Wayne Art Center …
On Saturday, the 17th, SAQA (Studio Art Quilt Association) spoonsored a symposium called “Building An Artist’s Community” at the Wayne Art Center, in Wayne, Pennsylvaina (outside of Philadelphia). The symposium was held prior to the opening of ArtQuilt Elements 2010, although attendees had the opportunity to see the quilts prior to the public opening.
The Wayne Art Center
Once in the center, we were greeted by Carolyn Lee Vehslage, an artist, the Editor of the SAQA quarterly magazine, and an active member of the Art Center.
Prior to the symposium starting, we were able to view the works selected for the show.
Entry into the first room of the ArtQuilt Elements 2010 show
My friend, Colleen Bell, who made the trek with me from central NJ.
A hallway in the Art Center which was showing off a fascinating collection of images created with shells.
The symposium sessions started at 9 a.m.
Sue Benner was the first speaker. She talked about her journey as a quilt artist, including the intertwining of her family and the various artists who came into her life at various times of her life. I would have also loved to have seen some of her work, which I’ve always admired, up close and in the flesh.
Next up was a discussion of the jury process by the jurors of this year’s show — Robin Schwab, Deborah Warner, and Jason Pollen. I wasn’t juried into the show, so I was interested in hearing what they were looking for and why. Coming into the lecture, my thinking was they were looking for an emotional response to a visually expressive piece with that piece also having to work together with the others to form a cohesive whole.
It was a lively discussion with a lot of audience participation, and it all centered on slides of rejected work. While I liked the interaction, I often didn’t get why there was so much emphasis on the composition of the detail shot. I’ve always thought a detail shot is to zero in on the technique of a piece, to call attention to that which might might get lost when looking at the image of the whole work. It seemed a strange thing to emphasize as one can take a good crop from most pieces of art and make an interesting piece of it in its own right. It almost seemed as though they were rejecting works whose detail looked more interesting than the whole. And, as an audience participant said, “It was like comparing apples to oranges” and “what about scale.” That all being said, they are the jurors and what they are drawn to is what they are drawn to. It’s very subjective stuff.
For me it would have been more enlightening if there was a rejected piece discussed and then an accepted piece discussed, giving their take on why one detail complemented the piece while the other didn’t, what they believe worked in one that didn’t in the other, and so on. That would have given me more insight in to their process (yes, I can be a thickhead).
Benedicte Caneill, who won the SAQA Cream Award for outstanding new artist!!, and moi
It was good seeing a lot of people that I haven’t seen in some time and meeting people that I’ve only spoken to on line. I finally met Wen Redmond and Natalya Aikens, both of whom are lovely, talented, and have work in the show.
Colleen and I both were unable to stay for the remaining afternoon events and the public opening of the show, but we had a great time. There is a lot of fantastic work in the show, and if you’re unable to make it you can purchase a catalog of the quilts directly from the ArtQuilt Elements website.
April 20th, 2010 at 2:09 am
How interesting – I had the same concept of the detail shot. However, I was just juried into a show that Jamie Fingal and Leslie Tucker Jenison juried. Their number 3 criteria was:
2. good photography and especially in choosing what portion of the quilt should be given to the detail
So, twice today, this has come up with something I wouldn’t have guessed.
April 20th, 2010 at 8:31 am
I get that the detail is very important and should reflect a close up of the essence of the quilt. What I didn’t get was how much weight they seemed to put on the composition of it. I would think the overall piece would have more weight. Towards the end I did learn that the images — full and close — were side by side. Okay. That helps. Maybe if they created a couple slides of that side by side and talked more about the selected detail. Even putting some slides into Keynote or Power Point and circling the area of the detail and explaining why one area would be more successful than what was selected. Or point out with a laser pointer circling on the screen. And, also, I would have liked to see some of the quilts accepted and compared in a similar way.
It’s all very subjective. And, no doubt, I can be quite a thick head. But when seeing the selected quilts, while most were fantastic, there were a couple that seemed to fly in the face of what they were talking about. So .. there you go. Subjective is subjective and their decision is just that no matter how it is explained.
And congrats on your recent acceptance. :)
April 20th, 2010 at 9:08 am
Hey gloria! I went to this event 2 years ago, and enjoyed it a lot. The Elements exhibition and the venue are delightful. Sorry we weren’t there the same year!
April 22nd, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Fascinating report on the jury’s discussion, Gloria. I have juried shows and couldn’t care less about the detail shot — it’s the overall visual impact of the art that makes the difference. I don’t understand why quilt people need details when no other medium requires them for entering juried shows.Holdover from the county fair – makes me think of lipstick on a pig.
I also agree that a comparison of accepted/not accepted and why might have given some insight into the jurors’ thinking – but the question is whether the rejectees were asked whether their pieces could be shown for that purpose or whether the jurors just took the liberty of showing them.
If I had been rejected, I would not be happy if my work had been the example of WHY it had been rejected. Since I did not submit, this is moot – but, still…
Finally, yes it is all subjective and every show has what I call “head scratchers.” Many times there is a quid pro quo compromise or two, which might explain these pieces.
The picture of you and Benedicte is beautiful! Thanks for the interesting post.
April 22nd, 2010 at 11:47 pm
Thanks Rayna. Regarding the detail shot, I like seeing it. When I look at anything that catches my attention, first I’m soaking in the whole. Then I’m generally walking up to get a closer look — a zooming in to see what else is happening. What’s going on with the brush strokes, textures in the paint, and so on. With textiles, I like seeing what’s happening with the fabric, the stitching. But, absolutely overall visual attention-grabbing punch does it.
Regarding the rejected images, I’ve no idea. However, there was no malice. It was designed to be educational and helpful.
April 22nd, 2010 at 11:47 pm
I agree, Jane. One of these days our physical paths are going to cross!