Page 1

diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

The Zeitgeist Open Exhibition 2012

1


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Artwork by Rosalind Davis collated from some of the notes made on the selection day of the Zeitgeist Open.

2


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Contents: Foreword and Introduction...4-6 Selectors statements....7-10 Press Release and images...11-12 Artists Work.....pages 13-54 Images of opening night....pages 55-58 Press........pages 59-63 Archive.....pages 65-68 Footnote....page 69

3


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Foreword from Zeitgeist Open founders, Annabel Tilley & Rosalind Davis: Long before we embarked upon this new project to create a really open Open, - and one that would be transparent and ethical - Annabel and I had several conversations about why opens are increasingly viewed so negatively by artists and how we could challenge those negativities. This was the seed of what became The Zeitgeist Open. Earlier this year, we spent a month researching other open competitions, and debating how and where they succeeded and failed. As artists ourselves we considered two points of view: our own experience of taking part in open competitions in the past, as well as my own involvement in having run Core Gallery, and its Open for two years, 2009-11. Our reason for re-inventing the Open was the parallel ideology of wanting to provide longterm opportunities for artists – where they felt valued - as well as finding a variety of independent methods to sustain our own arts organisation. It was a fascinating and heated debate, with Annabel coming down persuasively on the side of just one image, and this being shown anonymously to the selectors. We both felt passionately, and without question, that to be fair to all the artists who had put their faith in us and taken the time and money to enter, that there should be no pre: selection, and that the selectors (who are paid) would come together to look at all the images. For Annabel and I, and indeed, all the selectors, the idea of being together in one room with copious amounts of coffee, discussion and debate formed a vital part of choosing the work. To be truly transparent, we felt it needed to be vibrant and social experience where each of the 557 images had a chance to impress five people. We also debated the place of an artists CV in an Open, and agreed on

4


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

its irrelevance to the project of choosing engaging, maverick, high quality work. The Zeitgeist Open is all about the work itself, not an artists background or experience. What we came up in the end was solid: anonymity, one image, no cv, no pre-selection and no art celebrities. Our overwhelming desire was to create an Open exhibition opportunity, open to all, yet still emphasising the importance of the work with intelligent artists making educated, critical choices about the submissions. Alongside ourselves, we asked selectors who we felt held a critical position in terms of valuing artists. Through their membership of Market Projects David Kefford and Alistair Gentry constantly review and expose the unethical nature of some so-called opportunities for artists. David Kefford is also a director and one of the co-founders of Aid&Abet, Cambridge, which for us meant we were aligning ourselves with a critically-aware artist-led space in another region. For our fifth selector, we were privileged to have the gravitas, generosity and critical eye of Graham Crowley, a respected artist, and former Professor of Painting at the RCA, who has had a 40-year career in the art world. We were astonished by the overwhelming response of 557 artists applying. This was twice as many as had applied before in the previous two years of running an open, and also amounted to an unbelievable 191 artists applying on the last day. We had pleas for extensions, and pleas for waiving of fees - all of which were not allowed. On the final day, Annabel sat in Hastings, while I sat in London, both tirelessly answering questions from 7am until midnight, while entries slowly but surely arrived in the ZAP inbox. Holly Simpson our assistant (who we also pay) spent 4 days converting the j-pegs into anonymous entries for our selection day with the judges. The selection day itself was an intense, generous, critical, honest, beautiful, and eye-opening event. It was a profound and meaningful experience to select artists for the show, but it was also difficult to let other artists go. We felt an incredible responsibility for those whom had entered. Therefore, a carefully considered heartfelt 'rejection' email was created, attempting to avoid the trite and clichĂŠd phrasing we have all experienced.And we were pleasantly surprised to receive several thank you emails for our endeavour. For those artists that have been selected this year for the first Zeitgeist Open, we value their contribution and generosity in lending us their work. And we look forward to building relationships with all of them. Ten artists will be selected from the 41 for another group exhibition in 2013. In terms of the Zeitgeist philosophy, Annabel and I are interested in longevity and critical success. We are ambitious for the artists we 5


