Share your "Artist Statement"

Like it or not, galleries do ask for artists' statements (they don't demand them at gunpoint), together with CVs and other background information. They use this material as a starting point for conversations with clients about artists' work. Since this may well lead to sales, which is in the interests of both the artist concerned and the gallery, most professional artists are more than happy to supply this material!

And what if your CV isn't up to scratch? Will galleries refuse work from someone with the 'wrong' school/college etc on their CV? Are you saying a self-taught photographer is not an artist without an artist's statement or a CV?

Sorry, but this all smacks of the hijacking of art by self-important graduates and pseudo intellectuals! How long until we see 'Art Idol' and the removal of artistic control from those who wish to show in galleries?

Maybe someone in this thread could post up some artist's statements from Henri Cartier Bresson, O. Winston Link or Ansel Adams...

To all those who are against the idea of a written statement; let's say you had gone to the trouble of printing, matting, and framing 40 prints and had them hanging in a gallery, museum, cafe, mall, or hog barn. Someone comes up to you and asks, "could you clarify something for me?" Would you stand mute, shake your head, and point at your images?

Concerning the Giants of photography; if they didn't write a statement, you can bet the curator made sure there was written material on the wall...would you want someone to speak for you? Besides! What's the big deal? If you don't want to read it, please avert your eye's. You can always concentrate on the images themselves.

Murray

Andy K said:

Maybe someone in this thread could post up some artist's statements from Henri Cartier Bresson, O. Winston Link or Ansel Adams...

Click to expand...

Here's one for you Andy, it's the first and last paragraphs from: Portfolio Three - Yosemite Valley - Sixteen Original Photographic Prints by Ansel Adams.

"Yosemite Valley, to me, is always a sunrise, a glitter of green and golden wonder in a vast edifice of stone and space. I know of no sculpture, painting, or music that exceeds the compelling spiritual command of the soaring shape of granite cliff and dome, of patina of light on rock and forest, and of the thunder and whispering of the falling, flowing waters. At first the colossal aspect may dominate; then we perceive and respond to the delicate and persuasive complex of nature."

"Both the grand and the intimate aspects of nature can be revealed in the expressive photograph. Both can stir enduring affirmations and discoveries, and can surely help the spectator in his search for identification with the vast world of natural beauty and wonder surrounding him - and help him comprehend man's continuing need for that world."

Pick up the book and give it a read...each portfolio is preceded by a statement, either by Ansel, or by Nancy and/or Beaumont Newhall.

Murray

I'm still thinking this over.

If I *had* to make a statement "explaining" a particular work, I would consider the work to be something of a failure. If the "statement" is to supply some sort of "justification" for what I have done ... forget it. I refuse to apologize. If *I* decide that there would be some benefit in changing the perception of a particular work ... I will do that without a request... we actually do that when we "title" our work.
If the Gallery wants something to artificially "pump me up" in the eyes of the beholder -- NO WAY. I DON'T do that on my own - and I take great exception to anyone doing that for me.

About "advertising" -- there might be some value to the Gallery in a cooperative attempt at writing advertising copy for "sales"'... fine with me, but I would suggest closer communication, close two-way with feedback, with those who write the copy. The content there will depend more on what the Gallery wants to say than what I have to say.

Personally, my most important motivation is NOT "to sell". As a matter of fact, the most irritating participants in the field of art, to ME, are those who manically cry, "Sell. sell, sell" .. as if that was the ONLY thing that mattered.

One has to define what is meant by an "Artist's Statement" .. If something like a description of MY philosophy is desired, they better brace themselves .. I can go on for *hours* as some of you who have read me here can well imagine. To explain that coherently in three words or less --- I think I'd rather try to explain man's reason for being ... which, come to think of it -- isn't so far removed...

I'm thinking of this scenario: I am walking down a street in the Gallery district of town. I see a Gallery with a sign: "Black and White Photography by Joe Mxtstyblkxks". On entering, there is NO "Artist's Statement" to be found, anywhere.
How does the absence of that statement affect me? Not much. Very little, as matter of fact. Probably as intensely its presence would - still not much.

MurrayMinchin said:

"Yosemite Valley, to me, is always a sunrise, a glitter of green and golden wonder in a vast edifice of stone and space. I know of no sculpture, painting, or music that exceeds the compelling spiritual command of the soaring shape of granite cliff and dome, of patina of light ..."

Click to expand...

Forgive the skepticism here ... but DAMN!! That sure doesn't sound like something Ansel Adams would write.

