Post
by saulmelman » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:08 am
A warm hello from Brooklyn, New York.
Over the past week I have read the ”We have a Dream” art petition including many of the “petition supporter” responses and related correspondences.
As a former granted theme artist, “Johnny on the Spot” 2003 and “Jadu Beta” 2004, I would like to add my ideas to the collective as a participant but more importantly from the perspective of a previous Burning Man artist.
The issues are many. I appreciate your attention.
One of my favorite “petition supporter” comments is by David “Yo-Yo King Capurro” who writes, “ Huh? What’s burning man?” (Friday 19th Nov)
Clearly Burning Man is not what it used to be. But it appears the common denominator that unites many, irrespective of position on the current political brouhaha, is that the art at Burning Man is of great importance.
This is good news for art.
I’ve gone to the festival consecutively since 2001. I thought 2001 – 2003 were all strong years for art but like many others I was disappointed by the variety and quality of the art this past summer.
Although I appreciate Jim Mason’s (as well as his “petition supporters”) passion to improve the art, his ideas at their suggested most general, contradict his true democratic aim and I believe demonstrate an oversimplification of the arts administration process. In addition, his solutions do not reflect the artistic experience of what it entails to execute art on or for the playa. The proposed plan will not “fix the art”.
I think it is very important to consider the fact that the grant funding process that is being so harshly condemned is only 5 years old. During this time much has changed at the festival. One year of a lesser art showing, the result of which is multi-factorial, should not mandate a radical alteration of the process.
Be patient. Offer constructive criticism. Inflammatory and pugilistic rhetoric only serves to divide.
Change for change sake or to assuage ennui and resurrect nostalgic feelings is a false panacea and will wreck the progress that had been made.
Despite the “poor” showing in 2004, there were some very strong advances made this year with regards to the art making process that participants may not know about. One great example was the noteworthy improvement of the relationship between the hardworking DPW staff and the art department that is sure to benefit artists in the future.
I think that the people on the petition pining for the art from years ago should remember that there was no grant process before 1999. Perhaps the great “radical democratizing” should be to return to no art funding. This in my opinion would be unfortunate as grant funding truly offers an opportunity to make work that would otherwise not be realized. Perhaps the prize of money has corrupted the participants.
My thoughts on the petition.
Funding decisions through direct vote.
Organizing an event where artists share proposals with the community sounds like a nice idea. But the ‘art selection party’ designed to affect the subsequent electronic vote primarily benefits those artists able to attend.
When fair competition rests on equal representation, to suggest that for artist’s ‘too far away can have reps, videos or some other stand ins” simply does not equate with the power of having the artist share their proposal in person. It is an offense to the artist who has worked hard on his or her proposal who cannot be a part of the important process.
Moreover the event does not take into consideration the fact that many in the Burning Man community who would view the proposals, do not live in San Francisco.
Burning Man is no longer solely a West coast nexus.
The “art selection party” idea is biased and is inconsistent with the author’s general democratic intent of the petition.
If the “art selection party’ were eliminated as part of the proposed two step voting process, the idea of having artists showcase their ideas on the Burning Man website for a popular vote is a more democratic option.
This is a compelling idea but ultimately one that I strongly believe will bring the quick death of art on the playa for the sake of “releasing the power back to the participants”.
The risk of electing art (or anything for that matter) by popular vote will increase the probability that there will be a predominance of art with immediate appeal or ‘the neato factor’ and not much substance.
Making art on or for the playa is difficult. Ideas for projects must be accompanied with a sound plan for execution. This aspect, “ How I am going to build my project ” of the grant process in not unique to Burning Man. The Burning Man organization requests very little in comparison to other art grant procedures in this regard and offers significantly more money than most. Do your own research and you will find that “the hoops” many people are bemoaning are inconsequential.
And so the question,” Who amongst the voting population is going to read the entirety of all the proposals that are going to be posted on the web?”
Even if we are to trust that everyone who assumes the responsibility for voting reads the length of all proposals (my proposals were 15 pages each) that is not still not enough.
If one has little experiential knowledge of what it entails to successfully execute construction on the playa, the voter majority, how can one be qualified to decide what should or should not be granted?
It seems obvious that you can’t unhinge the art selection process from those with playa construction experience whether this constituency is part of BMORG or not and that is what the popular vote will accomplish.
An art project elected by popular vote lying in pieces on the ground is popular garbage.
Other important ideas to consider in regards to the direct voting concept are the implausibility of separating who has (and owns) the money from who is allocating the money and legal issues that ultimately the BMORG is responsible for such as safety and compliance with local and federal law.
Guest Curators
It seems presumptuous for Jim Mason to claim that Larry and Ladybee are bored of their “Art Monarchy”. Larry and Ladybee have always seemed very enthusiastic about the art to me. Nevertheless, an annually elected curator (s) as described by the petition seems appealing at first as well. However, unless BMORG has the ultimate decision, the popular direct voting process for curators falls victim to the same pitfalls as described for artists above. Moreover, unless monitored by BMORG, the proposed curatorial system would be a rich garden for favoritism and totalitarianism. Far from Jim Mason’s democratic design.