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

work with. We want to support them to aim high. These artists are part of our story and reputation now. We have mutual high expectations. I already know that is going to be an additional challenge and I expect there to be many more enjoyable debates with Annabel; not just about the future of the open, in general, but how we continue at Zeitgeist to develop ways of working with the new and promising artists we encounter on our adventures. Zeitgeist Arts Projects London - November 2012 See a video report by East London Lines Here which includes an interview with Annabel and Rosalind as well as artists Jack Hutchinson and Ben Coode Adams A heartfelt thank you video here. A video of the Private view and exhibition by the fabulous Broughton Birnie here

Selectors Statements Graham Crowley The ZAP Open is a welcome break from the tired and tawdry crop of corporate 'art' competitions. The selection is done entirely by practicing artists. It's one of a growing number of artist led projects that don't involve celebrities, nouveaux riches, art-world, apparatchiks or dealers. The sort of people whose only response to painting (or something similar) is - I like it or I don't like it. Is that it? Yes - and that's the trouble. This isn't a shopping trip. Why should practicing artists subject their work for the approval (or disapproval) of a people who can only make judgements based on their prejudices, their ignorance and/or their taste. All the work entered for the ZAP Open was submitted to thoughtful and extensive discussion. This discussion is only possible when the selectors are all aware of current practices and the prevailing critical context. This is experienced most acutely by practising artists and because of this, the selectors sense of responsibility is about as acute as it could be. The great strength of projects like this is that practicing artists don't necessarily 'like' art. Enjoy.

6


diyeducate@gmail.com

Graham Crowley

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Rosalind Davis

Rosalind Davis I found the process of selecting works for the Zeitgeist Open; profound, meaningful, generous, critical, amazing, tough, revealing, unexpected, delightful. It was a fascinating experience for all of us.

Alistair Gentry Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown. And it should, because even somebody in a relatively trivial position of responsibility should remain aware that other peoples' hopes and efforts have been entrusted to them. I'm sure we've all dealt with people in the arts who got jaded, cynical, mercenary and heartless. Or worse still, they started out that way. These are the people who blithely greenlight or blacklist without ever feeling a thing, spamming out stock “unfortunately on this occasion” emails with your name spelled incorrectly– if they don't just ignore you entirely– because really, who the hell are you? Not that judging this prize was a great hardship: we had fun, we saw lots of art, we really dug into how we feel about the hows and whys of making art. Nonetheless, I think everyone involved in this had a sense of how badly artists are often treated and that we should try to do better, not least because we are all artists ourselves and we have all been treated badly on occasion, sometimes by people and organisations who should definitely know better. Personally I'm satisfied that I was playing by the same rules to which the entrants were being held; judging on the single work in front of me, whether I liked it, whether I thought it was well done and interesting or not. No names, no titles, no statement, no personal history. Nothing else but the work. As friends of mine who (anonymously) entered and were rejected for the 7


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

particular work they entered will hopefully if perhaps slightly resentfully attest. All five of us are very different as artists and in our taste for the work of other artists. I think the final selection reflects all of us in some way. We don't all unreservedly adore everything that's in, and all of us had moments when we couldn't quite win the battle for a piece of work that we personally liked. In a show with nearly six hundred entries and forty-odd (and let's be honest... probably forty, odd) chosen artists, it would be mad of us or of anyone else to expect to like everything. What everything in the show does share, because we all agreed on it, is that every work in some way seemed to us to have integrity of intent and execution. Whether it made us laugh or it made us scratch our heads or it simply made us say it was an aesthetically pleasing thing, the artist meant it. The artist didn't seem to be chasing a trend, even if they might happen to be part of one. They might clearly know their art history and their predecessors, but they weren't engaged in empty pastiche. Via the image they'd chosen to show us, they seemed to be authentically themselves in some way. I think there's a lesson there for us all, myself included.

