Check out Mary Louise Schumacher's article on a recent call from "Occupy" to end the Whitney Biennial, largely considered the most important US showcase of contemporary art.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/entertainment/140866133.html
Now...I think I've made it pretty clear that I don't exactly
like the occupy movement. I think, generally, it lacks focus and any type of attainable goal, let alone a path to achieve that.
I don't like thsi new idea for the simple reason it does nothing to actually help artists. If you read the letter, it basically says "it's really hard to be an artist or art worker in today's economy...and since you aren't directly giving artists money, we want you to close." It addresses a problem, and instead of providing answers, it says "close your doors."
While the idea behind it is solid, instead of actually doing something that benefits the people they feel are being slighted, they want to hurt those that are benefitting. The artists aren't directly getting rich, so the people putting on the show should lose money! Instead of saying "give the artists a portion of the ticket sales, give them a stipend, or maybe have prizes including shows at other galleries," they want to cancel the show altogether.
It's just a step in no direction at all. Instead of helping artists, there's one less cultural event in the US. Instead of promoting arts in all it's forms, we should shut down the show so artists don't feel used Instead of awarding artists a HUGE showcase opportunity, you should just continue with your normal exhibits and tell the emerging artists to figure it out themselves.
I liken it to hungry people being angry that they can't afford bread from a bakery. Instead of asking the bakery to lower prices, working to pool money together or starting their own bakery, they immediately choose to burn down the bakery. Now no one has bread, the ingredients were wasted, the owner's finances are devastated, and the community still is hungry with no next move. It just doesn't help anything.
Instead of closing down any exhibit that benefits trustees, collectors, or corporations (pretty much any major exhibit would fall into this category), why doesn't the occupy movement, with it's hundreds of thousands in donations, propose putting on their own show which WOULD benefit the artists? Why don't they push an agenda which actually directly helps artists, in the way they say the Whitney Biennial doesn't. It's just another thing we can complain about, something we can pat ourselves on the back and say "way to stand up to those evil rich guys" without ever actually lifting a finger in any real attempt to fix the problem.