It's fluffy, but it's all Ansel...maybe he wrote it at the last minute on a hangover...

Murray

Here is Edward Weston's statement for the catalogue of his 1932 NY show, from page 246, The Daybooks of Edward Weston, #2, California:

"I have no unalterable theories to proclaim, no personal cause to champion, no symbolism to connote. Too often theories crystallize into academic dullness,- bind one in a straight jacket of logic,- of common, very common sense. To be directed or restrained by unyielding reason is to put doubt as a check on amazement, to question fresh horizons, and so hinder growth. It is essential to keep fluid by thinking irrationally, by challenging apparent evidence and accepted ideas,- especially one's own.

In a civilization severed from its roots in the soil - cluttered with nonessentials, blinded by abortive desires, the camera can be a way of self-development, a means to rediscover and identify oneself with all manifestation of basic form,- with nature, the source.

Fortunately, it is difficult to see too personally with the very impersonal lens-eye: through it one is prone to approach nature with desire to learn from, rather than impose upon, so that a photograph, done in this spirit, is not an interpretation, a biased opinion of what nature should be, but a revelation,- an absolute, impersonal recognition of the significance of facts.

The camera controlled by wisdom goes beyond obvious, statistical recording,- sublimating things seen into things known.

"Self expression" is usually an egotistical approach, a willful distortion, resulting in over or understatement. The direction should be toward a clearer understanding through intentional emphasis of the fundamental reality of things, so that the presentation becomes a synthesis of their essence."

That has a little more to chew on - especially the last paragraph!!!! I'd still rather read statements by real living photographers for exhibitions of their work...who spent the time to dig deep into who and what they are and could express it in words for others, or who could explain why they were unwilling to do so.

It comes to mind that maybe only those that have mounted a solo exhibit have really, truly, faced this question. For those that have, what words did you use...

Murray

Firstly, thanks to Murray for injecting a positive note by taking the trouble to dig out quotes by workers whom the other contributors to this thread may well admire.

To these other contributors I would say this:
I imagine you would acknowledge that in the course of your interest in photography, you have gone through a phase (maybe still are in a phase) where you tote your camera around when you have some spare time and shoot pictures accordingly to what spontaneously appeals to you. You then take the film/memory card home, process the images to the best of your ability and print the best of them.

This (quite rightly) gives you enjoyment and satisfaction. I have described my CV on another thread, basically although highly trained in the technical side of photography, I essentially started from scratch 10 years ago in trying to produce art images. I therefore most certainly went through the process I have just described, the culmination of which for many people is that they choose the "best of the best" images and may well have these accepted as single images in a camera club exhibition or even a nationwide or international exhibition.

This is a real achievement, and one of which a photographer can be proud, but it is important to understand that, when you have reached this stage, you are only just starting to make a coherent considered artistic statement (visual statement) and that a lot more thought, deliberation, soul-searching and ratcheting-up of standards is required before you can begin to call yourself an artist. This is where a written statement comes in, as part of the process of "finding your own voice" which I described earlier.

In a previous reply to "kjsphoto", I made a suggestion as to how to produce a simple artist's statement. I believe that anyone could produce a statement of this kind with just a little effort. There is no question of there being a "right" and "wrong" kind of CV - if someone writes "I am self-trained and have taken pictures in my spare time for the last X years", no one will laugh - the written statement is always secondary to the images. On the other hand, if you are not able to produce the very simple statement of the kind I have described, you are probably not ready to have a solo exhibition or have work accepted by a gallery.

You can call me impossibly arrogant if you like, but I am a professional (my primary activity is writing, secondary is photography) and professionals are supposed to know what they are doing and be worth the money they are asking. Any professional will have already traveled a long road of self-scrutiny (which never ends) and will work on the principle that, if they have any doubt about what they are doing, they will work on it in private to get it up to a standard where they feel they can offer it to clients. I do not use the word "amateur" in any derogatory way, amateurs are people who do things because they love them, and good luck to them, but the factors I have described represent a very real difference between amateurs and professionals.

Regards to all - accentuate the positive!

David

David...when you said that you weren't afraid to put your head on a block you weren't kidding!! You totally fleshed out my thoughts when I said, "It comes to mind that only those that have mounted a solo exhibit have really, truly faced this question."

Maybe others will join the "Shaman" and share their statements, or share statements by others that have moved them,

Murray

David H. Bebbington said:

On the other hand, if you are not able to produce the very simple statement of the kind I have described, you are probably not ready to have a solo exhibition or have work accepted by a gallery...

