The Function of the Gallery - Daniel Buren Redux

Images from Sculptural Objects and Functional Art Exposition: Chicago 2008

"At SOFA expositions, prominent international galleries and dealers present masterworks bridging the worlds of design, decorative and fine arts, showcasing the rich visual heritage of the decorative arts alongside new, innovative expressions. The works presented bridge historical periods, art movements and cultures, from ethnographica, Asian arts and mid-twentieth century modern to the most cutting-edge contemporary arts and design. The expositions also feature an acclaimed Lecture Series and educational Special Exhibits." -From SOFA Website

Gulp. I know I am not going to win any career points with this one. But here we go...

"Of all the frames, envelopes, and limits - usually not perceived and certainly never questioned - which enclose and constitute the work of art (picture frame, niche, pedestal, palace, church, museum, art history, economics, power, etc.), there is one rarely even mentioned today that remains of primary importance: The Gallery." - Daniel Buren [slightly adapted]

What is the Function of the Gallery in Contemporary Metalsmithing?

1. To sell the work of makers.
2. To educate the public and promote the work of makers they represent as well as the field generally.

Since I justly suspect that the gallery does not in fact allow makers to stay in their studio by selling sufficient quantities of the maker's work, I am forced to the conclusion that the maker's are simply giving away half of the value of their work so that gallerists may subsist in the margin between the maker and the wearer. I do not really have a problem with this other than the fact that:

1. If an alternate model was created that better served to facilitate the sales of makers' work at a lower percentage the maker could actually spend more time in the studio.

2. Due to the nature of the current climate of buyers or collectors, the dissemination and promotion of our field is only marginally advanced by the efforts of jewelry and metalsmithing galleries.

Problems of the Gallery (as an institution)

Galleries are an important forum or venue for work to be seen and purchased for the studio metalsmith (or jeweler). I image that many makers derive some portion of their income from these wonderful institutions. But given their basic function (see above) I must ask, how wonderful are galleries really?

I feel the need to qualify that I am talking about the gallery as an institution and not any gallery specifically, because indeed almost every gallerist I have ever met is a proponent of the field. So much so in fact that they have chosen to dedicate their life to promoting studio jewelry sales. So with no ill intent towards those unsung heroes of commerce, I see the gallery, at least for studio jewelry, as a flawed institution. If the function of the gallery is to promote and sell work by the makers that they represent, allowing the maker to remain in the studio, then I say the gallery has failed us.

If the market is too small, then whose job or responsibility is it to reach out to new markets or expand the current market? In the current system where the maker relinquishes half of the value of their piece (50% being a typical gallery commission) then what exactly are we getting for our sublimation?

Moving on to the second function of the gallery as an educational tool for the public, it is clear that this mission has been an abysmal failure. As the market for studio jewelry continues to shrink domestically, the necessity of the gallery to establish a rapport with collectors in order to subsist, clearly diverts energy away from their mission to educate. Even if the emphasis on collectors allows for increased sales, this promotion of the artist is not a recipe for sustainability. Currently, there are many galleries invested in diversification of their product line (this either means multiples, some less expensive options, or other products entirely). This is proof that the high end niche market of the past is not currently a viable model.

In any event, the role of public education and outreach for metalsmithing and craft as well, is a serious concern that needs to be addressed. Perhaps it should be another institution that should be charged with this task, but museums and smaller organizations do an equally inadequate job of public education as the gallery. I feel confident in this assessment, as the museum increasingly in a repository for and collaborator of the collector, and the local guilds and societies primarily concern themselves with activities that benefit members directly (sales, workshops, exhibitions, etc).

Networking Posing as Quality Control Acting as a Gate Keeper

Another function of the gallery, albeit a less important and perhaps even an unintended consequence of the gallery, is the exclusivity and prestige accorded to the work in the gallery and conspicuously not accorded to the work which remains outside. A few simple equations will suffice as a proof of the problematic nature of this function.

Set 1
studio + maker + material = work
work + gallery = recognition
work - gallery = obscurity

Set 2
hard work + experience + ideas = good work (+/-)
good work + gallery = recognition
good work - gallery = obscurity

Set 3
goodwork + networking = gallery representation
goodwork + insufficient network ≠ gallery representation
badwork + networking = gallery representation
bad work + gallery = recognition
good work + gallery = recognition

Set 4
(bad work + gallery = recognition) is not equitable when:
(goodwork + insufficient network ≠ gallery representation = obscurity)

therefore:
networking + (work(good or bad)) = gallery
if:
gallery = recognition
then:
networking = recognition

Alternatives

If a mechanism(s) could be created to supplant this dual function of the gallery (sales and education), and at the same time do a better job at each, would we not be better off as a field? I think yes.

Sales:

I imagine a system in which the maker would receive a higher percentage of the total value of their work. In the current gallery system there are two prices for each work produced; the wholesale price (which is the actual value of the work) and the retail price which is padded in order to support the current inefficient system.

I look to history (as I do frequently) in order to find a precedent for a system which better serves the maker. At the turn of the 20th century in America the guild shop provided a commercial outlet for handmade wares produced in the studio or small shop. The guild shop took only a small percentage in order to cover expenses (premises, utilities, display, staff, etc.). Today, if the artist was able to get 75-85% of the retail price of their work, not only would they have to sell fewer pieces to make the same income, but there is a real possibility that they could sell their work for less, opening the market to a larger pool of potential consumers.

Who would sponsor such a guild shop and how would they determine who could show? In the age of web 2.0 it seems that such an endeavor could be quite inexpensive to implement, and a pre-existing and/or long-standing organization could be the sponsor (The Society of North American Goldsmiths, American Craft Council?). What if the condition for inclusion in this "guild shop" was simply membership? Since virtual space is infinite (as opposed to the finite space of the gallery which carries overhead) there is no need to exclude anyone from exhibiting work. And if I am not much mistaken, the prospect of selling work through a recognized professional organization (again such as SNAG) would no doubt increase the membership and dues of any such organization bold enough to create such a venture. Many contemporary examples of the viability of this model already exist, including etsy, the artful home, object fetish, and klimt02 (which doesn't sell work, but could). Currently, no model exists which is sponsored by a not-for-profit organization.

Education:
Unfortunately, I do not have a specific solution for this problem anew from what I have put forward previously on this blog. I envision a restructuring of multiple institutions is order to effectively accomplish a public education campaign. A succesful effort would include non-esoteric publications, effective museum programs, professional organization outreach and public advertising campaigns, academic institutional outreach, individual studio efforts to engage with the public, easily accessible web content, and even galleries and craft fairs instituting programming to attact new patrons.

Conclusion

Finally, evolution vs. revolution has been a frequent topic of discourse in recent years pertaining to the field of studio crafts, metalsmithing, and jewelry making. If we take either of these proposed systems seriously, then we come to the conclusion that change whether forced or natural is imminent and inevitable. Personally, I subscribe to the revolutionary school of thought, but even in evolutionary theory only the strongest reproduce and live on. The gallery is certainly not the strongest of commercial tools when compared to either craft fairs or internet goliaths like etsy. I wonder aloud if the craft gallery is entering its twilight years? Which alternate model of commercial dissemination will evolve or rise up to take its place? I can only advocate that we get involved and help to actively determine the course of our field and how our work reaches its end user.

Comments welcome,
-Gabriel