Page 1

Oliver Bliss

Arts Management

Gatekeepers or open access: Does the process for selection for public

collections offer the best opportunity to reflect diversity in society?

Historically collections grew through the personal interests of wealthy individuals.

Since the 1900’s public funding has been a major contributor to the art market and

this review considers how spending decisions are made based on the decision

makers attitudes to social diversity.

Challenges experienced by artists wanting to enter the arts market are explored.

This literature review will also be exploring systems and professionals who permit or

restrict access to an artist’s progression within contemporary visual arts.

Because the motives of collectors in the public and private sectors are different, the

focus here is organisations receiving public funding from tax payers. Art Council

England (ACE) has been a significant influential force in setting standards when

considering diversity within artistic practice.

Public funded bodies have to be mindful of the Equality Act 2010 because it protects

the following characteristics: Age, disability, gender reassignment, and civil

partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation.

(Legislation.gov) The Equality Act means that there is a duty for public bodies to

consider and apply fairness and equality, especially in making decisions or policies

such as ACE. I have focused my examples to refer to representation of sex and

sexual orientation.

The Gate keepers

Page 2

Morris Hargreaves-McIntyre’s report Taste Buds 2004, identified the art eco-system

model which illustrates an artist’s journey into the arts market (Figure 1).

Figure 1

The model provides an overview of those who determine artists' trajectories as they

accrue endorsement or subscription. These institutes or gatekeepers included:

‘Academics, curators, dealers, critics, and buyers, provide advocacy and

endorsement for an artist's work through exhibitions, critical appraisal and private

and public purchases.’ (Hargreaves-McIntyre’s 8)

Arts Council England

Ensuring Equality and diversity is a concern for ACE. Mahamdallie 2010 discusses

how a new conversation is needed to ensure that diversity is fully integrated into the

Page 3

agenda of any artistic programming and collecting. He cites Foster’s audit of Tate

collections as an example of women artist’s previous inequality and lack of

recognition. Foster found that ‘women made up fewer than eleven per cent of the

artists represented in the Tate (there were 316 women and circa 2600 men) and they

only represented around seven percent of the collection’ (Mahamdallie 119).

ACE is not only concerned with diversity in collections but among its workforce:

‘We will support leadership and the development of a more diverse workforce in the

visual arts. We will work with partners, to ensure there is an improved range of

pathways into the profession – particularly those from culturally diverse

backgrounds. We will help create more mobility between national and regional

organisations’ Arts Council England ,Visual Arts policy, (2006 7)

A culturally more representative workforce offers ACE more natural opportunities to

tap into diversity across the country.

‘We want to see a more confident, diverse and innovative arts sector which is valued

by and in tune with the communities it serves.’ Arts Council England, Arts policies,

Developing arts practice and engagement, (2006 4)

I would like to see diversity at the heart of everything cultural…nothing can be

excellent without reflecting the society which produces and experiences it.

(McMaster 2008 11)

A male dominated arena and alterative voices

Page 4

Although policies have been put in place to promote equality and diversity the white

male gaze has historically, and continues to, dominate the arts scene. Parker and

Pollock’s 1981 Old Mistresses discussed how ‘the Director, curator, artist and even

spectators of the artistic realm were predominantly male’ (115).

‘male establishment not only determined the criterion of greatness but also had

control over who had access to the means to achieve it.’ (Anderson, 1992, 14)

Whithers 1988,‘What do These Artists Have In Common? (Figure 2), listed

contemporary male artists who collaborated with galleries that showed no more than

10% women artists or none at all… Their early works as a group effectively scolded

male artists, art galleries and critics for their meagre or non-existent commitment to

women artists’. (1988 285-300)

Figure 2: First Guerrilla Girls poster, first appeared in New York in 1985.

The Guerrilla Girls was a group who reacted against the absence of women artists

within gallery spaces. Founded in the mid-eighties their first poster campaign was

Page 5

distributed in the public sphere within the streets of New York. While they claimed to

doing a public service by challenging male dominance, artists such as Silvia

Kolbowski questioned the motives of this group commenting that ‘they are not

questioning the market place. They are accepting the validity of the institutions and

structures.... What’s missing is the critique of these structures’ (Whithers 1988, 300).