Alistair Gentry

David Kefford

David Kefford The process for making a selection of approximately 40 artworks from well over 500 entries for the ZAP Open 2012 was a perversely enjoyable one. However, it was tough to make subjective choices from such a truly wide range of artwork. Having submitted and been selected (and rejected) for a handful of national open competitions being one of the judges gave me an opportunity to sit on the other side of the fence. The fact that all the selectors are artists meant there was an underlying empathy to the often harsh reality of acceptance/rejection - a fact of any artists career. The judging itself 8


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

involved an intense day gathered around a projector, which displayed each entry in largescale. Nothing escaped our critical eyes. With an emphasis on fairness (if this is possible) we viewed each entry anonymously; we were making decisions based purely on a visual image, not on track record or contextual information. The impact and quality of each image flashing before us was crucial – was it well photographed? Had the artist adhered to the submission criteria? Did it capture our imagination? And, most importantly was the image engaging and memorable? After several hours we whittled it down to a long-list. This is when the debate began. Sometimes each selector needed to 'fight their corner' and stand up for a work they passionately believed in, mostly there was a collective consensus on which work went through - the judging was always respectful, considerate and rigorous. The final works in the exhibition hopefully give an intriguing snapshot into artists practicing in the uk today and in some way portray an integrity of thought, execution and content that we all saw.

Annabel Tilley It was a day I will always remember with affection: good people, sharp intelligence, wit, curiosity and the feeling that what we were doing had a purpose. It was a meaningful experience – we five gathered there at ZAP HQ with an intense sense of responsibility. I think we all shared a similar anxiety; a self-consciousness about the act of choosing, and how, when it came to it, we would defend our choices, or more difficult still, have the courage to argue against the others. But in the end we developed a mutual respect for each other. We listened to impassioned speeches, declarations of love, and hate, humble questions and bursts of passion, apathy and intrigue. We looked at all 557 images, and quickly developed a rhythm to reject or to keep work in for the next round. There were five or six rounds in total. It was an intense seven hours. Without names, the anonymous process of choosing was, for me, much easier. I wasn’t distracted by who the artist might be. I just concentrated on the image before me, and whether instinctually, it attracted or repelled me. It was like a love affair; the strong pieces stuck in your mind long after, and got better with each viewing. You felt compelled to look closer and for longer, your curiosity was aroused. Best of all was when someone else’s unorthodox choice made you look again - suddenly appreciate something new - or see something in a different way. We all had moments like that: works that we championed. In the end we found the word ‘integrity’ had crept in. The first Zeitgeist Open developed slowly over seven hours and five people’s opinions into a show about work that is sui generis – of it’s own kind, unique.

9


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Annabel Tilley

Holly Simpson ZAP Project Assistant As a new addition to the ZAP team, I felt privileged to have the opportunity to work on an Open submission opportunity built on the premise of integrity. Instantly attracted to ZAP’s honest and supportive ethos, I was lucky to be granted ‘insider’ access, to step across the exhibition rope and pitch up camp in the thick of the organisation and selection process. By individually cataloguing each submission entry prior to the judging day, I was the first person to view all 557 works. So I made it my priority to email applicants who had submitted substandard images to ask them for replacements so the work could be viewed in the best possible light. The atmosphere on the judging day was honest, gentle and supportive yet critical. I listened with fascination to the comments of the judges, experiencing at first hand those excitable squeals of delight, outbursts of laughter, moments of contemplation and the silence of admiration. With such a fundamental emphasis on anonymity and fairness, it was my job to relay any information required regarding the title, medium or dimensions that would allow the selectors a better understanding of the ideas and inspiration behind the work. Neither names nor biographies were mentioned, and the process was fair to the utmost degree. I thoroughly enjoyed the challenges and triumphs of this endeavor. And experiencing the warmth and integrity that this exhibition is founded upon has been both inspiring and insightful. I now hope you the viewer will enjoy the outcome as much as I enjoyed its delivery. 10


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Press Release The Zeitgeist Open Exhibition 16 November Preview 6-9pm 17 November - 1 December Exhibition continues Friday - Saturday 12-5pm 30 November Late opening for SLAM Last Fridays 6.30-8.30pm Saturday 1 December Artists and Curators in Dialogue, 4-5pm

