ArtPrize at NY Armory Arts Week
Are you going to be in New York for Armory Arts Week? Be sure to stop by the IMPULSE Café at the PULSE Art Fair on Friday, March 5, from 2:30 to 4:00.
ArtPrize organizers will be buying drinks and answering questions.
A little about PULSE, from their website:
“PULSE Contemporary Art Fair is the leading US art fair dedicated solely to contemporary art. Held annually in New York and Miami, PULSE bridges the gap between main and alternative fairs and provides participating galleries with a platform to present new works to a strong and growing audience of collectors, art professionals and art lovers.”
PULSE New York
330 West Street @ West Houston
New York, NY 10014
(map)
PULSE Hours
Thursday, March 4 12pm – 8pm
Friday, March 5 12pm – 8pm
Saturday, March 6 12pm – 8pm
Sunday, March 7 12pm – 5pm
We hope to see you there!
Art in a basic sense is a search for truth and purpose. With that in mind all
New York Artist attending Pulse should be aware that Artprize is funded by the Dick and Betsy Devos Foundation whose mission is described as
“Christian Evangelism through church building, family building, and youth programming; education through programs that provide support for parental choices in determining where their children attend school; and “public policy that results in a freer, more virtuous, more prosperous society.”(source ABC news)
The Devos Foundation recently was a major source of funding for a Republican effort to strike down limits on political spending enacted by Congress in the 2002 election reform law known as McCain-Feingold as well as the 2008 Proposition 8 in California which took away the basic rights of all gay and lesbian citizens.
To learn more about the Devos Foundation visit http://www.mediamouse.org/news/2006/10/dick-and-betsy-1.php
Richard, I have yet to see a direct ideological link between those right-wing political agendas you protest and the mission of Artprize. So far, you’ve failed to address how or if the existence of Artprize will directly result in some kind of social or cultural damage.
If you could present facts that relate directly to Artprize, that would significantly improve your arguments. For example, “Artprize employs 1,000 slave laborers” could be an argument against volunteer support (JUST KIDDING!). But that could at least make a fun Onion article, eh?
If you could present solid facts that support direct arguments against Artprize, that would be more valuable. “AP takes advantage of artists because of this and this and this…” or, “supports a federal decrease in arts spending because of such and such fact.” or, “cheapens beauty due to this and this attribute.” or, “encourages society to disrespect artists and cheapen or commercially abuse the concepts of truth and beauty as evidenced in such and such procedures, mission, and ideology.”
If you can’t make your argument against direct attibutes of Artprize (but instead make arguments against Prop 8), then your argument will not be persuasive. It won’t be clear. If it’s not clear and obvious, then it’s not an honest argument. Just trying to help.
No organization, foundation or individual for that matter gives $500,000 of their money to a cause or idea just for the fun of it. They donate money to causes to support a position or instigate a change in social or political policies that they believe in.
In the case of The Devos Foundation they donate money to ultra conservative social/ political and religious causes that according to their mission statement result in a “freer, more virtuous, more prosperous society.”
I believe it is important for artists to question the connection one can make between the referendum against the established Art world that ArtPrize is making and the public policies and social engineering The Devos Foundation funds and supports.
According to the online Metro Times when Dick Devos ran for Governor he ran on a platform of “tax cuts that primarily benefit corporations and the wealthy, industry deregulation, school privatization, militarism, the promotion of so-called “traditional values” that cover everything from undermining the rights of gays to re-criminalizing abortion to breaking down the wall separating church from state, opposition to the environmental movement and organized labor and affirmative action, and cuts in funding to social services.”
I think one can make a case that the stripping away of the established public professionalism in education (school unions, teacher salaries), in the sciences (evolution in the schools, modern medical abortion practices, professional environmental standards and regulations) that Devos’s platform supports is the very same social engineering that is being applied to the Art world when it comes to Art in southwest Michigan.
