|
After reading all of the comments, some of which I agree with and some not, I couldn't help but add my own 2 cents.
I haven't entered any competitions in years, but I do think they can have a positive impact in different ways.
1. They bring an "art awareness" to the public. I'm not, of course, referring to the infamous "feces or empty room" type art. Other than the "gimmic art", there is a lot of interesting art for the public to view. I personally prefer realism, but if the judge prefers abstract then oh well. There is some very good abstract just as there is some very poor realism. My point is that the more the public is exposed to art the better. In this day of schools dropping art courses, it is no wonder students become adults with little art knowledge.
Art exhibits get people thinking about art and that is good. If I go to see an exhibit and the art is not very good, I often hear the public whispering their disdain. That means they are thinking and reflecting on the art. Whether the art is good or bad almost doesn't matter. The important thing is that the public is being exposed to art, and I truly believe that the more they are exposed, the more likely they will begin to desire going to art museums etc. and hopefully they will start to desire to own quality original art.
2. Another positive about art competitions is what it can do for an artist, if the artist has the right attitude. When I was first starting out, I entered art shows and competitions mostly for exposure and the challenge. Initially I seldom was chosen for juried shows and often did not win when I was in a show. It spurred me on to do better. I was determined that I was going to improve my paintings.
I started really paying attention to what the judges were and were not choosing. Sometimes it was obvious that the choices were ridiculous, but sometimes I could learn something from the choices. One memorable learning experience was when I was juried into a show that had some good pieces and some awful pieces. They had a special critique night for the judge to share the reasons for his choices. One of the top award winners was this awful piece that had bright yellow bananas on a blue table - rendered in a childish style. The judge said that the painting grabbed him as soon as he entered the room and that it demanded his attention. Well, I still think that was a stupid reason to give a top award, however I still remember this painting.
I learned a valuable lesson, and after that night I desired to create paintings that are not only "good" but that also grab people when they enter a room and are memorable. At another show I learned some important things about composition. Each show has something we can learn from it if we look for it.
I can't resist on commenting on one more thing that came up on this thread - Thomas Kincaid. I know there is another thread on him also, but since it was brought up here, I'll go ahead and make my comment here. There seems to be a concern both on this forum and with other artists that I've met, that the public is being duped. I agree the public is being foolish if they spend large sums of money on art destined to be worthless, but I can hardly feel they are being duped.
First of all if they like the art and have the money then more power to them. If they are buying for investment purposes then they need to do their homework. If I have a few thousand dollars to invest, I'm going to do research on businesses if I choose to invest in the stock market. If I choose to invest in real estate, then I'm going to investigate where the property is located and learn about the area. In either of these examples, I should know better than to let my financial investment be based strictly on the statements of the real estate person or stockbroker.
If I'm not independently wealthy and this is my one time investment, then all the more reason to be diligent in checking things out. I wouldn't even buy a car unless I first did my homework. So if someone is "investing" in Kincaid's art then they should be doing their "homework" first and if they get burned then they've only themselves to blame.
Of course, if they like his art and that is how they want to spend their money then, why not? At least they are thinking about art (good or bad) and that is a step in the right direction.
Mary
|