Bond House Project Space, ASC, Goodwood Road, New Cross, London, SE14 6BL The Zeitgeist Open Exhibition is a compelling view of a cross section of critically engaged artists who are currently producing profound and intriguing works. Annabel Dover, AnnaMaria Kardos, Anthony Carr, Axel Bottenberg, Ben Coode-Adams, Ben Cove, Bob London, Carol Wyss, Catalina Barroso Luque, Chiho Iwase, Clare Mitten, Connie Sides, Corinna Spencer, Daniel Slater, Debbie Lawson, Giulia Ricci, Heather Miller, Helen Donnelly, Jack Hutchinson, Kate Murray-Browne, Kate Russo, Lauri Hopkins, Louisa Chambers, Louise Mackenzie, Marina Velez, Mark Sadler, Max Gimson, Michele Fletcher, Peter Jones, Reginald Aloysius, Robert Worley, Sarah Filmer, Sarah Jeffries, Sarah West, Sasha Bowles, Shelley Rae, Steph Goodger, Susan Francis, Timothy Shepard, Tom Butler and Una d'Aragona. We discovered in all the selected artists “A cherished and obsessive practice” (Ben CoodeAdams) As well as: Melancholia, fantasy, identity, macabre, dreamlike people, places. There is absurdity and there is death. There is mystery and sharp realisation. Familiar and yet devastatingly unfamiliar spaces. Morbidity and things verging on the grotesque. Seriousness, playfulness. Joy…. 11


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

All the work was seen, and scrutinised carefully on the basis of image alone – artists were not judged on their CV, age, art-school history, gallery connections or art-world renown. These 41 artists have between them all a stunning array of achievements. We could tell you that these artists have international careers, they come from across the world, that they have exhibited extensively or very little at all, that they came from famous art colleges now, or 30 years ago. Many have won some kind of art prize, or been involved in major exhibitions. There have been private and public commissions. Their works are in major collections as well as no doubt numerous private collections. They work in paint, drawing, photography and sculpture using a wide range of materials, concepts and processes. They have done residencies, are in publications, they write for publications, they curate. But none of this mattered to us. The work did. And that is why this will be a different open exhibition. The philosophy behind The Zeitgeist Open – judged on a single anonymous image – was to create a really open Open, resulting in an exhibition that is about the artwork, and about intelligent artists making critical, educated and also instinctive decisions about the artwork: looking at 557 works over seven intense hours meant for the judges that each work had to hold its own; had to engage them totally and immediately – subtly or with force.

12


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

( please note the original press release was tampered and edited by Ben Coode-Adams. We prefer his version)

13


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

14


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Annabel Dover Brain [2012] Oil on board (25 x 25 cm)

15


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

AnnaMaria Kardos Fact Finding [2012] Giclee inkjet on MDF (76.2 x 50.8 cm)

16


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Anthony Carr A Month of Nights, Derby, Camera 43, 9-10pm, Bold Lane Car Park [2011] C-type photographic print (23 x 31 cm)

17


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Axel Bottenberg Zealot [2012] Acrylic on canvas, ply, fabric and foam (100 x 40 x 5cm)

18


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Ben Coode-Adams Vernal Equinox - Moon of Winter Gives Way to the Sun of Spring [2012] Watercolor (61 x 46 cm)

19


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Ben Cove Trans [2012] Oil on linen, oak, black gesso, gold leaf, acrylic paint (180 x 45 x 51 cm)

20


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Bob London Las Meninas [2012] Felt pen on paper (26.5 x 35 cm)

21


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Carol Wyss Blue Bell [2012] Etching (100 x 80 cm)

22


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Catalina Barroso Luque Fold [2012] Photograph- RC Black & White Handprint (31 x 43 cm)

23


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Chiho Iwase Portrait Of My Teddy Bear [2012] Plaster pigment (35 x 28 x 26 cm)

24


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Clare Mitten Overtones [2011] Paper, papier mache, cardboard, glue, blackboard paint (41 x 41 x 18 cm)

25


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Connie Sides The Audition [2012] Oil on wood (60 x 81 cm)

26


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Corinna Spencer Mourning Dress [2012] Oil on board (21 x 15 cm)

27


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Daniel Slater Two Bicycles Arranged Around A Tree In An Unforeseen Parallel [2009] Photograph on board (17 x 25 cm)