In ArtPrize professional art curatorial practices, and art historical ideas are replaced with an American Idol type of art competition. The power is shifted from the expert, the educated professional to the general public. Case in point, because of the Devos’s powerful connections in Grand Rapids we now have a innocent Art Competition where the winning entry, selected by the people, is now on permanent display in the Grand Rapids Art Museum. Is this now precedent for all future ArtPrize winners? Do these pieces fit into the collection? Are they worthy of being in a museum collection? If the Devos’s can just give something they like to the museum can anybody do the same? Should that be the standard by which Art is selected for our museums?
I could be totally wrong. The simple fact could be that The Devos’s wanted to give their son a half a million dollars because it would be good for the economy of Grand Rapids. But that would mean that they have no idea how the Art world works or the radical changes that their ArtPrize systems is suggesting. But I doubt that they are that naive. They even call ArtPrize a “radical experiment”.
I firmly believe that if my fellow artists are being “radically” experimented on that they should take the time to know who is the money behind the experiment.
Your apprehension is understandable, given that you do not share the same ideology as Dick DeVos, but the prize funder’s worldview does not mean that ArtPrize is a vehicle for his political agenda. It is an attempt to reconnect art/artists and community, to bring new life to an urban center and to the state of Michigan, and to show that quality and popularity need not be mutually exclusive. I’m hardly what you’d call a conservative (politically or religiously) but I applaud the undertaking.
At ArtPrize we want to create an atmosphere of openness and discussion. This also extends to our online spaces. Thank you for helping us keep the conversation civil and respectful.
For more examples to support Richard Kooymans argument:
(for disclosure, I am his wife)
This is an excellent page itemizing how and where the Devos hundreds of thousands of dollars of funds go to directly impact law, education, advocacy and the arts toward a very specific and narrow rightwing, Christian, Evangelical policy and agenda. It is not innocent, naive, or arbitrary. Artprize is a guise of philanthropy to further a political agenda.
http://www.mediamouse.org/tag/dick-devos
Aaron, in fact, the Devos’ did support a federal DECREASE in arts funding. They were major supporters of Dick Armey who in 1989 took the case AGAINST funding the NEA during the Mapplethorpe exhibition at the Corcoran Museum.
Devos Foundation provided $194,000 to Compass Arts, where Betsy Devos serves as Board, a program that offers internships to students to make anti-abortion promotional materials.
What? openness? where did John’s post go??
Melanie, like I said previously, we want to encourage open discussion but we do not tolerate personal attacks.
Aaron,
Cultural damage you ask? How did the sound principle of a woman’s right to an abortion become a principle teetering on the edge of eliminate ? By the ring wing slowing changing the perception of what a abortion is and chipping away at how we label and define established principles.
What is wrong with the basic premise of the general public deciding the winner in a art competition? Well, nothing on the surface. But what if that art competition is advertised as the largest in the world? Now we have inserted a premise that the largest prize money in art can be awarded simply by a person on the street. Who needs professional in art when the person on the street knows what they like? Who needs museum curators when a public panel can do the job? If you can change how people think about art you can change history.
This may seem like a far off idea in the real art world but this is how the right makes small little changes in the public consciousness. Actually I’m a little shocked how we already have traveled dangerously from ArtPrize’s first year in GR to last years years winning entry being on permanent display at the new Grand Rapids Art Museum. I see this as a huge example of cultural damage. Is this what the future of the GRAM will be- the house of ArtPrize? One also has to wonder if this had anything to do with the recent stepping down of the current director Celeste Adams.
Sorry for the typo’s above. Need more coffee. Would be nice to have an edit function to the thread posts Ian.
Richard, that would be nice. Adding it to the long “to do” list
“Now we have inserted a premise that the largest prize money in art can be awarded simply by a person on the street.”
As pointed out elsewhere, if the winning work had been schlock, the competition would not be going into its second year with as much credibility as it. However, what seems to have happened is that the public managed to choose a work that is traditional in many ways, but nonetheless serves as a powerful metaphor for painting overall. This holds out hope.
