Why the Grand Rapids ‘ArtPrize’ isn’t a Prize.
May 4, 2009
When I was young man in the 70’s Grand Rapids, Michigan suffered the decline many midwestern cities did of urban flight and a decaying empty downtown. In 1969 Grand Rapids became the first city in the United States to install a public work of art through the National Endowment for The Arts ‘Art for Public Places’ program. The sculpture chosen was Alexanders Calder’s ‘LaGrande Vitesse’. Originally it caused a immense controversy which is showcased in the PBS American Masters Series available on DVD. Eventually the energy and vitality of downtown Grand Rapids was rebuilt with major contributions by the Devos family. Last week Rick Devos grand son of one of the founders of the Amway Corporation announced ArtPrize “the worlds largest art prize”. A international art competition that will award close to $500,000 in prize money with the top prize being $250,000. The ArtPrize web site states that it’s mission is to..
“reboot a conversation between artists and the public on a grand scale.”
What is unique in Rick Devos’s idea is a international competition where the public will decide the awards similar to the ‘American Idol” talent competition where the public decides who wins the big prize.
The prize money is being funded by the Dick & Besty Devos Foundation, Rick Devos’s parents. The Devos’s have a deep history of charitable and political contributions mostly involving Christian organizations and have been contributors to James Dobeson’s Focus on the Family Ministries and have made contributions supporting California’s Proposition 8.
“Our family sees ArtPrize as a new and innovative way to engage and support the arts for the future,” said Betsy DeVos. The Dick & Betsy DeVos Family Foundation is underwriting ArtPrize. “Dick and I share our son’s vision for encouraging everyone to explore the arts in a truly democratic way.” Artprize website
I’m not sure art has ever been, or ever should be ‘democratic’, but I certainly am all for supporting anything that creates a conversation between art, artists and the viewing public. But a conversation, a dialog about art and it’s purpose in society is one thing. Giving the power to the public to be judge and jury to not only the prize money but the entry to the contest is a completely different thing.
And this is the first problem I have with ArtPrize. It’s not really what it says it is. When ArtPrize was announce it was billed as a open art event where the public would decide the prize winners. But you have to get into the ArtPrize first and your first juror is the venue owners. After applying to ArtPrize ($50 application fee) it is the artists responsibility to contact a venue from a list provided on the website. Or you can contact anyone who owns property within the city of Grand Rapids and “negotiate” a venue agreement. Artists are responsible for shipping, installing and insuring their work during the event,but here is the kicker– the person who owns the venue decides who and what they want in their venue. Good luck finding a public venue in this conservative town if your work is overtly political or sexual or anti- religious. The owners of the venue then become your first juror. Ok, this is America and you can’t make the religious Calvin College show a painting called “I hate Jesus” if they don’t want to have that hanging in their campus gallery. I can respect that. But then ArtPrize shouldn’t really bill ArtPrize as a international competition open to anyone.
$250,000 is a lot of money. $500,000 in total prizes is a whole lot of money. It’s not play money. The purpose of offering that kind of award I guess, if I can speak for the Devos’s is to show that ArtPrize is serious about attracting great art, and great artists to Grand Rapids. It’s an attempt to bring a high quality art event and showcase Grand Rapids the same way the Sundance Festival showcases Sundance. So the question begs to be asked- is the public the best jury for the “worlds largest art prize”. And subsequently-what is the point of having them do so? Will it be fun for the public? Absolutely. Will it be interesting to the public. I’m sure it will be. But is it the right thing to do? I don’t think so. Here’s why.
Artists are as serious and professional about what they do as any other important profession. Art has a history. Art deals with issues of relevance, aesthetics and purpose. Art questions who we are and what we do. There are reasons for why artists do what they do. There are even reasons for the reasons why they make what they make. Some of those reasons are simple, easy to understand and assimilate. Some of those reason are harder, more obtuse, more deeply ingrained in the history of art and the history of why art is made. There are professional experts, historians, critics, art writers and artists that spend their whole lives writing about art, trying to assess and come to a full understanding about the practical and philosophical reasons behind art, what make good art good and bad art bad. If ArtPrize wants, as they say in their mission statement a “giant conversation ” you need to include this professional aspect of art, not exclude them by a overwhelming vote of popularity. Is the implied professionalism in the the title “ the largest art prize in the world” compatible with a popularity vote?
The ArtPrize mission suggest that we are in a time of great change and we need new ideas and fresh inspiration…
”we developed a radically open framework for this event, which gives power to everyone’s opinion When everyone’s opinion counts, everyone is included in the conversation.”
There is a very big difference I feel between a conversation, a dialog about art between artists and viewers, and giving someone the power to decide what is and what is not the best art in the show. I know from my own experience that I approached many artists and artworks over the years not being able to understanding something about the work, not even liking the work, only to have it become some of my very favorite work, years later. I just wasn’t ready for it. I just didn’t have the ability, the knowledge, the patience, to fully appreciate the work. I grew to appreciate it. I became more educated, more knowledgeable. There is a major flaw in the ArtPrize organizers attitude about the public and judging art. Sometimes, as the public, we are just not able to fairly judge what we are seeing. Should we have the public decide what books the Grand Rapids library should or should not buy this year? Why not have next years Nobel Prizes awarded by the public? I think most sane people would agree that it would be a bad idea to do so.
I appreciate the ArtPrize interest in a fresh dialog about art. I also appreciate their attempt to bring up for discussion the reality that for a lot of people there is a disconnect between art that exists in the professional art world and art that they would like to have in their homes. But the reality also is that Grand Rapids is a very conservative town. I’m not making a judgement. Just stating a fact. It’s been the lunch stop for every Republican President for years. It’s a highly religious mid-western city. Is Artprize going to draw enough progressive, art educated, viewers(voters must register at the event in person) to balance out the overwhelming conservative votes? Or will this simply be “a conversation” between the artist and those conservative locals who show up?
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
Filed in art, art philosophy
Tags: Devos Foundation, ArtPrize, Grand Rapids, art jurying
