Given the technological advancements in the way people communicate and do business, is it still necessary that an artist reside in a city with a major gallery market? Throughout grad school, I was told that unless I was satisfied with regional recognition, I had to live in either Los Angeles or New York. (Perhaps I should have asked that person to back up and define 'success'...) I realize this may have been true in the past, but is the art market not advancing like every other industry? As an artist, you are required to submit information online due to the fact that most galleries/residencies/artist calls will no longer accept paper applications. Everything is done electronically, so why does it matter where an artist lives?
This spring, I traveled to Germany during the Berlin Biennale and concurrent Gallery Weekend. While I thoroughly enjoyed my experience, I noticed that a website, described as a "hybrid reality show", had been launched for those art enthusiasts who were unable to make it to Berlin. On this website, Virtual Gallery Weekend Berlin 2012, you create an avatar who can move from gallery to gallery viewing art. Beyond enjoying many different exhibitions, including the ability to stream video artworks, your avatar is able to chat with other art viewers and contact gallerists. While the software could use some fine-tuning, this site attempts to make art as far-reaching and accessible as the internet itself.
On view now is the first Los Angeles biennial exhibition, titled Made in L.A. 2012. Presented at the Hammer Museum, LA><ART, and LAMAG at Barnsdall Park, this exhibition takes an interesting approach to choosing the recipient of the $100,000 Mohn Award. While a professional jury is used to select the finalists for the prize, the competition is then opened to the public. Through an online registration, one is able to vote for a winner of the award. Five finalists were selected, and we are now awaiting the results. (The Hammer's Mohn Award was given to Meleko Mokgosi).
If the art world is as web-savvy as it appears to be, then why would an artist outside of LA or NYC be less desirable, less pertinent, or less 'successful'?
This spring, I traveled to Germany during the Berlin Biennale and concurrent Gallery Weekend. While I thoroughly enjoyed my experience, I noticed that a website, described as a "hybrid reality show", had been launched for those art enthusiasts who were unable to make it to Berlin. On this website, Virtual Gallery Weekend Berlin 2012, you create an avatar who can move from gallery to gallery viewing art. Beyond enjoying many different exhibitions, including the ability to stream video artworks, your avatar is able to chat with other art viewers and contact gallerists. While the software could use some fine-tuning, this site attempts to make art as far-reaching and accessible as the internet itself.
On view now is the first Los Angeles biennial exhibition, titled Made in L.A. 2012. Presented at the Hammer Museum, LA><ART, and LAMAG at Barnsdall Park, this exhibition takes an interesting approach to choosing the recipient of the $100,000 Mohn Award. While a professional jury is used to select the finalists for the prize, the competition is then opened to the public. Through an online registration, one is able to vote for a winner of the award. Five finalists were selected, and we are now awaiting the results. (The Hammer's Mohn Award was given to Meleko Mokgosi).
If the art world is as web-savvy as it appears to be, then why would an artist outside of LA or NYC be less desirable, less pertinent, or less 'successful'?
RSS Feed