The long-term prospects is that public appreciation will become more sophisticated because ArtPrize is a form of public education. And, honestly, it is time for a broader public to become enfranchised, to be connected with art in some other way than serving as a passive, consumer audience for blockbuster exhibitions.
The lack of curatorial input does not bother me, either. For the most part, and the curatorial/critical and market dynamics of the professional art world during the past 20 years only created a bubble that parallels the real estate and financial services bubbles.
It’s time for a new paradigm and, regardless of the funders’ politics, ArtPrize deserves a shot at effecting positive change. Let me put it another way: would you boycott international exhibitions in other places because you disagreed with the politics of the governments that sponsor them? Admittedly, this is a private enterprise, rather than governmental, and the jurors are the public, rather than art professionals, but the question remains valid.
A few typos in my comments above, but the ideas are intact.
Richard, I think your strongest argument will be that Artprize, by nature of its public vote and grand prize, champions the status quo by encouraging artists to sacrifice their true voice in order to win public approval, and replaces a purist’s (that’s you) beauty with a political or entrepreneurial spirit. If you look at pop music, Hollywood film, and even commercial sports, you’ll find that mass media has always used public interest, ratings, ticket sales, etc., as a proven foundation to build commercial success. In this context, the only thing new about Artprize is that they embraced social media as their mass-marketing platform.
I’ve seen the video interviews with Dick Devos (www.michiganright.com), in which he explains that he’s not leaving politics despite staying out of the latest governor’s race (2012 presidential race perhaps?). I’m aware that his newest political strategy is to harness the energy of popular society (while maintaining his own value structure). It’s rather obvious, then, to connect the dots and see Artprize as a potential element in a larger political strategy.
The point I’m trying to make, though, is that your criticism needs to be more honest if you want credibility. I don’t think your arguments are objective. Being Pro-Life has NOTHING to do with the merits of a public vote and a large cash prize. Artprize itself has NOTHING to do with Republican ideologies. If anything, Artprize seems more like something Paul Allen, Google, Steve Jobs, and/or Barack Obama would conceive. It’s progressive! Would you feel the same way about Artprize if it was federally funded under an Obama Administration?
Aaron,
I think you are assuming that I have one big problem with AP when in fact there are two basic issue that I take issue with. These two issue can be looked at as interconnected but they exist as independent concerns that every artist should at least look at and question where they stand on.
The first issue is who is backing ArtPrize. If you don’t have a problem participating in an Art competition sponsored by a ultra conservative Evangelical Foundation that uses their money to deny the rights of gay and lesbian people in this country then AP is for you. If you don’t have a problem with Christian pray being allowed in public schools, tax payers money be diverted to private Christian schools, intelligent design being taught along side evolution, corporation rights being supported over individual rights, and the complete dismantling of the environmental regulatory system then AP may be just right for you.
Frankly I don’t see the artistic ideologies of freedom of express, openness to new ideas and other peoples beliefs, and the search for basic and complex truths that artist believe in fitting into the right wing oppressive beliefs that the Devos Foundation supports. Most people in the mid 80′s thought that Little Stevie Van Zandt and the dozens of fellow musician he rallied to boycott Sun City in South Africa during the Apartheid to be heros. Should any artist support an Art Competition funded and organized by an foundation that was one of the major financial supporters of Proposition 8 in California, a state that the Devos’s don’t even live in? I don’t think so and if anyone does they may want to take the time to see Kirby Dick’s wonderful movie ‘Outrage’ http://www.outragethemovie.com/
The second issue is the structure of AP. The competition is structured as a referendum against existing systems of interpretation , education and curation. Someone of the structuring is interesting and exciting. Someone of it is, i believe, is dangerous.
My comments are as honest and simply objective as can be. These are simple facts. You as an artists either choose to connect the dots or you choose to look away.
