REGAINING OUR BEARINGS: A Challenge for Art Judges 

”Painting did not die, but was driven from the art scene into the background by the international mafia of art…These are the people whose credo in art is—that which is good, is bad; and that which is bad, is good. These are the people who turned such terms as mastery, virtuosity, and brilliance of technique into swear words.” Sergi Bongart—famous Russian impressionist—“It’s Time to Call Things by Their Proper Names”

Recently I received this letter from a reader and fellow artist:

“Your words hit the mark with me, as all my life I have done the "good enough" routine. I was feeling really down because I had been rejected from our Art Center's Juried Competition. When I saw what got IN to the show, it really made me more depressed, but as you say, people's tastes (or lack thereof) are all over the map. The thing I fear when I see some of the works that were allowed into our show is that it alienates the public even more from "Art" than they already are. People always say, "I don't know anything about art" and when they see what supposedly knowledgeable judges have chosen to encourage, they will turn away from visiting and participating in the wonderful arts programs. I was a high school art teacher and having had to grade many student creations, I held to standards of creativity, aesthetics, and what I called "quality work" using the guidelines of the elements and principles of art.” Sandy Bennett

In my own travels over the last few months, I’ve been able to see two national art shows, a change for me since I abandoned art shows about 9 years ago due to the judging. (When the framed newspaper won, I realized the judges and I were approaching art is vastly different ways.) Let me just say that my curiosity took me to see how shows are currently being judged. Having occasion to evaluate art on an ongoing basis, the subject is of great interest to me.

In one show, the judges bestowed the top award to the artist that demonstrated the lowest level of technical ability. The show followed the lead of the “establishment art” crowd that has hijacked fine art for the last century. They reached their pinnacle between 1950 and the 1980’s. These people believe that great art springs from the untrained eye and the more outlandish the idea behind the art, the better it is received. Those universal principles that have governed the creation of fine art throughout time have been abandoned.

The judges of the second show also bestowed awards in a way not commensurate with the level of expertise demonstrated by the artist. If they had, the distribution of awards would have been much different. Organized by a group outside of what normally would be called “establishment art”, the judging, nevertheless, reflected a disregard for an objective standard, mastery and aesthetics. This group should have known better.

Sadly, the title “Authority” does not make one knowledgeable or proficient when it comes to evaluating art. Obviously, authority does not mean the judges know the standards nor does it give them the ability to apply those standards fairly. When defending their choices, these authorities appeal to the “subjective nature of art”.

Style is the subjective voice with which an artist speaks. It is that quality which makes the message unique when a thousand others may be saying the same thing. The principles that make for quality art, things like line, value, unity, balance, composition, light, etc., are universal, regardless of style. Without holding tenaciously to them, all evaluation becomes arbitrary.

Most artists have resigned themselves to the notion that “this is just the way things are, so why fight it.” Many are so discouraged by the process they walk away instead of risking further hurt. A few with less noble responses prefer to offer a silent “finger” to the judging. Only by speaking up can one truly comprehend the brunt of the arrogance of the “authority”.

Authorities dismissing objective standards when judging art end up marginalizing themselves. The public is too smart and knows better. Arbitrary judging and celebrating buffoonery only passes for so long. It soon rubs off and those promoting it become the baffoons.

While the public says “I know nothing about art”, the fact remains: our culture is immersed in art. Raphael’s cherubs, Vermeer’s girl with a pearl earring and DaVinci’s proportion of man are easily recognized by the masses. Great art is everywhere and the public as a whole is developing a deeper and broader sophistication in their artistic tastes. Most people do not have an academic understanding of fine art, but they steadfastly spend their hard earned dollars on great art.

Museum curators, who previously hid the works of the great masters in their basements or sold them cheaply are acquiring and displaying them once more. It is but a matter of time before the rest of the art establishment and the judges everywhere will have to educate themselves on the universal principles behind superb art and apply them evenly.

I firmly believe history will recognize the great artists of our day, whether the judges and curators in these dark times do or not. Those who conscientiously pursue knowledge of the universal principles of art and apply them in their craft or in their judging ultimately will be held in high regard.

“During the 20th century an elite group has established itself as a sort of priesthood...I was told by a contemporary art curator that 'talent had had its turn for centuries...'' " Robert Bateman on the art establishment