28


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Debbie Lawson Persian Stag [2011] Carpet and mixed media (148 x 110 x 37 cm)

29


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Giulia Ricci Order / Disruption Painting No. 4 [2012] Acrylic paint on laser engraved laminated board (36 x 36 x 1.8 cm)

30


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Heather Miller Les Petites Morts (The Little Deaths) No. 13 [2011] Digital C-type photographic print (20 x 30 cm)

31


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Helen Donnelly Untitled [2012] Acrylic, pencil, marker pen and whitby jet pigment (35 x 35 cm)

32


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Jack Hutchinson Autography Series No.19 [2012] Pencil on khadi cotton rag paper (7.5 x 10 cm)

33


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Kate Murray-Browne Chair [2011] Oil on canvas (90 x 60 cm)

34


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Kate Russo You Can Always Paint The Roses [2012] Oil on floral fabric (27.5 x 30 cm)

35


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Lauri Hopkins Awkward Crystal [2011] Acrylic and enamel on aluminum (29 x 39 cm)

36


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Louisa Chambers Streaming [2011] Acrylic on Paper (34.5 x 26cm)

37


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Louise Mackensie Evolution Of The Object [2012] Cyanotype original print (19 x 28 cm each)

38


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Marina Velez Lot [2011] Digital print on aluminum mount (90 x 39 cm)

39


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Mark Sadler Control Panel (Gold) [2011] Silk-screen print on card (54 x 44 cm)

40


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Max Gimson Structured Pools I [2012] Oil, acrylic and varnish on linen (50 x 60 cm)

41


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Michele Fletcher Maladjusted [2012] Oil on linen (30 x 25 cm)

42


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Peter Jones Hedgehog [2012] Oil on linen (19 x 24 cm)

43


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Reginald Aloysius BAF GH66 [2012] Graphite pencil drawing, carving, enamel paint on MDF (50 x 45 cm)

44


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Robert Worley Owl Figure [2012] Ceramic (42 x 20 x 25 cm)

45


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Sarah Filmer Goldfinch [2012] Digital C-type photographic print (17.8 x 12.7 cm)

46


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Sarah Jeffries Lady in Pink Gloves [2012] Oil on log (20 x 18 x 18 cm)

47


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Sarah West Weights [2012] Oil, acrylic size, spray paint and carbon paper on pigmented gesso panel (42 x 30 cm)

48


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Sasha Bowles Standing On The Shores Of Caspar [2012] Oil on linen (45 x 35 cm)

49


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Shelley Rae Perseveration [2011] C-type hand print from analogue film, aluminum mount (101.6 x 76.2 cm)

50


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Steph Goodger How They Might Have Danced [2011] Oil on canvas (70 x 50 cm)

51


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Susan Francis The Loaded Gesture (They All Know It Was You) [2012] Lampshade, doll's head, glasses lens, pin, make up case (30 x 30 x 20 cm)

52


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Timothy Shepard Place Vendome [2012] Archive ink print on hahnemuhle paper mounted on linen (48 x 59 x 7 cm)

53


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Tom Butler Hatch [2012] Gouache on Victorian cabinet card (albumen print) (10.5 x 16.6 cm)

54


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Una d’Aragona Bubblegum Thoughts [2012] Oil on canvas (20 x 20 cm)

55


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

56


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Images courtesy of Julie Henry

57


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Images courtesy of Corinna Spencer

58


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Michele Fletcher. Original work selected for Zeitgeist Open, if you ever see this‌email us! We allowed a replacement‌

59


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Thank you! Every artist that entered The wonderful artists in the exhibition The indefatigable and generous judges Graham Crowley, David Kefford and Alistair Gentry The marvellous ZAP Project Assistant Holly Simpson Rich White, wonderful artist and technician for hang of the show. Kate Murdoch, Kate Bowen for tireless volunteering support and tea…. And Michaela Nettell for all that too and for our website. Julie Henry and Corinna for brilliant photography at the Preview. Broughton Birnie for another great great video Shane Carey for bar skills, cool shirt and videoing Rosalind’s Speech. Gemma Cossey for paper hunting, labels, bar skills, smiles. Sarah Jacobs for bar skills Lisa Snook and Shane for pie making and posters Special thanks to Graham Crowley (for everything!) and Pearce Crowley for eleventh hour drill rescue and generosity. East London Lines a-n.co.uk Artquest.com Our families and friends and ambassadors And of course ASC Studios for giving us space and support

Thank You, for visiting, reading, experiencing, sharing….for being part of something. Rosalind Davis and Annabel Tilley.