Araeen, 2010 introduces the notion of a ‘master’ and ‘slave’ relationship. By this he

means that those in a position of power dominate and are referred to as ‘masters’,

those without power who have to adopt the rule of a ‘master’ are ‘slaves’.

‘Master and slave can indeed speak to each other, both have their voices, but only

one has significance- that of the master. The master can speak even with the voice

of the slave and sympathetically represent the predicament of the slave. But the

slave must not claim any subjectivity or agency that might threaten or undermine the

power of the master.’ (23)

Returning to Foster’s report on the Tate collection Foster was told that:

‘The Tate’s position on gender equality was that the collection was just a ‘natural’

reflection of art history, and that the situation would change naturally’ (Foster op cit.).

The Tate, as an institution has taken the role of ‘master’ and has absorbed the voice

of the female ‘slave’, by justifying their position in accepting that women have been

excluded from their collection.

Women, although compraising 50% of the population find it difficult to get their

voices heard, minority groups must not be forgotten because they find it just as

problematic. Homosexuals are a minority in the population and to a certain extend

Page 6

are a marginalised group who, along with all other minority groups, struggle to get

their voice heard.

Elmgreen and Dragset in Alonzo, Bieber, and Krohn 2011 say that ‘the artists may

produce work which reaches a gay audience’ and it is ‘ important to create

something that connects with a certain definite identity’ it is also important to ‘ create

a certain increased understanding for that identity in wider social spheres ‘( 46)

A New Vision: Equality, Change and Selection

Mahamdallie (op cit.) As a Senior Strategy Officer for ACE, discussed his three point

approach for progressions of change. First, ‘Equality’ means, removal of barriers in

the arts to allow artists to realise their potential. Second, ‘Recognition’ through the

resituating diverse artists both historically and theoretically at the centre of British art.

Thirdly, creating ‘A New Vision’ he says ‘there must also be the construction and

dissemination of a new framework …that takes it out of negative or ‘deficit’ model …

Diversity becomes not an optional extra but part of the fabric of our discussions’

(105-106).

However Mahamdallie does not include a framework for input from the general public

in future discussions. His is a top down approach where information is disseminated

down to organisations and out to the general public. Ultimately this still excludes

those outside positions of power in established institutions. Without giving the public

the opportunity to contribute equally within this framework, the public funders remain

‘slaves’ and ACE, continues to dictate as the ‘master’.

Page 7

The 2011 Liverpool Biennial of Contemporary Art’s publication, Touched an interview

contributor Lynn Hershman-Leeson, in conversation with Alison Rowley (RAW!WAR

website, partnership funding with Stanford University Libraries) discussed the fact

that Rowley’s work aimed to inform the public about dangers of censorship, prejudice

and freedom of expression( 52). Rowley’s work strives toward making others

understand the importance of the history of women’s ‘paralysing’ struggle for visibility

in the art world which she describes as ‘an inspiring story of freedom, despite the

existing politics, oppression, discrimination and over-riding attempt at historical

erasure’ (54)

Rowley’s ambition for her website is that it is a vehicle for a democratic, self-curated,

global collection of work, where ‘future generations are able to add their voices, art,

stories and information into an on-going collaborative archive‘(57). Rowley

recognises the new growth opportunities for artists to exhibit work. This open

resource allows artists to contribute without restriction of institutions which previously

oppressed the likes of the Guerrilla Girls. This approach alters Rowley’s position as

‘master’ because, although she has created a forum for others, she has handed over

the power the public to contribute and build its future. This creates an open platform

for the wider public to enter which address’ part of the imbalance of power of the

artist (slave) and the gatekeeper (master).