Richard, it’s not fair of you to suggest that artists are either with Artprize or against it. This same black & white thinking is what got us into the Iraq War! I’ll have to start referring to you as Richard “W” Kooyman! Haha! Your argument is getting better…Now you have two bullet points (just need one more). But please try to connect the dots with facts, not with insinuations. Have you met the Devos family? Have you met Artprize organizers? Do you know their individual motivations? Do you even know if Rick and his team share the same ideologies as his parents? Can you honestly not separate the positive attributes of Artprize from your underlying sense of evil? Do you honestly believe there are only two points of view in this world???
Additionally, you stated, “If you don’t have a problem with Christian prayer being allowed in public schools, tax payers money be diverted to private Christian schools, intelligent design being taught along side evolution, corporation rights being supported over individual rights, and the complete dismantling of the environmental regulatory system then AP may be just right for you.”
Yikes, Richard. This is a prime example of what I’m talking about. There is NO CONNECTION between participating in Artprize and supporting intelligent design education. Artprize “might” be a small element in a strategy to gain public support during the election cycle, but can you back that claim with a series of facts? And if Artprize actually achieves enough power to influence voters to vote for the Devos family during a campaign, shouldn’t Artprize be treated as one single issue and debated for its own merits and shortcomings? If you can’t individually separate each issue from your pseudo-omniscient sense of evil, then you are not being objective. Artprize has nothing to do with Republican ideologies.
Something else I wanted to mention… This is in response to Ian. You said, “At ArtPrize we want to create an atmosphere of openness and discussion.” Can you please explain why the final vote tallies were not released to the public? It actually really bothers me that it wasn’t released, and I’m certain a lot of other artists feel the same way. Please reply to this message. It’s an important topic that deserves the courtesy of an explanation, if not a full disclosure.
Aaron,
It’s not a matter of being fair or unfair. You either decide to participate in a event organized and funded by a ultra conservative evangelical foundation of you don’t. You just can’t stick your head in the sand and say it doesn’t matter who funds these things.
……..
You are devoting a huge part of your life writing a book about the disenfranchised and unemployed. Saying that there is no connection between ArtPrize and the Devos’s right wing social and political platform is a little like saying there is no connection between GM shipping jobs out of the country and unemployment in America.
……
Pick up a copy of “Art Matters:How the Culture Wars Changed America by Marianne Weems, Brian Wallis, and Philip Yenawine. It’s a detailed account of the rights organized effort to strip the art culture of credibility and the funds that supported it. The rights dismantling of our cultures tax base leaves the power in the hands of those that have the means to fund things, like ArtPrize, a faux of a competition that claims to be “open to anyone’ but in fact is controlled by ArtPrize and it’s side kick undisclosed selection committee -the UICA.
Okay, THERE! You have an argument. “…open to anyone, but is in fact controlled by Artprize and it’s sidekick undisclosed selection committee — the UICA.” Now back it up with a series of factual examples, and you’ve got a bullet point to make your larger case. Unless you organize these facts to support your position, the argument will come across as inaccessible SPIN. How can anyone discuss or break down your point-of-view to better understand your position if the argument is based on a loose theory that Artprize is evil due to its association with a person you believe to be evil? Why should someone believe and trust your abstract thought when the benefit of Artprize is clear and obvious? Do you see what I mean about being objective? Find a way to make your argument UNDENIABLY CLEAR AND OBVIOUS, so that you don’t have to counterbalance with loads of persuasion.
As for the comment about participating in an “ultra-conservative evangelical” event, I beg to differ. We are all connected in someway or another, and participating in an art festival does not translate into supporting a political worldview. Everyone has their own reasons, motivations, and perspectives on the choices they make. To suggest otherwise gravely underestimates the diversity of humankind. As an artist, you should be keenly aware that WE DON’T ALL FIT INTO BOXES. We don’t all see things two-dimensionally.
