Quote:
|
Check out www.greenhousegallery.com and see the Salon 2002, Hundreds of entries from around the world and one of Greenhouse gallery's artists won with a 10x13" painting. In 2001 the OPA national show the judge gave her husband one of the major awards. This happens because artists let it, ignore it and continue to fund it. Art Talk is the only art pulication that will even mention such things in print.
|
Competitions are always subjective. Sometimes, the jurors could be in a conflict of interest. However, having viewed the winning entries in the Greenhouse Gallery, I think the Best of Show - "Amsterdam" by Kevin Macpherson, should have been given the Best in Show. I think it was the best of the six or seven paintings I saw.
I am careful about attributing prize winners to insider conflict or interests or nepotism. I have certainly seen jurors who pick paintings very different from what they produce, and others who pick paintings which are exactly like what they produced. I also think jurors actually bend over backwards to be fair. (Having been the juror at several national level competitions, I know how difficult it is to honestly evaluate the works, and then have your selections questioned because you knew several of the prize winners.) There is no way for it to be totally "double blind". Even if the titles and names on the slides are blanked out, most of the top artists in my field produce works which are so identifiable, that I can tell who the artist is without a signature.
Peggy
Threaded Mode