Click to expand...

If an artist's work is good enough I believe any even half decent gallery would beg to display work, regardless of whether it was accompanied by a few paragraphs of waffle.

David H. Bebbington said:

.. but the factors I have described represent a very real difference between amateurs and professionals.

Click to expand...

You missed the main difference I have always noticed between amateurs and professionals, and this is in every field of human endeavour, amateurs do it for the love, professionals do it for the money.
Where in most fields this is of little importance, say in sport for instance, in art, personally I find it a little distasteful. Fair enough if an artist does get paid for their work good luck to them, but to deliberately try to 'create' for money?
When I am out making photographs, how much a particular shot might earn me never enters the equation. I think it would be a major distraction and disrupt my thought train. I photograph what appeals to me, not what I think has the biggest £££ signs.

Andy K said:

If an artist's work is good enough I believe any even half decent gallery would beg to display work, regardless of whether it was accompanied by a few paragraphs of waffle.

Click to expand...

Andy, I think the point has been reached where we simply need to agree to differ. Allow me to say, however, in parting, that the above scenario SIMPLY DOES NOT HAPPEN!

Regards,

David

and professionals are supposed to know what they are doing and be worth the money they are asking.

OTOH, there are other professions or professionals that do not require to have an explanation of their chosen field. It goes without saying that if you are going to charge money, you should know what you are doing. As a chemist not once was I asked by an employer why I chose to be a chemist, nor did I hear any engineer I worked with tell me they chose engineering because they felt at one with nature when they heard the gentle whisper of the slide rule....or now a days the click of the keyboard....

It seems to me that there is this notion that being a photographer is "glamorous" or that it is so easy that we should explain why our work has any value and as such we should give "meaning" to our efforts by trying to explain what we are doing.

Every time I am asked for an artist stamtement I simply write a little blurb abut me and why I chose to leave the sciences in favor of photography. Not once have I attempted to explain my photography, if my prints are not strong enough to stand by themselves without explanation then I have failed in what I want to do.

IMO an artist stament is similar to a comany's mission statemnt, a bunch of BS designed to mask the real intention, a company wants to make money and hopefully have a happy customer, a photographer wants to make interesting or at least appealing photographs that people will enjoy and hopefully buy.

Bottom line for me, an artist stament is a gimmick played by the art and gallery world that should have have much bearing, or be something we shoudl spend too much time worrying about. I have yet to go to a gallery opening and see people gathered around the artist stament discussing it..

Jorge, I'm talking about creative professions. Consider, if you will, the world of TV chat shows and arts programs. Every time you see an actor, author or artist on one of these programs, it's because the PR department of the film studio, publishing house or gallery concerned has set up the appearance on the show because they are about to release some new work and want to provide some background insights into this. PR professionals would not do this unless they knew that these personal appearances, where the "creative" person concerned explains their motivation and feelings about their work, are vital to make the work a success.

I have been a "creative" (in the advertising/PR industry sense of the word, meaning the opposite of a "suit") for nearly 40 years. It has become obvious from the postings to this thread that I inhabit a different world from most of the other contributors, who may well believe that products sell themselves, that sales promotion is vulgar and cheap, and that art is imponderable and unknowable and that any attempts to quantify or understand it are ridiculous, deluded, pretentious and doomed to failure.

I have stuck at this thread in an attempt to demonstrate that there is another way of looking at things, although I must say I am getting really bored with it now. Let anyone who wants to believe that the best way to make art is some vague directionless "purist" approach with no attempt at self-analysis and certainly with no suggestion of anything as filthy and disgusting as self-promotion. I rest my case - thanks, everyone, and goodnight!

David

David H. Bebbington said:

Andy, I think the point has been reached where we simply need to agree to differ. Allow me to say, however, in parting, that the above scenario SIMPLY DOES NOT HAPPEN!

Click to expand...

I'll allow you to say it. Allow me to respond -

To the "Ultimate Guru on Top of the Mountain": Yes, it DOES happen... more often than not - much more often.

You are assuming that other professions are not "creative". Strangely enough you will find that there are as many photographers who are also acomplished in the "hard" siences as there are "artists" who are not.

But you make my point exactly, the actor or artist that makes an appearance is only doing so to promote their work and create some interest on something that should not require it if it is good, and most people see this for what it is. Succesful movies and books are so because of word of mouth, not because the artist made an appearance. ALthough it does not hurt, it certainly does not make or break the work, what does is the content.

