Ethics in Art: ARTPRIZE Grand Rapids

By BARCODE 2x

The world's largest cash prize for art has just finished its voting period. On Wednesday September 30, all votes had to be in for ten finalists, all competing for a grand prize of $250,000. The winner is decided by us.

Grand Rapid's ArtPrize is the brainchild of Rick DeVos, of the wealthy Grand Rapids DeVos family. His interest, he has said in an interview with Kurt Anderson of Studio 360, is to explore the possibilities of technology, social networking and art. Artists rally fans via Facebook and other online resources, and compete for votes. The founder wanted to take the curator out of the picture, and let the public interact directly with the art. Or as directly as possible, via the internet.

Art is installed throughout the city, in churches, malls, smallk businesses, gyms, as well as traditional galleries. Voters are encouraged to see the work up close and in person, to experience it physically before voting. But it is not required. The artist need not be locally based, nor even be present for the competition.

Artists are able to sell their work, as long as it stays up through the end of the event. ArtPrize does not participate in sales. Which limits the artists' distribution, but on the other hand, the artists need not bother paying commission fees to the organization.

This festival is larger and more elaborate than other art fairs, and no doubt is an example of 'Cool City' theory at work. The Cool City initiative is based upon the idea that art and culture are good for community prosperity. Art and cultural institutions bring people to town, where they will no doubt spend a little money on lunch, etc. Take our a2ethics Resource of the Month, for instance. The Ann Arbor Public Library is renowned for its size and breadth of resources. It is a cultural/educational institution that draws people to the downtown area, and in the process, these patrons support downtown and local businesses.

So the communities benefit. But not always the artists. Art fairs require entry fees to show work, as well as hidden fees for rental of equipment, and etc. Artists pay their way, and while they can get great exposure, make sales, receive commissions, etc., they are prey to vandalism, and the elements. Rainstorms and other harsh weather have plagued Ann Arbor art fairs in years past, blowing paintings down entire city blocks. ArtPrize has made it clear that they are not responsible for damage done to art.

And how about greater damage to art? Philosophical damage, aesthetical damage, and corruption of art altogether?

When artists compete for a prize, the art no doubt is reshaped to fit the rules of the contest. ArtPrize contestants develop fanbases and attract audience through social networking. Online votes are cast, and therein lies another issue. Online voting is easy to rig. Fans can vote multiple times, and while some safeguards exist to block voter fraud, there is often an overwhelming number of votes. The margin for error is huge. No computer system, nor any human supervisor, can accurately keep count of votes.

The art is corrupted by the same popularity-contest principle of social networking. Voters are effectively determining the value of art. The value of art will always be subjective, but in this case, there is confusion between information and experience. The problem with social networking is that users often interpret their online activities as real experience. Frequent users are isolated into virtual worlds. And despite the contest's efforts to bring patrons to downtown Grand Rapids, the online experience is still bound to be more popular and accessible.

Some artists are internet-savvy. Some are not. Some understand marketing and know how to work the system and make the sale. Some are too busy making the art to bother collecting fans.

The grand prize itself is also way out of proportion; $250,000 is a huge sum for a piece of art. And when the art ranges from music to circus performance to furniture to the release of 100,000 paper airplanes from a rooftop, there is a problem developing. Viewers get a broad view of the many media of art in the world, but what they choose to vote for is not based on quality, or value, or usefulness, or any other thing we might pay for. The vote is cast, essentially, based largely on virtual reasons.

There is a difference between art and consumer art. All are art. None of us can judge what is and is not art. But within the art world, lines are firmly drawn. There is a difference between a painting of a fruit bowl, and an actual bowl. The painting cannot be eaten, and has no practical function. But the actual fruit bowl, in the moment it is used to contain actual fruit in someone's home, is a mere household object. No matter what went into the creation of the bowl, it is the painting that carries more value as actual art. When an object exists only to be viewed and examined, it is art. Take a painting and lay it on top of four legs, it can become a coffee table, and its artistic value is diminished. Form and function are distinct and separate virtues.

In ArtPrize Grand Rapids, however, the bowl and the painting are competing for the same dollar. The artist who wins will be able to live off that large sum of money for a while, perhaps even long enough to create their life's work. The greatest painting, or the greatest fruit bowl, that they have ever made. This kind of huge prize could afford them a better life. It could help them expand what they do into a larger market. It could afford them better facilities, more expensive materials, and richer, more elaborate art will spring from their newfound wealth and prosperity. It will, for a moment, catapult them into the spotlight of the art world. But outside of Grand Rapids, the artist may struggle to gain traction. They may be the winner of the world's largest prize for art, but they are now under a new kind of scrutiny. Will the rest of the art world take them seriously?

Marketing and social networking are arts all their own. Advertising and word-of-mouth are available to many Americans, for free. What makes one product soar above another in sales, is not based on artistic value, but on the elusive virtual experience that it provides for the consumer. The experience is what matters. And the prize goes to the one with the elusive magic to catch the public buzz. Marketing is a dark art. The product is really irrelevant in this context. It may as well be a blank canvas. No fruit, no bowl, no image at all. Only the idea of it, and the artist's willingness to hawk it online.