AN INTERVIEW WITH GEORGE WALKER


CHRISTINE
What number of jurors “work best” in judging a show?

GEORGE
For me..... I like three.....that makes two opposing opinions and one person to make a decision between the two. It is also a good idea to have an odd number when it comes to that tie breaking vote.

CHRISTINE
What do Jurors look for in jurying a show?

GEORGE
Different Jurors look for different things. For example, a conceptual artist would seek strong concepts whereas a technical realist is looking for strong technique and a designer...well you get the picture. A jury should try and be true to the spirit of the award and what the award has been established for. Continuity of the intended exhibition is also an important concern.

CHRISTINE
Could you tell me specifically what you looked for in the "Celebration" show? How did you go about trying to connect the pieces to the spirit of that show?

GEORGE
I was looking for something that said "celebration" in a general way. I didn't want a literal translation or a religious one....I felt the word had to encompass a spirit of joy in the broadest sense.

CHRISTINE
How do you decide initially to include or exclude certain paintings?

GEORGE
At first, works can be excluded on the basis of lack of context to the nature of the award. Weak work is easy to disqualify because it lacks integrity and flare. But if you have to give one award and you have a hundred works to jury, you may only reject half of them based on this initial viewing. After that it becomes difficult to eliminate work. The dynamic of the jury plays an important part after this point. Their concerns about culture, art and originality become important to identifying works of merit. The continuity of the exhibition that is to accompany the award winning piece is also important if you wish to have a show that has meaning.

CHRISTINE
What are some of your concerns about culture and art, and how did that influence your jurying of "Celebration"?

GEORGE
That's a difficult question. I haven't the space to write about all of my concerns about art and culture and this would certainly take us off the topic of juried exhibitions. It is true though that my concerns about culture and art have a profound affect subconsciously on how I perceive the intent of the artists involved. There is also the whole history of art galleries and museums that influence what I expect to find and what the public expects. Let me give you my initial impressions of the work submitted to “Celebration”. I felt (and I may be wrong) that most of the work submitted to the show was not created specifically for this exhibition. I thought that the artists entering the show would create new work that addressed the theme of the exhibition. In this respect I was disappointed. Perhaps I expect too much?


CHRISTINE
How do pieces qualify as art?

GEORGE
Art can be defined in very broad or narrow terms. In antiquity the philosophy of art was that it was anything made by human hands as opposed to nature. Our culture has a narrow view that art is somehow a transcendence above the average capabilities of human potential, that art is the apex of human expression and can only be executed and realized by a few exceptional individuals. For me there is no absolute in art and what qualifies as art today may not tomorrow. Art is a subjective and personal thing that confronts aesthetics and the human condition. Art is as different as we are individual and what qualifies as art is not always art


CHRISTINE
So, when you actually jury a show, do you go in open to having your own subjective definition of "art" challenged?

GEORGE
Sometimes you might find work that is challenging and you have to be open to that. I try to be open to new ideas and approaches.


CHRISTINE
"What qualifies as art is not always art". Can you explain that a little further?

GEORGE
It is like Duchamp's 'wheel' or Warhol’s “soup cans”. The Gallery or museum creates the spectacle of what is art. Often outside of the confines of the institution or gallery the work is no longer art but something else. The wheel becomes merely a wheel and the soup can one of millions of soup cans. The art gallery raises the value of objects by the very act of displaying them.


CHRISTINE
Why do people see the same piece of art differently?

GEORGE
We process perception through the filter of our own experiences and sometimes we are surprised to find others who have captured what we could never say in words. We interpret our perceptions in context to our understanding of what we believe the work to mean.


CHRISTINE
Why does what the artist intended differ from what the viewer sees?

