I don't know the difference) art spaces, organizations and venues throughout the US. Many have SLIDE REGISTRIES for local, or state artists. They will often invite artists to submit 20 slides to be put in their registries. Curators for the spaces often refer to those registries to put shows together. Outside curators, corp buyers, etc. often dig threw thosefiles to put together other shows.The more remote the location, of course, the less viewership you will have.IN order not to be overwhelmed....target a specific area and get or make a list of ALL the galleries there with their addresses.Check them ALL out. See which ones may be better suited to your work. A sculpture gallery will not be particularly interested in paintings.HOWEVER...not a bad idea, to develop a relationship with all of the galleries that you can and show them your work for feedback. SOme of them will give it, gladly. You do not know WHO THEY KNOW that they may later talk to.College and university galleries are also good hunting grounds.Check out some group shows and get in some. Unfortunately, group shows are relatively easy to get into. Once you are n one, it only takes a small effort to get into many more. The good thing is that it is a great PRACTICE arena for showing up as an artist publically and thinking that way. The bad thing is it can be addictive since it becomes fairly easy to do and one can get complacent and think one is advancing their career when they really are at step one. A good year of group shows and then becoming highly selective should be about right for anyone. Always raise the bar on yourself, both artistically as well as in the concept of "showing my work".Very imprtant........Take this seriously for six months. EVERY TIME YOU MEET SOMEONE AND THEY ASK WHAT YOU DO.......the answer HAS TO BE...I am an artist (painter, sculptor, whatever). Clearly and to the point. SAY NO MORE until they want more information. The reason for six months????? we are all artists so that is not an issue, but our level of confidence is often somewhat low. You need to hear yourself express it again and again until it comes totally naturally to your thinking and who you are. When that happens, people will get it, and they will begin to respond differently to you. If you shuffle and hem and haw and make small of what you do (talk small about it) they will take the cue FROM YOU that you are semi-serious about the "hobby". Sorry...that one is a rough one but true. I am not directing that last one at Chris, I am directing it at all of us.Set a goal. In the next 12 months to be in 5 shows. Choose a number and trust that you will afterward figure out how to get that. You have no idea until you start and then everything starts falling together. Leaps of faith followed by good landings.I know. Somewhat general. And it works.PS....if you have never shown and go straight for the top....well...that's ok but your results will be ZERO with a lot of hurt feelings.
Dan, you sound like Robert Anton Wilson when you say "EVERY TIME YOU MEET SOMEONE AND THEY ASK WHAT YOU DO.......the answer HAS TO BE...I am an artist."I've come to that conclusion myself. In my case, I was saying "I'm a painter," as a way of explaining what I'm doing without taking the name "artist" for myself, because I kind of felt that "artist" was a title others bestow upon you.I still feel that way, but I also feel that the only way to initiate the brain change required to be an artist is to start claiming you're one, even if you're faking at first.I'm not sure I agree about the group shows, if you mean "call for entries" style group shows. Ed Winkleman discussed this on his blog recently and I agree with him.That said, I've been in a couple of open submission group shows and made a contact or two that way. So it's not a total waste.
Saying one is a...... is definitely geared to making a committed brain change. Period. On ecan think of it as brainwashing that offsets the other brainwashings. I think everything is brainwashed anyway. Time for some clean water this time.The group shows.... picking is personal...but there are enough out there that one does not have to go to one where a fee is required...it's bit like saying you are an artist. The point is to use these as a practice vehicle to get going. If one already is going, it isn't necessary, but if one gets stuck or hasn't really started , then it is a vehicle to start or warm up again.One can debate all this ad infinitum. My perspective is simply action/no action.
Dan sez:One can think of it as brainwashing that offsets the other brainwashings.Are you sure you haven't read Wilson? Because that's pretty much exactly what he says.The basic idea of his philosophy -- his method, really -- is that your brain has been programmed a certain way, mostly by accident, partly by culture. And he's all about reprogramming your brain. Or, as John Lilly would say, metaprogramming the human biocomputer. Or as Crowley might say, directed brain change.Brainwashing is just a crude method of reprogramming someone else's biocomputer without their permission.So, yes, you're brainwashing yourself Or, as Kurt Vonnegut once wrote, be careful what you pretend to be, because you are what you pretend to be.
boy, right on. I think we're brainwashed from before we are born. But that is not a perjorative. We think of brainwashing as evil but actually, it is the sum total of what we take in , process, and then put out, or as you say..programming.I don't read that much so I don't know who Wilson is. But I read a book by Max Maltz, a plastic surgeon in the 60's who took up psychology ...wrote PsychoCybernetics....which beasically goes...a person cannot function outside of their self-image. So the trick is to transform the self-image if one desires certain results.So if the stats are correct, they say that a child hears NO said to it something like 10,000 times by the age of 4 or 6., we are preconditioned to get and accept no as a way we live and reach out...or don't reach out. Kids never think about the no...till their legs get a little longer and they look like their parents.
I think in the beginning its good to do a few group shows just don't let them become a krutch. You can keep them off the resume or weed out the non-essential ones.I used to a lot of these and in the end it started to cost to much with the entry fees and shipping.I would try to do ones that are in College or university galleries as sometimes they produce catalogs and this is good as it counts as being published.I also used to look for alternitve spaces, artist run galleries are good as you can be small shows.I almost joined one here in Boston years ago but the fees were kind steep so I took my chances else where.
I just stepped outside to take a leak and look at all this good advice I missed!The only thing I learned from participating in call-for-entry shows was how to make a good re-useable shipping crate. The only way that I have ever been included in a gallery's stable was by meeting the right people at the right time. I've always been suspicious of my good luck.I'd have to say that walkin' the walk is the best advice. Bruce Lipton has a lot to say about our cellular consciousnenss.