60


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Press: Over 40 exhibitors at new artist-run open Another day, another open exhibition – but is the inaugural Zeitgeist Open doing things differently?

By: a-n NEWS: 15 Nov 2012

Ben Coode-Adams, Vernal Equinox - Moon of Winter Gives Way to the Sun of Spring From 557 images received, 41 exhibiting artists have been selected for the first edition of The Zeitgeist Open, which bills itself as an open exhibition with a ‘difference’. Judge and painter Graham Crowley says: “It’s about creating opportunities for ambitious artists, creating new networks and bringing new audiences – curators, gallerists, collectors and the general public – to artists.” Crowley is joined on the judging panel by Alistair Gentry, David Kefford and Zeitgeist founders Rosalind Davis and Annabel Tilley, all of whom are artists. All work was seen on an anonymous basis and there was no pre-screening. The Zeitgeist Open’s stated aim is ‘to create a really open Open, resulting in an exhibition that is about the artwork, and about intelligent artists making critical, educated and also instinctive decisions about the artwork.’ In developing The Zeitgeist Open, its founders Davis and Tilley say they have attempted to reevaluate the premise of the open submission experience in terms of how artists are treated, valued and supported before, during and after the event.

61


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

At least 10 artists from The Zeitgeist Open will be selected for the next Zeitgeist Art Projects group exhibition in spring 2013. The Zeitgeist Open 2012 exhibition opens in New Cross, London at Bond House Project Space on 17 November and runs until 1 December. A full list of exhibiting artists is at www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com/exhibitions.html

62


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Reinventing the Open Zeitgeist Arts Projects present their research on open submission competitions and explain why they insisted on transparency for their own newly-launched Zeitgeist Open. BY: ROSALIND DAVIS & ANNABEL TILLEY NEWS COMMENT: 19 Jul 2012 a-n.co.uk "Open submission exhibitions are a vital platform for new and emergent work" - Graham Crowley, painter In recent years there have been a proliferation of Open competitions and so-called 'exhibition opportunities' for artists. This year, following the success of the original Core Gallery Open 2010 and 2011, I am managing The Zeitgeist Open 2012. I see it as an opportunity to look anew at the open submission experience, to consider how artists are treated, valued and supported during and after the event. I am doing this through a whole new artist-led organisation, Zeitgeist Arts Projects, and with a collaborator, Annabel Tilley. Annabel and I have spent time analysing and debating the idea of an Open: the rules, fees, conditions of entry and, most importantly, the artist's own expectations. Our conclusion was that a sense of transparency was key to the whole process. Our Judges Graham Crowley, Alistair Gentry and David Kefford have contributed to the ZAP Open Terms and Conditions. Gentry and Kefford are both members of Market Project, an organisation that has been critical of open submissions in the past. So this time, we know we are under the microscope. Many other opens employ a pre-selection process, where a percentage of artists are rejected even before the official judging starts. Annabel was adamant that this was unfair and insincere, especially when artists were under the impression that their work would be seen by the named judges. We felt it was vital that in order for artists to feel valued, everyone who pays a fee should have their work seen by the full judging panel. And if this isn't possible then it should be made clear at the beginning that there will be a pre-selection process. I am glad to say that this type of transparency is starting to filter through this year. Annabel also suggested that we become even more stringent and remove any other sense of unfairness by making The Zeitgeist Open anonymous. This means that the judges will choose works based purely on the quality of what they are seeing, not an artist's CV. For me, it has always been important that the judges selecting the works should predominantly be artists. This is about the measured judgment of practising artists and curators who are aware of fine art practice, painterly conventions, precedence, history, innovation, context and criticality. For both of us, there seemed little point in having a renowned curator or gallerist involved if there was no chance of them developing a relationship with the selected artists in the future. We realised that even after an artist is selected for an open they can often feel undervalued and underwhelmed by the lack of input and communication, by hidden costs etc and that 63


