Getting feedback from promoter

I recently applied for some "B" list shows with a promoter who has never juried us into any of her shows. I applied partly because we were hoping to stay closer to home in January, but also figuring that if we could get into one of these shows and she could see our artwork, display and sales techniques which might provide a better chance of getting into her "A" list shows. Well we got declined again. So, I wrote an email requesting feedback. I received an email within 2 days saying that she would happily provide me with input but now it has been 5 days since I received this reply. If I have not heard within the next couple of days, do you think I should email again? It seems to me that this is part of the agreement in paying jury fees....what do you all think?

Hi Pauline, feedback is a very touchy subject, and a difficult task for promoters to manage well. So much of what we might say to an artist is subjective, and who are we to arbitrate taste? The same applies to jurors...they each have varied and unique experience, exposure, and therefore, perspectives. What none of us wants to find ourselves in the position of is telling an artist that their work isn't good enough, or high quality enough ... all subjective statements that smack of elitism. And it would be impossible to suggest alternative treatments for the artists work without being presumptuous. The biggest fear is that our input may make us sound stupid and unqualified, and also might elicit some form of retaliation. That's why I've always tried to be up front with the subjectivity aspects of jurying a show, and why I always tell rejected artists that with another jury, on another day, results could be very different.

There is another point that I would like to make about the artists responsibilities. Artists have to determine for themselves where in the spectrum of artistic accomplishment they want their work to exhibit (be). And they alone must assess the standards and requirements necessary to place at that level. That means ,the artist has to become very familiar with what's been done, and is being done by other artists at the desired level of accomplishment.

To make a generalization (and I probably shouldn't do that), what promoters and jurors see in rejected artists work is a disconnect between the standards of higher artistic accomplishment (whatever they may be) and that artists work. I'm obviously not talking about rejections for lousy booth shots... but, actually, the same awareness applies here as well.

And if the above doesn't make sense, then you can imagine how difficult a time we would have giving feedback of any value. T

Replies

Pauline Haas-Vaughn November 15, 2013 at 3:00pm

Thank you both for your feedback Larry and Tim. I think this is a little bit of a different situation in that (I believe) the promoters do the jurying themselves, but I do understand the inherant challenges of giving feedback as I regularly did this in my previous career. I also agree with you that artists have to determine for themselves where they best fit in based on the level and style of their work.
Tim Reilly November 15, 2013 at 1:48pm

Hi Pauline, feedback is a very touchy subject, and a difficult task for promoters to manage well. So much of what we might say to an artist is subjective, and who are we to arbitrate taste? The same applies to jurors...they each have varied and unique experience, exposure, and therefore, perspectives. What none of us wants to find ourselves in the position of is telling an artist that their work isn't good enough, or high quality enough ... all subjective statements that smack of elitism. And it would be impossible to suggest alternative treatments for the artists work without being presumptuous. The biggest fear is that our input may make us sound stupid and unqualified, and also might elicit some form of retaliation. That's why I've always tried to be up front with the subjectivity aspects of jurying a show, and why I always tell rejected artists that with another jury, on another day, results could be very different.

There is another point that I would like to make about the artists responsibilities. Artists have to determine for themselves where in the spectrum of artistic accomplishment they want their work to exhibit (be). And they alone must assess the standards and requirements necessary to place at that level. That means ,the artist has to become very familiar with what's been done, and is being done by other artists at the desired level of accomplishment.

To make a generalization (and I probably shouldn't do that), what promoters and jurors see in rejected artists work is a disconnect between the standards of higher artistic accomplishment (whatever they may be) and that artists work. I'm obviously not talking about rejections for lousy booth shots... but, actually, the same awareness applies here as well.

And if the above doesn't make sense, then you can imagine how difficult a time we would have giving feedback of any value. T
Larry Berman November 14, 2013 at 10:10pm

I'd pick up the phone and call. E-mail potentially leaves some unanswered questions.

Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100

This reply was deleted.