It is an important oversight in Mason’s proposal that there is limited mention of the immense amount of ‘behind the scenes’ work put into the production of the art for the festival. Curating is more than just the glamour of conceiving of a plan and picking the art. What visiting curator (s), completely ignorant to the system is going to be able to quickly step in and assume the full breadth of curatorial administrative responsibilities in an effective manner with or without the flavorless duties of the grunt “art council”. Curating is a full time job and it takes time to learn how to do. Who is going to pay for it?
Among other under appreciations in the petition are the incalculable. Jim Mason writes in ‘Jim Mason’s response to Ladybee’, that “Ladybee suggests a couple of tweaks here and there and all will be fine showing once again that her head must be buried deep in playa dust.” I disagree with Mason’s interpretation of Ladybee’s suggestions but would agree that at times I have seen her and her art associates with their heads deep in playa dust. This summer when my crew and I were being ravaged by the unrelenting pre-event dust storms it was Ladyee and others who appeared during these torments to cheer us on and help us achieve our goal. These visits were much appreciated.
10% for Art
Apparently Mason is well acquainted with the accounting books of BMORG and is a member of the LLC.
Okay. More money for art may help. But more money for art doesn’t necessarily equate to better art. Just more.
Distribution of increased funds into art infrastructure not just the grant pool cache is important. The art tour bus is a good example of how money invested into other art enterprises improves our experience of the art.
In summation, the ‘art selection party’ is not democratic. The implausible concept of direct voter art and curator selection is likely to lower the quality of the art, increase the chance of failed projects, and will kill the growing efficiency of the art department by replacing it with a bureaucratic Hydra.
Themes
The themes are hardly “regimes of absolutism” as Mason would have us believe. In fact, he negates his own words in his next sentence when he writes, “most of art has little to no relation to the theme.”
Answering the challenge to a theme offers a context for the artist, unifies the collection as whole and as a viewer is interesting to see how different artists solve a problem.
However, funding art just because it reflects the theme in some way is a good way to lower the quality of the art.
In this regard, I agree with Jim that it would be good to see interesting non-thematic art funded.
Fund strong theme and non-theme related art.
One of my favorite pieces ever was a non-thematic work from 2002; a brilliant musical sculpture made of PVC, rubber bands, fishing wire and plastic cups. (This piece influenced the design Jadu Beta – who ever made installation thank you.)
General Suggestions
Work within the young and growing system. In my experience when discussing contentious issues with BMORG if you converse in a level headed manner they listen and respond.
Over emphasis on interactivity with installation art limits artistic expression and makes art into easy-to-forget entertainment. Participants seem to want more than just cool toys to play with. Let interactivity be part of the art when it makes aesthetic sense and continue to fund strong work with limited “traditional” interactivity.
The performing arts are a critically important aspect of the festival. These arts are very under funded and should be supported more.
Most importantly, the way to have better art on the playa is for artists to create better work. Artists are the ones who need “to fix” the art.
Would be Burning Man artists need to do more research on art exhibited from previous years so we don’t see similar projects rehashed. For this reason, I think an expanded database on theme and non-theme art related should be accessible. Artists need to have reasonable expectations for art grant funding and imagine creations that can flex to available funds not the other way around. Dream of the mindful, reasonable impossible and I believe BMORG will consider it.
Artists need to fulfill their contractual promises. Finish the project on time so the community can have more time to appreciate the art and clean up the site after the festival so DPW doesn’t have to and so future artists don’t get punished (approximately 50% of the artists didn’t clean up their sites this year despite contractual agreements. BMORG in a generous letter agreed to absorb these costs but it will understandably make contractual agreements more difficult in the future).
Russell Wilcox posted two solid essays on the theme art list. The essay entitled “How do artists get paid in a gift economy” is of particular interest. Wilcox contends that if BMORG recognized artists with “gifts” such as an artist-viewer open forum, artists would feel more appreciated and thus be more inclined to make art.
Although this idea portrays the artist’s primary drive to make art for ego applause it is a good suggestion in that it will serve to bring artists and viewers together and make everyone feel more invested in the art which is one of the central goals of the petition.
In his essay, Wilcox seems to indicate that these “gifts” do not exist. Rather the opposite is true. In the past several years there has been a progressive increase in the amount of forums where artists may be recognized and/or interface with the viewers. The pre-event theme art website, regional pre-festival events, JRS announcements, BRC Gazette articles, BRC radio artist interviews, the art tour bus and the artery gallery are such examples.
I think Wilcox’s suggestion is a very good one and we need to send the message that we want more of this type of community. An open forum panel discussion between artists and participants in center camp would be amazing.
Artists and art lovers need to unite and work with the BMORG in order to further the development of art on the playa to make Burning Man the vanguard for creativity it is now poised to become.
As “petition supporter” sssssSassy declares, “The arts the thing.” (Tues 23 Nov)
Thank you.
Saul