If you are looking at an artist statement as a PR piece designed to promote and hopefully aid to sell your work, that is all well and good. But IMO it should not be something to worry so much about it, nor should it be something to loose sleep over it.

It seems to me you are getting "bored" with this thread because many people here see an artist stament as what it is, a piece of fluff that is required to play the "art" game. Certainly you are putting words into our mouths when you say we have a directionless "purist" approach with no self analysis. Nobody that chooses photography over a succesfull career on another field does so with out it, it is precesely because of the self analysis that we know what are the important things. Even so, the lack of self analysis does not preclude the lack of good work, some actors and writers are some of the most shallow people and egotistical people you can find, yet they manage to produce good work...no?

Jorge said:

IMO an artist stament is similar to a comany's mission statemnt, a bunch of BS designed to mask the real intention,...
Bottom line for me, an artist stament is a gimmick played by the art and gallery world...

I have yet to go to a gallery opening and see people gathered around the artist stament discussing it..

Click to expand...

My sentiments, exactly. I wish I had written that.


BTW ... The comment that INFERS that we do not know what we are talking about, because we do not "quote" has not gone unnoticed.. How about:

"You see, I'm not interested in mediocrity in photography. I'm not interested in selling cat shit to dogs. I just want to do my own thing. If people like my work, all the better. If they don't, too bad."

- Ralph Gibson, New York, 1992

Or... (One of my favorites):

"A photographers main instrument is his eyes. Strange as it may seem, many photographers choose to use the eyes of another photographer, past or present, instead of their own. Those photographers are blind."

- Manuel Alvarez Bravo - Mexico city, 1986


"One cannot call themselves "Artists" unless/ until they ... (add any set of requirements here).
Why not? Anyone can call themselves any damn thing they want to, as far as I'm concerned. To deny them that is to "sit in judgement over them".
-- So someone describes themselves as an "Artist" and they don't deserve ???) the title. So what? - Is that supposed to have some sort of BAD effect on me? - I have news - it doesn't.

WOW...nobody can accuse photographers of having flacid convictions!

The spirit of this thread wasn't to look down on anybody, to belittle anybody, or to suggest that only real artists write statements. Because I live where I have no peers (people who take their photography SERIOUSLY) I have nobody to discuss photography with; therefore I write as a means to clarify my thoughts, and to pose arguments that force myself to be damn sure I'm on the right path. A statement is just like that...a defining of ones work in words...or ironically, like my statement from my last show, a reasoned explanation why I didn't want to define my work for others!

I still want to read some statements, if anybody is now brave enough to belly-crawl themselves out of the trenches and risk getting their butt's burnt with all the flame throwers out there! If you haven't tried to write one, even for just your own eye's, you should give it a go...you may learn something of yourself...

Murray

I'd be happy to submit the last two statements I wrote ... One for a Solo Show in a well respected Gallery, and one to accompany a submission to a Group Show - actually a "juried competition" ... Yeah, I participated even though I DO NOT believe in "Juried Shows"....

1. "I was born in Beverly Massachusetts, July 20, 1934. I have been fascinated and awestruck by the beauty in this World ever since."

2. "I came. I saw. I photographed."

These are actual, true - "statements".

I don't want to seem "mean" or "vindictive" - but I really DO NOT care if anyone approves of them or not.

P.S. "To be sure I'm on the right path" ... ??? Oh - If only ... But I'm the only one who knows what the "right" path is.

- To KNOW?? -- Be absolutely SURE??? NO! Heavens, NO!! - Where is the fun, the adventure, the "Discovery of bright sparks of joy" in that??

MurrayMinchin said:

I still want to read some statements, if anybody is now brave enough to belly-crawl themselves out of the trenches and risk getting their butt's burnt with all the flame throwers out there!

Click to expand...

Murray, no-one here is flaming anyone. What this is, it seems to me, is a debate on artist statements and whether they hold a valid place in the artistic process. A few of us do not believe they do, because we disagree does not make our replies 'flames'.

Remember, you yourself said in the very first post of this thread "I'm also curious to see if they spawn any debates!"

Believe me, compared to some threads I have seen, this one is extremely amicable!

Here a quick one from me:

I like to capture what moves me and make photos that can move other people. Constantly moving and trying all styles to gain knowledge and experience. I do not believe in rules, so I experiment a lot to see if I can add something extraordinary to the final product to enhance the message.
My photos are made to show my view solely; my view upon what is around me.