GEORGE
Sometimes the artist communicates their idea fluently to an audience that understands and other times it is a message created for an audience that does not exist yet. Marshall McLuhan the media philosopher said it best when he said, “ The function of the artist in correcting the unconscious bias of perception in any given culture can be betrayed if he merely repeats the bias of the culture instead of readjusting it. In this sense the role of art is to create the means of perception by creating counter environments that can open the door of perception to people otherwise numbed in a non-perceivable situation.” This question brings to mind a friend of mine who is a painter. He is colour blind and yet he paints with colours that he finds vibrate with hue. Yet we may not be able to understand what he sees if we are not colour blind...still we can interpret meaning into the work through our own vision. It is not lost to us merely because we are not experiencing the same physical challenges.


CHRISTINE
This view could be, and often is, seen as being arrogant. something like "you don't like it because you don't understand it, if you were only as enlightened as I am, you would see how great it is."


GEORGE
Yes......and I would agree that it seems to be arrogant on the surface. But let's compare other forms of knowledge. Jazz music is often misunderstood because some people can't hear the subtle qualities and technical nuances in its playing. Some people listen to Sonny Rollins and they just hear noise. Van Gogh's work was rejected by many people and even burned by some who thought it was trash. Now some people think he was the greatest painter who ever lived. The pioneers of the invention of flight were also thought to be arrogant and foolish and yet they continued their experiments and now we take air travel for granted. Alexander Graham Bell made machines that you would laugh at now. We cannot expect that everyone will understand and appreciate the arts and sciences. Even our laws are arrogant! You know the old maxim "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". Every profession has its accessible and inaccessible levels of understanding. We learn and we move forward to new understanding just as Plato described in “the Cave”.


CHRISTINE
Why might the public disagree with the jurors choice?

GEORGE
Public opinion is what people think that other people think . All ideas and art and much of human knowledge is subject to the filter of public opinion. For every ten in agreement there are another ten in equal disagreement. If it is mediocrity that is aspired to then a public vote on what is art will suffice. Any artist that has created public art will tell you that if there is one thing the public cannot do is come to an agreement on what is or is not art. That is why I think that they invented juries, because it is easier to blame someone if you can name collaborators. It may be a good thing that they disagree. Great works of art and important exhibitions have never been popular in their time. Artists who are always selected in juried shows and sell their work effortlessly should be wary. Rejection may be a sign of a greater originality and a more challenging aesthetic that the public may not be ready for yet.


CHRISTINE
Why do jurors disagree among themselves and how do you work through your differences?

GEORGE
A vote usually helps break it. My favorite pieces are usually the ones that are controversial because they challenge and push the boundaries.


CHRISTINE
Did the winning "Celebration" piece "challenge and push the boundaries?"

GEORGE
Good question....what do you think? For some people it would be seen as just another modernist painting. Only time can tell who and what pushes boundaries.


CHRISTINE
How do you finally decide on a winner?

GEORGE
Perhaps it is the mediocrity of the best works that become the winners. They are the works that we can all agree on and in being so they may not be the work that is truly challenging, new and original. It depends on the jury....but...every now and then I think we pick a winner.

In conclusion I would have to say that juries are a changeable lot. I might choose different work on Monday than I would on Friday. No two juries would pick the same kind of show and therefore it all comes down to the mood of the moment. No one should feel offended or inadequate as an artist or person just because their work wasn't chosen for an exhibition. My advice to all artists is keep entering exhibitions and competitions as a matter of practise. If you don't have a pile of rejection letters, then you're not working hard enough. Many artists like Mendelson Joe have made a career out of their rejection letters. When Scott Watson rejected his work for an exhibition at the Vancouver Art Gallery, Watson phrased it, "I think your work is really awful and cannot offer you an exhibition here." Mendelson published the letter with his own comments about Watson’s gonads and was immediately offered venues for his work by numerous curators at other galleries. The point is simply that rejection can be a form of flattery and that if your work is loved by all and hated by none then perhaps you're on the wrong track.


CHRISTINE
This could get a bit confusing. If three of you can agree that my piece of art is the winning piece, perhaps I should be disappointed. Perhaps I should be striving not to win the award!


GEORGE
Perhaps!




George Walker