What the hell is that?
In 1913, when Marcel Duchamp mounted the upturned bicycle wheel and fork on the seat of a four-legged stool, there was basically no such thing as kinetic sculpture. It was nonetheless a highly compelling piece of artwork, even if Duchamp himself would say only that he just liked to watch the wheel spin; it being an example of his "Ready-made" art. Ironically, museum visitors never get to see his wheel in motion. DON'T TOUCH! More hilarious still, the work was duplicated for MoMA in 1951, about which several videos have been produced, and none of which show the blessed thing turning. Yes, video! Evidently, the academic community continues to struggle with the simple fact that motion is a central element of these works. That is in spite of the effect that the processes one's brain undergoes, as a result of perceptual contact, over time, is the essence of experience.
So what? So, on any given day, you can find hundreds of announcements online, inviting artists to submit their work for jury consideration, for this or that exhibit. Often, the gallery mounting the exhibition foots the bill for it's activities by charging a nominal fee for entries. I can't give you statistics, other than to say that most of these open calls, even ones soliciting three-dimensional work, give no consideration for those pieces, whose creators have so painstakingly imbued the attributes of motion.
What makes me say that? These days, one typically uploads images for consideration via online systems. They're set up specifically for the purpose of making it easy for jurors, around the globe, to review and select what they think merits the exposure, without leaving the comforts of home. It's a great idea. What I don't get is that so often these submission sites, or their clients, make no provisions for submitting video of one's work. Can you imagine a choreographer submitting a dance work, if it would only be judged by what could be gleaned from still photos of the dancers. But, there you have it: opportunity squandered; widespread propagation of the medium hobbled.
Not taking "No" for an answer any more than I absolutely have to, I've communicated with the various administrators of these things. Some have said they're simply not set up for it; a statement that sends my mind into apoplexy. I mean, for crying out loud, YouTube was founded in 2005, a time when pretty nearly every PC on the planet had been playing video for the previous five years. Not set up? Frankly, I think they just didn't think of it, when they made their arrangements with the website people. After all, the sites certainly have these capabilities, as absolutely required for those contests that are for film or video works, specifically.
In fairness to a couple of these folks, I have been given the exceptional opportunity to mail in a video DVD to supplement my submissions. As of yet, that has not proven a successful strategy. Not having been accepted by those particular juries, I have no way of knowing if the videos were actually screened, or in what manner my interloping DVD was actually regarded. I feel righteous in my cynicism because, in my own experience, for those exhibitions specifically seeking kinetic work, provisions for video submissions have always been made, and my stuff has thereby been selected every time.
Oh well. The perception and disposition of art has always been the same as anything else, I guess. What and who gets to enjoy widespread promotion or recognition follows traditions that likely date back to neolithic times, subject to the whims of social phenomena, and tempered by happenstance.
So what? So, on any given day, you can find hundreds of announcements online, inviting artists to submit their work for jury consideration, for this or that exhibit. Often, the gallery mounting the exhibition foots the bill for it's activities by charging a nominal fee for entries. I can't give you statistics, other than to say that most of these open calls, even ones soliciting three-dimensional work, give no consideration for those pieces, whose creators have so painstakingly imbued the attributes of motion.
What makes me say that? These days, one typically uploads images for consideration via online systems. They're set up specifically for the purpose of making it easy for jurors, around the globe, to review and select what they think merits the exposure, without leaving the comforts of home. It's a great idea. What I don't get is that so often these submission sites, or their clients, make no provisions for submitting video of one's work. Can you imagine a choreographer submitting a dance work, if it would only be judged by what could be gleaned from still photos of the dancers. But, there you have it: opportunity squandered; widespread propagation of the medium hobbled.
Not taking "No" for an answer any more than I absolutely have to, I've communicated with the various administrators of these things. Some have said they're simply not set up for it; a statement that sends my mind into apoplexy. I mean, for crying out loud, YouTube was founded in 2005, a time when pretty nearly every PC on the planet had been playing video for the previous five years. Not set up? Frankly, I think they just didn't think of it, when they made their arrangements with the website people. After all, the sites certainly have these capabilities, as absolutely required for those contests that are for film or video works, specifically.
In fairness to a couple of these folks, I have been given the exceptional opportunity to mail in a video DVD to supplement my submissions. As of yet, that has not proven a successful strategy. Not having been accepted by those particular juries, I have no way of knowing if the videos were actually screened, or in what manner my interloping DVD was actually regarded. I feel righteous in my cynicism because, in my own experience, for those exhibitions specifically seeking kinetic work, provisions for video submissions have always been made, and my stuff has thereby been selected every time.
Oh well. The perception and disposition of art has always been the same as anything else, I guess. What and who gets to enjoy widespread promotion or recognition follows traditions that likely date back to neolithic times, subject to the whims of social phenomena, and tempered by happenstance.
Comments
Post a Comment