Haregreaves-McIntyre 2004 highlights the limitation of the internet for those

intending to sell work; although it is efficient is in raising awareness and at ‘selling

well-branded editions. When it comes to original works, most buyers want to see

work 'in the flesh'. Successful internet sellers tend to also work in partnership with

physical galleries.’ (18)

Page 8

Rowley aimed to create a forum for artists to enter without restriction from a

gatekeeper. The intention of her website is to allow open access to all artists

however; they would have to find other routes to generate income because work

cannot be viewed in person.

Economic sustainability

Snoddy 2006 raised the issue of buying of contemporary art and said that for

managers it should be considered ‘at the top of their institutions agenda…An early

purchase of an artist's work can be of immense economic value.’ (16-17)

He believes that directors have a responsibility to play a positive role in a leading a

region's aspirations in cultural development and social engagement (16-17). His

stance on leadership is similarly recognised by Marjorie Allthorpe-Guyton 2003

‘Buying works of art for a public collection is a responsibility that requires knowledge,

diligence and tenacity’ (6)

Snoddy (op cit.) discusses the opportunities for collections to support economic

resilience and sustainability for the institution in the longer term, at the same time

recognizing that this does not have to jeopardize the integrity of other public duties in

the process.

‘I believe strongly that regional museums and galleries must balance their public

duties regarding exhibitions, education, interpretation, social inclusion and equality

with responsibility for acquiring contemporary art - art that creates a history and a

legacy for the future’ (16-17).

He recognised how institutional directors are influential leaders in other areas of the

market place. He said that directors have the opportunity to be pioneers in

Page 9

discovering new and diverse work through supporting, developing and buying work

at the early stage of an artist career. Institutions can gain financial return, build the

artist’s reputation as well as their own and lead the future of the market of

contemporary art.

However this paper does not discuss how an artist’s work is identified as a suitable

investment. In public organisations funding come from a silent majority who are

unable to participate in the decisions to justify which pieces should be brought for

long term benefit. Snoddy insists that it is the director’s responsibility to make these

choices unlike Rowley’s RAW!WAR website. Unfortunately the website does not

provide storage and maintenance of a physical work of art therefore works cannot

been seen or touched by a potential buyer nor can this model save works of art for

prosperity, the archive is representational in a digital format.

The artist and the collector

Mansfield 2010 provides an example of how the role of gatekeepers can support

artists and influence an artist’s career. For example he cites David Hockney

acknowledging; his ’significant contributions to British Pop Art’ (181), Gordon Burn

also acknowledges Hockey’s extraordinary raise to fame in the 1960s (Hirst and

Burn 2001) ‘Not since the emergence of David Hockney in the early 1960s had a

British artist's passage to fame been so rapid and spectacular’ (41).

Hockney’s work was collected by a number of curators working with public spaces

including, Wolverhampton Art Gallery, Cartwright Hall in Bradford and more

significantly the Walker Art Gallery, in Liverpool. Walker Art Gallery is home to the

iconic Hockney painting, Peter getting out of Nick’s pool which won the 1967 John

Moores prize. Hockey was the winner out of 1,813 entries selected by a panel of five

Page 10

individuals including John Moore himself (Liverpoolmuseum. 2012). John Moore was

concerned with London’s increasing domination of the national arts scene and

developed the biennial painting competition as a means to draw focus to the North

West. (Mansfield 191).

The fact that Hockney was a ‘northern artist’ having been born in Bradford, may have

influenced the panel when considering the winner. In Hockney, John Moore had a

worthy winner with a growing national and international reputation.

The Walker Art Gallery has automatically added the first prize-winner to its collection

since the 1980s (Mansfield 191). This may be due to the realisation that a piece of

art can be a significant long term financial investment. Artists, whose artistic

interests are, aligned to decision makers aims and interests are more likely to be

selected for permanent collections. For example, the John Moores collection has

some of Hockney’s early work, A 1963 piece sold for 3.28 million in 2005 (Galenson

2005 46) Supporting Snoddy’s suggestion of the importance of collecting work early

in artist’s career.