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

ultimately no lasting relationships are being built between themselves and those on the panel. The Zeitgeist Open is based on generosity. We work hard to support artists, this is key to everything we do at ZAP. We are constantly seeking to create opportunities for ambitious artists; creating new networks and bringing new audiences – curators, gallerists, collectors, the general public – to artists through exhibitions and our artists' education programme, DIY Educate. An Open, for us, is an extension of those principles. It is about listening to what artists need, want and desire in opportunities. We also put our money where our mouth is – many artists selected for our highly successful launch exhibition Collectible came to us through the Core Gallery Opens. With nearly 700 visitors to Collectible in seven days, 25% of the work was sold. As an arts organisation run by artists, we are constantly trying to set an example of how things could be, to level the playing field in an imbalanced art world and to create longer-term opportunities for the artists involved. As a result, at least 10 artists from The Zeitgeist Open will be selected for the next ZAP group exhibition: Discernible in Spring 2013. Rosalind Davis & Annabel Tilley Read our full curatorial statement at: www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com/open2012statement.html

64


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

ARCHIVE

Open Submissions: A guide. By Rosalind Davis, October 2011. Entering and being included in an open submission exhibition can be a fantastic opportunity, bring prestige to your cv, be a networking opportunity and help you reach new audiences which can include galleries, collectors and Curators to your work. Each year there are consistently more artists applying for opens making the percentages of getting into the exhibitions even more competitive for example in 2009 The Jerwood Drawing received 2344 entries 66 artists chosen. In 2011 they received 3500 entries and 70 artists were chosen. Its competitive and difficult. Therefore here are a few general guidelines as to how to navigate, enhance and make the most of your entry to open submission competitions and not waste that all too precious submission fee. Research: You need to be discerning: Sometimes, artists can have a scattergun approach in the hope that one (at least one!) open submission may take your works. With the rise of competition fees one needs to be careful about what and how many competitions you enter: So here are some questions to ask yourself before entering: What is the percentage of artists that are selected? Is this a gallery I would like to exhibit in? Would I like to develop a relationship with the judges or gallery space? Does the competition/ gallery space have a good reputation? What sort of work do the Judges do? Are there any prizes (if so that can also mean a higher amount of artists entering) Does the gallery actively promote the exhibition? Independent Artist led/ Commercial Galleries? Core Gallery is a small independent artist led space; we develop and value relationships with the artists we work with long after the physical exhibitions are over. With larger art prizes you can be a very small fish in a large pond and feel rather anonymous ( and depressed) ; however on balance the larger competitions of course have more money for promotion, champagne receptions and guest lists. Networks vs champagne. Sustainable relationships and feeling part of something vs glamour. Which would you prefer? Once you have looked at these factors and decided to enter you need to think about the Submission entry itself. Some of this may sound obvious but having looked through many artists submissions there are always a percentage that do not do the following which can automatically disqualify you from getting into a shortlist; 65


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Take good photos of your work: Please don’t include the wall/ other people’s work or your own hand (yes really) within the frame. Do check the image is in focus Do label each jpeg as requested by the guidance notes Keep to the resolution the competition asks for. Be consistent: Open submissions state a maximum amount of images so it is best to make a strong statement about a body of work; 3 images should give a clear identity of a body of work not necessarily showing how diverse and multi talented an artist you are. With regards to installation and sculpture this can be difficult to show in one jpeg, so you may be better representing your work by using your 3 images showing just one piece/ installation shots. Know how to write about your work: Some submissions require artist’s statements to support your application; Some statements bear no relation to the artwork the judges see and they need to be in harmony, so make sure your statement is relevant and understandable. Does your statement talk about the actual physical work: is it painting, sculpture or video? Is it site specific? What materials are you using? Is the process important? Are the materials important? Why? Sum up your practise in 3 words is a good starting point. Once you can do that you can expand. Are you ready? This is a hard one, but sometimes we need to give ourselves more time to develop as artists and not be consumed by getting into exhibitions. Useful Resources to locate and get tips on open submissions: a-n.co.uk Artquest.org.uk Axisweb.org

