Winners were
announced last night at the Akron Art Museum. Many of those who came to hear
the list did so during the last half hour or less before the official 9:30 podium
time (maybe the really loud band had something to do with it?)
Only four of us for sure were Canton entrants and perhaps a
couple more were as well but the majority of the 200 pieces were from Akron
area students and artists. Being “outsiders” we stand no chance of winning but
it is fun to see what is chosen by the general public. (The awards are by
popular vote via an app while in the footprint of the venues.) That being said,
it is possible to game the system by taking ones friends to lunch within that
footprint or having them drive by and vote, with no need to see the work. A
total lack of media coverage probably did not help either. Not one mention in
the ABJ this year that I could find. The Rep did a better job with a color
article about one of the local entrants.
This is a short posting so let’s get to the interesting
observations. Keep in mind that the
general public votes, only once for a piece and only 5 (or six if one fills out
a survey) votes total. The participating
artists voted for one of their own to be the favorite and the winner was April
Couch for her Mandela Table, a truly wonderful piece of drawing and
construction. She was the only female in a field of older men who swept the
remaining 6 awards. (Yes Bill L, you are gett’n up there like the rest of us).
Animals ruled this year. Bill Lynn’s dragon piece (sorry
all, too lazy to scroll thru the app and find official titles), Tom Baldwin’s
rhino head carving, Brian Parson’s circular snake and grand prize winner
Fredrick Shortridge’s carved walking stick, which had some animals on it, are
all 3-D pieces as well.
Michael Marras’ salvaged materials man (3-D) and the
aforementioned snake were both made from metals and repurposed materials. Only J David Norton had a “2-D” piece but not
a traditionally flat one like canvas or paper, it was glass depicting a sunset….and
gorgeous as usual, a repeat winner. So
you notice, no paintings or drawings, no ceramics or printmaking, nothing truly
contemporary in an abstract or interpretive sort of way, nothing that required
a deep thought process to appreciate.
The pieces are all well-constructed and/or extremely detailed and time
consuming, and in most cases truly gorgeous, but nothing that requires much
“thinking” to understand or appreciate.
So these results lead us to many questions for
consideration:
Does the general public want art that is easy to digest,
easy to understand and can be instantly recognizable for what it is? There were many wonderful entries in the show
but they had to be contemplated to be appreciated.
Should work that is “deep” or requires a bit of processing
and contemplation be avoided? Viewers don’t want to spend much time when they
are going place to place and free drinks are waiting.
Are the worlds of social media and shallow entertainment
television dumbing down our audience and filing them with a need for instant
art soundbites? Some people want to know what something is right away because understanding
context takes time.
Is paining dead? Note
for next year, please include the media on the labels, not just artist name and
title.
What is the appeal for objects in the round as opposed to
objects on the wall? That could be a real study in the psychology of personal space
and the transient lifestyles of contemporary culture.
Are pieces with animals less threatening than those with
figures? As a culture that is losing its ability to interact with live people,
are animals more relatable? (After all they are pretty cool creatures in the
fantasy genre, movies and TV)
As a culture that is now focused on repurposing and
recycling, does choice of materials play into likes and dislikes? There was a
definite Don D influence.
Wonder why it was an all-male line up for the top 6? Is
there something innate in their work which appeals more to people?
Congrats to all the winners and kudos to the team that put
together this 4th year of the event.
No comments:
Post a Comment