Unwritten Rules

The New Contemporaries, an organisation that selects work to enter an annual

exhibition of emerging talent, hold a basic principle of a constant open and

democratic exhibition, ‘fundamental belief in a truly democratic selection, without

knowledge of school, sex, or age, is based on the premise of fairness where work

can, itself, without the anecdotal support of connection and context, triumph.’

(Craddock, New Contemporaries 2010 3).

Page 11

New Contemporaries work is selected from students who are undergraduate and

postgraduate, as well as people a year out of art school. Because selectors do not

have prior knowledge of the artist, judgement is only made on the basis of work

submitted. However, there are unwritten rules that bar certain artists from

participation. For example some applicants who were attempting to renegotiate

relationships to identity did not get into the final exhibition, because selector Mellor

acknowledged:

‘Currently identity politics is perceived to be somewhat dated. I’m interested in what’s

failed, in terms of why it fails. For example, if you are living in some Northern town

and you want to deal with class, and you are told that’s no longer an issue in this

country, I don’t know how you deal with that’ (New Contemporaries 2010 5)

If identity politics is of no interest to the selection panel it will not be selected and

therefore becomes invisible. Selector Kuri noted that it was inevitable that she

reflected on her own practice and saw similar shared concerns in other’s work, whilst

Mellor states that she ‘aims to remove as much subjectivity as possible’ (New

contemporaries 2010 7). Unlike a director’s motives for selection, Snoddy (2006) the

selector shows conflict between individual perceptions of excellence and how they

individually judge merit to artists work.

As all the selectors have artistic backgrounds rather being a panel of people from

different professional fields, while agreement may be easier it could result in a less

diversely representative portfolio because collectively they represent a small

segment of society. A panel of professionals from different fields may place

importance on other works.

Page 12

An attempt has been made to create a system of presenting work for selection that

tries to be more democratic in its construction but the weakness in the process

overall is that without a truly diverse panel there is little democracy. The public

remain excluded from input to the selection process and so selection is dependent

on the discrete tastes of the selectors. Unlike the RAW/WAR online exhibition which

allows anyone to upload content, New Contemporaries continues to act as

institutional gate keepers to who is considered worthy and excellent.

Summary

The issues that have been discussed demonstrate what a rich and complex area this

is. Concepts that have been explored include the exclusivity of the art institutions,

funders opportunities for voicing their opinions on how their money is spent, and how

to include them in the decision making process, ensuring that there is diversity in the

collections that reflect the diversity in society. It is certainly necessary to have

knowledgeable and educated decision makers to run the institutions and panels, it is

also important to prevent individuals or interest groups from dominating selection

panels. Alonzo, Bieber, and Krohn 2011, note ’Regardless of whether individuals,

who are the decisions makers, have the appropriate qualifications, within the system,

an individual’s presence can be influential through driving their own agenda on

selection panels.’(5)

Another issue that has arisen is the need for compromise with traditionally excluded

groups. The Guerrillas Girls group has highlighted the lack of representation from

50% of the population because of the hegemony of men in the art world as artists

and buyers. Without such issues being raised the established elite remain unaware

Page 13

and lack insight into the need for reform, this was seen in the Tate’s response to

Foster.

There are issues for how work is selected, it is usually by ‘expert’ panel members

and all institutions have been criticises for their exclusivity and the limitations of

individual panel members. To address this Rowley’s established her loosely

structured website. Unfortunately this could lead to a model that is oversubscribed

but also chaotic with work that is indiscriminately placed. There may be a diminution

in the interest because of the lack of discrimination by Rowley if too much poor

quality work dominates her site. This is a paradoxical situation for her and it difficult

to see how it might be overcome.

Directors of institutions need to examine how panel members are selected; they

need to ensure diversity rather than a comfortable homogeneity of members from

their own class and educational background.

Alonzo, Bieber, and Krohn (op cit.) discuss the fact that the selection process of any

given collection can be in danger of non-democratic selection from a ‘privileged or

preferred few with relative power…’ ( 5).