The other point I want to make has to do with the integrity of your message. However you answer, I don’t care. It’s only rhetorical… Can you honestly tell me your paintings have never sold to Republicans that support Pro-Life issues? Have you honestly never purchased a Diet Coke, because rumor has it that Mormons own the company? Have you never bought a box of Nabisco crackers because they’re owned by Philip Morris? Have you never watched a movie that was funded by conservative investors? Is your house not built with lumber purchased from a mill most likely owned by Republicans?
I met a guy in Colorado that was planning to sail to the Philippines to claim his own island. His reason was that he was thoroughly disgusted with the American system, especially with regard to consumerism. I respect his point of view and even admire his character for taking the initiative and risk to make a huge life change. But I didn’t go to the Philippines — I stayed here. You, Richard, are still here. I’m assuming it’s because you feel the need to contribute to society? If so, Artprize can be a platform for artists to deliver their message. It doesn’t have to be, but it can be.
The issues I have with Artprize are directly related to operational philosophies that I believe undermine the credibility of Artprize itself. I also realize that it will continue moving forward, whether I participate or not. At some point, Richard, you have to accept that Artprize has a right to exist. If you don’t like it, CREATE SOMETHING in response to it.
Your right Aaron. Everything is just fine and if I don’t like it I should just leave the country. And George Bush was just doing his best and really like reading Schopenhauer. Zoloft is a health supplement and Jesus did make the world in 7 days. Thanks for helping me see the shiny light.
Aaron, we decided against disclosing the vote tallies for each artist last year for a couple of different reasons. The bottom line was that logistically it would have been very difficult to pull off. I’m sorry it disappoints you.
Ian, will the vote tallies for this year be disclosed?
Actual tally numbers will not be disclosed for the same reasons as last year. We are considering ways for artists to get more feedback from the website, so they can track their progress. That website feedback, in our research, was the underlying desire for tally numbers.
Paul, I’m really sorry for getting your blog posts off track. This whole comment thread has nothing to do with NY Armory Arts Week. I also apologize for “lurking” and being an obnoxious troll. That certainly has not been my intent. I recognize it and will most likely phase myself out of the Artprize conversation altogether. I don’t even think it’s plausible for me to enter a piece in time for this year anyway.
But… The nondisclosure of vote tallies is a very legitimate concern for artists. I just can’t seem to understand why you would withhold this information from participants? For me, it’s about closure, but it’s also about learning and preparing for the future. After spending months preparing for Artprize ’09, I’m unable to know definitively how well my piece was received in the community. Media is one thing, and personal conversations are also important, but this was a public vote competition, and to actually know what the general public (as a whole) thought about the piece really provides a lot of insight for the artist to learn and grow. I know you will make whatever decisions you feel need to be made, whether I like them or not, but it’s especially frustrating that you refuse to give a straight-forward reason for withholding the tally.
Hi Aaron,
First off, I would never classify you as a “troll.” Regarding the vote tallies. Closure and an understanding of what the general public thought of the work is what we’re working to provide this next year. It will not come in the form of disclosing a vote tally, since that’s something that large competitions involving votes–think Oscars or American Idol–never do because the potential liabilities far outweigh the potential benefits.
I don’t understand Richard’s apprehension of having the common man decide on art. Who is it made for? Do I need a college transcript before I can enter an art museum? While perusing Artprize 2010, I’m looking at works that I like. If I don’t like it, I’m not willing to spend much time on it, and there’s not a chance I’d buy it.
While looking at the artist biographies listed, I’m seeing many people who have regular day jobs and aren’t listing a bunch of degrees behind their names. I’m sure there are plenty of stories of great artist that were considered inadequate in their time as well.
Richard, if you’ve decided to participate in this years Artprize, please cover your piece so that our untrained eyes do not gaze at what we are simply to stupid to appreciate.
Also, in reference to the DeVos’ political agenda: Take advantage of them! Try to make something us little people might like, take his quarter mil, and spend it on your own political agenda?
PS, I just find it funny that you’re trying so hard to cast the DeVos’ as elitist, but yet you look down your nose at people who might enjoy art without a pedigree.
Lihplom