66


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Open Submission Swindle? Published in a-n.co.uk Magazine October 13th 2010 As an artist who has entered open submissions and as a manager of an artist led gallery space (Core Gallery, is a not for profit space), which held its first open submission. this year, I feel I can give a slightly different insight into this subject than those laid out in the last 2 issues of an as to what actually your open submission fees go towards. Graham Crowley one of our selectors for the competition was interviewed about this subject for our Core Gallery Interviews sums up succinctly why it is important to have independent competitions: “Independent competitions are vital in providing a platform for work that isn’t being shown by commercial or public galleries. This becomes more important as the market seems to exert an increasing influence on public galleries.” Firstly we decided to have an open submission because it was a great opportunity to give artists a chance to exhibit their work at London’s foremost contemporary arts festival‘Deptford X’- a prime slot in the exhibition calendar in this area of London. Competition administration was significant, 4 months of planning and execution. If we weren’t to charge a fee there would have been no way of being able to hold this competition. Even with the amount raised through entry fees, this does not even begin to cover costs: promotion, publicity, marketing, design, invites, paint, screws etc let alone all my work, my colleagues and interns labour into the show- all of us artists. All open submissions take a huge amount of work regardless of who they are run by and I am afraid it is unrealistic to think people could run them for free or that an equivalent ‘ hang fee’ would balance the labour involved- it would end up being more costly than your entry fee. If we were able to give everyone involved in the running of the competition, the minimum wage, we would be way into the minuses of the fee raised; we were working for free so hardly a swindle for us at least. Why did we do it? The competition allowed us to build up a database of artists, which we would not have been able to have seen in other circumstances, a means of creating an audience for our space, to make ourselves known to artists as we are a new gallery space. Ultimately the competition was profile raising for us. In future for us at least this means being able to connect people- artists and curators etc. All revenue was put back into the exhibition and the gallery and will go towards helping create more educational events amongst other things, through exhibitions, education and art talks ( and not just for those who won the final competition!) 67


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

We charged a low fee (£10) in order to make the competition accessible and affordable. In addition to the competition we are then supporting a further exhibition of 3 artists that were selected from the 18 initial winners of our open submission. Tom Butler, Marion Michell and Alyson Helyer will be given a group show in 2011 at our gallery supported by us- (not bad for a £10 entry fee) We had fantastic independent selectors for the open; Kate Jones, Matt Roberts and Graham Crowley who I purposefully asked as I wished for the exhibition to be exciting and stimulating and something that artists would want to enter and be part of. The judging was utterly fair. Everyone had an equal chance to get in on their own merits. We were also rewarded by the wonderful exhibition we had of 18 artists, the artists were very pleased with the exhibition and appreciative of the hard work we had put in. This was a mutually beneficial competition. In the future we will need to make an annual open submission more sustainable for the gallery as people’s labour should be paid as we all know, but it was a great and rewarding project to be part of but definitely was not a quick way to get rich! I completely agree that submission fees to competitions have inflated to ridiculous prices. Saatchi Gallery recently held an open submission ‘The Art of Giving…’ £25 per artist is something of an ironic joke given the title. I would suggest that one just enters those competitions you firmly believe in or want to be part of and feel you have a fair chance in applying to it. There is a glut out there for good or bad but they do serve an important purpose on many levels of getting exposure for artists and galleries need money to run their spaces too I am afraid to say. There is already a hanging fee of types- you can hire a gallery and put on your own group show- but then who will organise, promote and manage that,? If you wish to empower yourself, it certainly can help to set up your own projects or support independent competitions and spaces like ours that supports artists in a number of ways. Rosalind Davis www.rosalinddavis.co.uk

68


diyeducate@gmail.com

www.zeitgeistartsprojects.com

@ZeitgeistAP

Catalogue compiled by Rosalind Davis and Holly Simpson.

69


The Zeitgeist Open 2012 Catalogue  

To celebrate and archive the Zeitgeist Open Exhibition.16th November -1st December 2012 we have created this. enjoy

Advertisement
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you