Snoddy’s contribution to the discussion on the economics of managing a gallery has

inherent tensions. His suggestion that work is bought early in an artist’s career

places a great weight of responsibility on managers to not only spot artists whose

work may rise in value, but also predict future trends and tastes. Collecting early

work is a gamble. Another tension is the selling of work once an artist is established.

Selling a piece, while immediately raising much needed revenue, may be detrimental

in the long run, visitors attend galleries to see particular works of art. If key pieces

are sold then that may reduce revenue from future visitors.

Page 14

Much of the research appears incomplete because it is without the voice of a major

funding contributor, the tax payer. It is difficult to see how to directly tap views from

the public except to rely on their elected representatives, the politicians; this is why

ACE is ultimately responsible to the government of the day. Future research may

explore how to engage in a more direct and meaningful way for getting public

representation on to selection panels. Regional pilot studies may be a way forward.

Word Count: 3, 193

Page 15

Bibliography

Allthorpe-Guyton et al, Marjorie. Arts Council Collection Acquisitions 1989-2002,

London, Hayward Gallery 2003. Print

Alonzo, Pedro, Bieber, Alain, and Krohn, Silke. Art and Agenda, Political art and

Activist. Ed.Klanten et al. Guestalten, Berlin 2011 Print

Anderson, Heather, Art Education, Vol. 45, No. 2, National Art Education Association

1992, 14-22 Print

Araeen, Rasheed Cultural Diversity. Creative and Modernism, Beyond Cultural

Diversity the Case for Creativity. Ed. Appigananesi, Richard. London, Third Text,

2010. Print

Arts Council England, Arts policies, Developing arts practice and engagement,

London 2006 Web.

www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/documents/.../phpiz2yUb.doc 06 Jan 2012

Arts Council England. Visual Arts policy, London 2006 Web.

www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/.../visual_arts_policy.pdf 06 Jan2012

Craddock, Sacha, New Contemporaries 2010, New Contemporaries, London, 2010

Galenson, David Who are the Greatest Living Artists? The View from the Auction

Market, NBER No. 11644, Massachusetts, 2005 Web.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w11644.pdf 04 Jan 2012

Page 16

Hargreaves-McIntyre, Taste Buds, How to cultivate the art market, executive

summary, Ed. Hadley, Janet, Arts Council England, London 2004 Web.

http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/documents/publications/tastebudssum

mary_php7xDjDe.pdf

Hershman-Leeson, Lynn, touched, Ed.Domela, Paul,Liverpool Contemporary Art,

Printed DeckersSnoeck, Antwerp, Belgium 2011

Hirst, Damien and Burn, Gordon. On the Way to Work, Faber and Faber, Alibris UK,

2001

Legislation.gov Equality Act 2010

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/4.Web.15 Jan 2012

Liverpool Museums. Liverpoolmuseum.org. Johnmoores n.d. Web. 07 Jan

2012http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/johnmoores/fact_file/fact_file6.aspx

Mahamdallie, Hassan Breaking the Code: New Approaches to Diversity and Equality

in the Arts. Beyond Cultural Diversity the Case for Creativity. Ed. Appigananesi,

Richard. London, Third Text, 2010. Print

Mansfield, Laura. Contemporary art society, the guide to public collections of art in

the UK, Ed. Byatt, Lucy, the Contemporary Arts Society, London, 2010

McMaster, Brian Supporting Excellence in the Arts: From Measurement to

Judgement,Dept. of Culture, Media and Sport, London, 2008

Mulvey, Laura, Visual and Other Pleasures, Basingstoke,Macmillan, 1989

Page 17

New Contemporaries 2010, New Contemporaries, London, 2010

Parker, Rozsika and Pollock, Griselda. Old Mistresses, Pandora, London, 1981

Snoddy, Stephen ’Prepare for the future’ Museumsassociation.org 106/9 2006. 16-

17 Web. 15 Dec. 2011 http://www.museumsassociation.org/archive

Whithers, Josephine, The Guerrilla Girls, Feminist Studies, Vol 14, No 2, Feminist

Studies Inc 1988, 285-300