|
| |
|
A Conversation with 2007 Long’s Park
ZAPP Juror
Mary Jane Q. Cross
Would 23 Seconds be Too Much to Ask For? |
|
|
|
other art
show jury reviews |
| Donate to
BermanGraphics |
| INTRODUCTION |
| I was honored to be chosen to be one of four
2D jurors for the 2007 Long’s Park Art Show. The jurors are picked from
the previous years exhibitors. I want to start out by saying that this is
the first time I had ever juried a show, digitally or with slides. It was
important for me to come into the experience with no expectations or
agenda, completely a blank page. “Tell me what to do. I’ll do exactly what
you say and I’ll be equitable and follow the instructions and do the job
as best I possibly can.” Other jurors have done as much for me in the past
and I wanted to fully give back to my industry. It was such an education
and a privilege for me and I loved every minute of it. |
| THE PROCESS |
| We saw two images projected over two images with the
booth off to the left. The booth shot led you into the four, and the four
were in a square. My eyes started with the booth, circled then ended with
the booth. This was a great balance and very comfortable visually. As best
I can recollect, all we saw on the monitors were the thumbnails, artist
statement and scoring template. There was nothing else to distract us.
In each medium, there was a five second preview followed by a 15 second
slide show for scoring. And that preview was truly a delight to see
because you’re not under any pressure to be making decisions during that
time. I was deliciously experiencing the work of my peers. The time that
you really are under pressure to make decisions is in the 15 seconds
round, which I would have liked to be a little longer. I think there were
457 2D entries, with four pieces of art each plus a booth shot. So the
volume of work that you’re seeing is substantial.
I was looking for work that was well done and consistent, a cohesive
body of work with an established palette. I consider having an established
palette to be somebody who’s not all over the place color wise so that the
work looks like it’s by the same artist. It has a style and consistency
that is apparent, a tonal harmony, a body of work. Those are the kind of
things I was looking for. |
| INSTRUCTIONS AND JURYING |
| The instructions we were given were to look at the five
slides all at once and decide whether or not it is good work and give it a
score from 1 to 5. We were to judge the quality of the work; nothing else.
You don’t have to judge whether they’re going to be in the show. You don’t
have to think about what the balance is, like do we have too many painters
or photographers. You just have to judge whether or not it’s good, strong
work.
I have criteria that I use for judging work. I’m not saying “judging”
in the sense of judging shows, but judging individual pieces of artwork
for whatever reasons they’re good or bad or whether they pass my muster or
not. They’re the standards that I’ve been using since art school.
Basically its composition and theme and impact and color and skill and all
those things kind of rolled into one. I also like to see strong technical
ability.
I wish there had been an elimination round to narrow it down, but our
jurying was one day and that was it. Though the jurying became instinctual
after a while, there were times we would say, “Hold on, can you go back?”
And they did. But there were also several other things that I wished we
could have slowed down for. Like the occasional artist statement,
intriguing media, unusual subject or booth, or just to gaze at fine art
work.
I would have appreciated an instruction that said, “Choose the best you
can; however, know that for any reason you can also vote no, ‘No, I don’t
feel that that’s what I’d like in the show.’” And though it may be good
work, I would have rejected them as not meeting the vision of the show as
I understood it to be.
Initially the artist’s statements were not read aloud. I’m a good
speed-reader so I was able to read every single one of the statements on
my monitor and still be able to look up at the art work. I remember one of
the other jurors saying, “I can’t read those and look at the pictures at
the same time.” So we began to spontaneously read many of them out loud.
We as artists are people who are incredibly visually oriented. Doing two
things at once, reading analytically and seeing 2D elements, is a real
reach, especially under such constant visual stimulation. Remember, all
this in 15 seconds. That’s because the people who are running the show
aren’t us. They admire, respect and trust us, but it’s our livelihoods we
are determining, a responsibility I took very seriously. |
| Donate to BermanGraphics |
| ETHICS |
| An ethical question came up at lunchtime. Another juror,
who knew that I was a strong, traditional painter, asked, “Did you feel
like you were going to give a low score to somebody whose work you were in
direct competition with?” And I said, “Gosh, I’m glad you asked that
question. With my hand on the mouse, at the very first strong, traditional
artist’s work I saw, I was shocked, then mesmerized by the quality and how
good it was.” And I said to myself, “if I’m going to do a good job at
this, I’m going to be as deadly honest as I possibly can be.” They’re
good; they’re in as far as I’m concerned, and so I gave them a very high
score. It became my standard.
And so the people at lunch, when they were asking me this, said, “Wow,
I was dealing with all these ethical questions and wondering, what
everybody else is doing?’” I guess my personal take on this is, “I have a
much bigger judge over my life to deal with than a judge at an art show.” |
| THE RESULTS |
| I was a little surprised at the results after I
walked the show. Though the show looked as good as it usually does, I was
disappointed that the quality of what I saw in a few of the booths did not
quite live up to what I had seen in the slides. A few booths had more
abstract, bright, flashy color and I realized that the time constraints of
the jury process made it more difficult to see the technical skills of
those few artists
And now I’ve got to say that the people at Long’s Park were thrilled
with our judging after walking the show. |
| RECOMMENDATIONS |
| There is much more emphasis on the artist statement than
most artists can possibly think. That short artist statement grabbed us
more often than not. We were all rather quiet to begin with, there was not
a lot of discussion, but then every once in a while one of us would say,
“Did you read this artist’s statement? Do you realize you’re looking such
and such?” And everybody said, “No.” And so I would advise applying
artists to consider this part carefully, don’t blow it off by saying, “I
like to paint nature because it speaks to me–” I’m sorry but that’s just a
bunch of malarkey and double speak. You want to avoid broad statements
like that. Being more thoughtful and specific is more important than you
realize. I also think the allowable length of it (100 characters) falls
short. It needs to be longer in length and needs to be read aloud by
someone other than the jurors while we look at the work. I think educating
the promoters might be as important as educating the artists who are
applying. The promoters have to give a little bit more time and allow more
words to describe our artwork. 23 seconds might have made me happier. And
that was eight seconds more than we actually had.
In closing I would like to thank the volunteers and staff at Long’s
Park for having a deep respect for the artists. They are one of the best shows
in the country because they have an artist first mentality that is
refreshing and works. |
|
Donate to BermanGraphics |
Check out Mary Jane's
web site to read more about her and see her work:
http://maryjaneqcross.com |
|
other art
show jury reviews |
|
Hire me
to Prepare your Digital Jury Images |
|
