Things to take away from a visit to the Kunstrai 2014…
I am reluctant to become commercial. The bigger public that could be buying art again in the coming years has a distinct idea about how “art” should “look”. With that look there are two problems: 1) It is not imaginative, and only slightly creative. 2) I do not have it.
It is a good thing that I am moving towards setting up my photographs more, relying less on what is and more on what can be.
The reason I wanted to talk to some gallery owners (my friend Bas Stubert took some photographs of me trying to network, a unique sight for sure) is that I need to sell some of my work to be able to produce the work. I can finish maybe 30 big prints mounted and all now but I can not store them, let alone display them for people to see. During my recent testprinting it became clear that the photographs only reach their potential when printed (large). This is my dilemma.
However, to obtain this freedom (of space) I am not prepared to inject artsyness into my work for the sake of being recognized by the art-buying public, because I would be faking it. My double-exposures are probably the closest it will come to that (and their raison d’être is entirely different). I am sure that once an artist starts getting famous (in general) the art-critics and blogsters will find stories for the work even if it does not look artsy.
A mini version of Jeff Koons’ balloon dog? Some 2d representation of the diamond covered skull by Damien Hirst? Give me a break. Gallery owners as hardworking drugstore proprietors. Salespeople with a story. This is not how I imagined it. I know marketing and connections are important but maybe exposure can be reached from a different angle. Try to find a crowd consisting of artists and organise shows ourselves. The Kunstrai also excited me to concentrate on the work more (I have tons of ideas but because the execution is lagging I could not show them) and not be influenced by what is considered art nowadays.
Even if it leads to obscurity.