Competition in Art

There is naturally a lot of competition in the arts. Artists compete with one another for sales, jobs and/or grants in addition to opportunities to show and display their work. Commercial galleries compete for sales, art buyers and patrons, and for the right to represent artists and work that appeal to their audience. Non-profit galleries and institutions compete for grants and funding. And everyone competes for publicity, reviews and other opportunities to promote themselves.

Don't get me wrong, competition is healthy because it encourages us to strive for more and to work harder but, all in all, a lot of artists and institutions seem to be fighting with one another to divvy up what opportunities, monies, patronage and press coverage is available. Constructive criticism is good because it causes us to reassess what is available, what purpose is served and whether or not we meet our objectives, but dissing something just because it is different is counterproductive.

Some people have voiced that they think the art world should be more limited so that there are less things competing for "a slice of the pie". (Chuck views this mentality as myopic because it focuses on solely the "pie" already available rather than seeking or creating a bigger "pie".) Perhaps some things should be reassessed and scrutinized that are unsuccessful at meeting their own goals and objectives. But I think that different things play vastly different roles and that individual artists, galleries and institutions need to determine where they fit and be true to their visions rather than imposing their needs and desires on everyone. I don't think that everything should be judged on the same terms because those terms may or may not apply. Not all of us have the same goals.

As an artist, I recognize that some opportunities have more to offer me than others. But I still think that the others are important and need to be fostered. Not everything has to exist within the limited scope of where my work fits and what my goals are because my work is not indicative of everything that the art community has to offer. Who am I to say that I am so much more important that all opportunities and events should sync up with what I'm doing? And yet, a lot of people fall into these judgments, thusly fostering more competition than collaboration.

I have spoken time and time again about celebrating diversity in the arts and offering a wide range of opportunities for artists, from low-key cooperatives and grassroots organizations focusing on emerging local artists to nationally-acclaimed institutions showing internationally-recognized works. I strongly feel that we should encourage and foster as many different opportunities as possible so that artists of all levels working in a diverse range of media have someplace to exhibit and so that there is a breadth of venues and experiences available to appeal to the general public.

Simply put, sometimes competition can get in the way by causing us to see things in very constricted ways that suit only our visions and needs. But there is so much out there that we all have to offer. I most certainly won't agree with or like everything that I see, and that's okay. I don't have to like and agree with everything in order to try to celebrate the scope of what is going on and to encourage freedom of expression.