I was not aware the seas were that deep. I'll need to get a longer testing stick.(by the way Chris, great post!)
you have to start somewhere.Pay to show venues or the ones with entry fees do suck, but to a few is not a bad idea, if they are in college galleries.I say this because I'v done a few and you get a nice brochure, which is a sign of being published.I would stay away from galleries that do this as its a rip oof and that's how they make there money.
I'm glad to see the direction this discussion has taken--much more productive than ripping this gallerista fool to shreds. But, as I told you privately, Chris, this woman is a fool. She does not understand the concept that 'there is no such thing as bad publicity,' let alone the fact that what you gave her was anything BUT bad publicity. She is giving herself the worst possible publicity by being so rude to you. She's exposing her ignorance, her provincialism, and her generally narcissistic, narrow-minded nature. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Kim wrote back to me, in case anyone's wondering, and apologized ("a bit"). Basically she went off the handle when I compared the prints to posters. And honestly I think that's the least defensible part of my review. I'm not even sure about the categorization, since NYFA's Website says diddly about classifying prints/posters/limited editions/what have you, so the source I linked to could be dead wrong.I have on my wall a lithograph from John Noble which I would in no way consider a poster, but which is one of 295 prints. On the flip side, I know Noble printed as many lithos as he could from one stone, and it would end up anywhere from 25 to 300 or so, and then the stone would be no good for more, so he'd clean it to use it for a new lithograph drawing. Whereas Matthew Smith's plates never wear out, and he can (and has) "reissued" prints, which is generally a fine art no-no.But Kim says, "In this world ofgiclee, the hand-made product is all that more important, and I said beforeyou saw this and noted on it and I do appreciate that you respected it."Overall, the apology is welcome, but not entirely necessary. I can understand where someone who's worked for 13 years trying to convince people that this piece of paper with ink on it is not, in fact, a poster, and therefore worth $300 (or whatever) and not $15, I can understand where having some random guy lump them in with poster makers might make them mad.She says she's going to show the review to Matthew this weekend, so maybe I'll hear back from the artist himself.
Sie brauchen noch eine neue Website.
Stanno lavorando esso.
Hi Chris, I can't think of anything witty to say about all of this, but it has been interesting to follow. I had wondered if you ever hear from galleries or artists after you do an review. I like your reviews but I imagine they don't always go over too well in a gallery. Not that anyone in the real art world reads or takes blogs seriously, of course:-)
It's unavoidable to make enemies its part of the human kind... and be honest with yourself do you love everybody? So you can’t expect to be all loved back. Just be confident with your own guts, the ones who don’t like it can go and dine in the canteen!
Tracy: Most galleries haven't written back when I've told them about my review. Valerie McKenzie printed out my review of James Lecce at her gallery and was giving it out to visitors, but she never told me she was doing that. I just happened to catch her on a later trip in. A few have written back; a couple put me on their mailing list. Most recently Hasted Hunt got back to me to say my "interpretation of Martin [Schoeller]'s work was nice and insightful". Considering how little I wrote about his photos, I'm not sure what they meant by that, but I'll take the compliment.I have yet to hear from anyone I've torn apart. I'm not really looking forward to it. Even though Angela is, of course, right when she says you can't be loved by everyone, I still kind of want it.
It continues to amaze me how terrified people are of blogs. Oh my God, if you let ANYONE have a voice, what will they say? This is most true of the political blogs, where politicians, pundits and the media are scrambling to figure out how to deal with this new, unruly source of information and opinion.As for the group show thing, if you haven't done so already, I strongly recommend getting your work into slide registries. I've gotten into a lot of group shows this way. Send slides (now often digitals, actually) to as many good ones as you can, both curated and non-curated. The ones that come to mind in NY are White Columns, Momenta (Brooklyn), DUMBO Arts Center (Brooklyn), Artists' Space, The Drawing Center, and Rotunda Gallery (Brooklyn).
Wow! What a totally unprofessional bitch. I am totally shocked by her response. How old is she? Fourteen? My eighteen year old daughter is more mature than that. Having said that, these kind of responses are priceless, to be fondly remembered for all time as the reason why we blog in the first place. To expose all the hypocritical crap in the marketplace. Blog on Chris!
jec sez:It continues to amaze me how terrified people are of blogs.And then Rebel Belle sez:...the reason why we blog in the first place. To expose all the hypocritical crap in the marketplace.I'm terrified of blogs, not because I'm scared of what will happen when you give anyone a voice. I'm scared of how little so many people have to contribute. I really thought more people had brains in their heads. Blogs make it clear why for so many years we've had editors and publishers: To filter out all the crap. Now we have to filter the crap ourselves, and, man, it's exhausting.As for why I blog -- and how do I hate using blog as a verb -- it's not to expose hypocritical crap. I do it because I'm addicted to writing and posting online. Have been for years. Back in college it was Usenet News and the campus conferencing software (VAXNotes, in case anyone cares). Then it was News and mailing lists. Then I was putting up Web pages (back before they were called blogs I wrote a whole book online).I'd like to think I have something to contribute. Not much, but a little more than most. I'm at the cusp: I think my writing is just below the minimum level for what would have been publishing in the pre-computer age. I might have, with tenacity, made it as a yeoman reporter or local film critic or cheesy advice columnist or something. Instead, I blog.
chris, do you feel like a blog on a log?I just needed to say something like that. It's not the same if I think it and then it's gone. When I see it come to life,as on this page....welll....ahhhhh... no matter how inane it is.The boy can't help it.