I do not want to show reality, and if reality is captured it is NOT intentioned...

Greetings Morten

Ed Sukach said:

... To the "Ultimate Guru on Top of the Mountain" ...

Click to expand...

A brief foray to see if the volcanic ash is cool enough to walk on!

First, may I say that I do like the above title - is it honorary or is some property attached to it? If the latter, please forward directions on how I can take possession of this - I've always wanted my own mountain!

Secondly, I think it has been established to everyone's satisfaction that some people totally reject the idea of writing an artist's statement. As far as I can see, no one has a problem with this attitude. Furthermore, some people think that other artists' statements which they have read are meaningless, pretentious and a waste of time. No problem here, either - I've read plenty of these myself.

BUT - and please read this carefully! - it does seem a little unrealistic to deny the role of advertising, PR and sales promotion in the modern world. Whether this SHOULD be of any significance is another question, but I quite honestly do not understand how it is possible to ignore the fact that, for example, movies which do not do good business right from the start are pulled from exhibition in no more than a couple of weeks, before any word-of-mouth effect can take place, that (particularly in the US) TV shows which do not hit the expected ratings are canned overnight, that music groups whom accountants feel are not economically worthwhile (for example, because their albums sell "only" 50,000 copies) have their contracts terminated ASAP, etc.

You may feel this is not right - I certainly do - but it is the way things are, and the only way you can ignore this situation as an artist is by deciding to work totally non-commercially (and there is a difference of view here. Some people think that working non-commercially means MORE freedom. To me, it means less, particularly in terms of the time I can devote to producing work). I also feel it is strange to regard commercial aspirations as antithetical to artistic expression. I do not regard my photography primarily as a "get rich quick" opportunity - I would be utterly stupid if I did - but I DO produce work because primarily it interests me but ALSO because I want to communicate it to others, and I am more than happy to do anything which may facilitate this process - including writing an artist's statement!

Regards,

David

You seem to be the only one hung up on advertisement or lack of it. An artist statement is not PR or advertisment. If you pay B&W magazine for an ad, you will not have your artist statement there, you will have one of your pictures and a small blurb. You want to maximize your advertisement dollars and you do this with a great picture, not some BS about how you feel one with the universe every time you take a picture.

You seem to assume a lot of things and are actually responding to thing nobody here has said. So please read this carefully:
- nobody is against advertisiment or saying that we choose a "purist" approach.

I do know where you got this notion that some of us are against advertisement, all we have said is we think an artitst statement is a necessary evil if you want to play the art game, bit it certainly should not be what defines your photographic work.

Bottom line, if your photography sucks, no amount of flowery words will make it good....OTOH if your photgraphy is mediocre, but you have gift for art speak and promotion, you might be the next best thing in photography....

Nobody here denies the power of self promotion, but do not equate self promotion with an artist statement, it is not the same thing.

I see an artists statement as something that has to be tailored to your audience. A statement that accompanies your work to a gallery owner for review may be quite a bit different then what goes on the wall as a preface to a show.

I personally find the simple ones to be the most effective. By this I mean they contain some biographical and historical data and a paragraph or two about the photographer's motivation for choosing the subject matter displayed in that exhibition.

David's little template just about fits what I like to see on the wall with a little more info about the photographer.

I'll give an example of a little blurb I used to accompany some images I had up at a local bookstore a couple years ago:

Hidden Stories: 8 photographic images by James Chinn

I have spent my whole life living on the Great Plains of Nebraska, my roots run deep as a descendent of 3 generations of farmers and pioneers.

I have been fortunate enough to be able to travel extensively around the US and the world, but Prarie sensibilities always bring me back home.

On the Great Plains, beauty is not grandeur, but subtleties that must be sought out. The never ending sky, the smell of the March breeze that signals Spring, the great migration of birds across the vast expanse of flat water and the decaying structures that remind us that we exist here only by the mercy of nature.

These eight images represent some of the subtle beauty that I find here. The abandoned machine, now prarie sculpture. A church, its town disappeared with its last parishoner in the ground. The ubiquitous cottonwood tree, the cuts in the branches and rotting ropes testament to children who would climb and swing, now grown, moved to who knows where.

I hope regardless of where you are from, you find pleasure in viewing these mages.

Peace,

Jim Chinn

This is an approximation as I can't find the exact copy, but it gives some idea of how I feel that the statement that goes with a "show" needs to be specific to the subject matter.

The Shawshank Redemption.