The year I graduated from Art School, the art world was in one of its “painting is dead” moments in 1987. It had been three years since New York’s Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) had last held an exhibition of contemporary painting – MOMA having included my professor among the world’s 100 most promising painters. One of the pre-eminent gatekeepers of modern art, it would not stage another for 25 years. That alone speaks volumes of the world I stepped into as a painter. Any wonder I made my living elsewhere for the last 40 years?
Painting appears to be making a comeback these days, not that it entirely went away. It was kept alive not by curators of contemporary art, but by collectors and members of the public who refused to turn their backs to it. Painting continues to be well-represented at the international art fairs, where booths are expensive and the ability to actually sell something and collect commission is necessary to cover those costs. Declaring painting dead likely didn’t help.
Wednesday night my spouse and I attended the opening of Rare Form at the Station Gallery in Whitby. The Station Gallery is one of the many small municipally-run non-commercial galleries that offer a lifeline to local emerging artists who are seeking to develop an exhibition record and get their work in front of the public. Rare Form is the 33rd Annual community exhibition, drawing in so many people on its opening night that it was uncomfortable. Some people (not us) were wise enough to wear surgical masks amid a particularly bad flu season.
We were told that there were 200 applicants to the show’s call for entry, of which it appears about 150 made the exhibition. That led to some very crowded spaces – the Station Gallery has only three modest-sized salons on its main floor. I felt badly for anyone who was hung in the corridor between the last two galleries – it was next to impossible to look at the work there amid all the people coming and going. My painting was hung in the second gallery, just above a fire alarm, the bartender kidding me that my painting must have been hot stuff. At least I made a wall space — others were shown on easels. As much as I admire their attempt to be as inclusive as possible, the jury should have likely tried a little harder to move the number of selections downwards. Quality over quantity. I think that most artists would prefer it that way too. Of course, amid a crowd like that it is also impossible to properly take in the show.
As a point of comparison, I recently applied to the Think Pink show at the Leslie Grove Gallery (starting January 7th). I didn’t make the cut, but neither did three of four applicants. They too had more than 200 submissions and limited their selection to 54. The last colour-theme show I had participated in with this group was 2006, then at the Eastern Front Gallery. I was fortunate to be among the small number who were selected back then for the Blue Show. My turn will come around.
While paintings likely dominated submissions (I didn’t count) in Whitby, none of them made the top three awards on the evening, the prizes going to a ceramic piece (three mugs attached together with a ceramic chain), an abstract(?) fabric piece, and a small sculpture assembly that looked a little goth or new age to me. Amid the crowds, I was worried that the ceramic piece was most at risk: I noticed one woman narrowly missed knocking it off its plinth with her handbag while squeezing past other patrons.
My spouse also noted the lack of landscapes among the selected work. She did like one landscape made of felt, and there were some landscape photos, but there wasn’t a lot overall. This in a country predominantly known for its natural vistas. Are we finally past the Group of Seven? Maybe? On-line it would be hard to make that argument given all the Group of Seven wannabes posting their rocks, trees and lakes with zeal. Maybe landscape artists know better than to enter competitions? Coincidentally this morning’s Art Net post noted the comeback in landscapes, with of course, a modern twist around story telling. That trend may be a little slow to get out to us in the burbs.
At the beginning of the 19th Century landscape was considered to be the lowest form of art, many believing that artists did little more than go out in nature and copy what they saw, compared to, for example, history painters. That all changed and got supercharged with artists like Corot and later the French Impressionists. In Canada we had the aforementioned Group of Seven. But then the rest of the 20th Century was not particularly kind to landscape, and I feel we have somehow gone back 200 years.
Funniest moment on Wednesday night: A fellow artist who likely knew me from the Oshawa Art Association asked which piece in the show was mine? I said it was the self-portrait on the wall above the fire alarm. “Who’s it of?” she asked before realizing her faux pas and laughing.
—
I also noticed this week that the Estate of singer Marianne Faithfull went on the auction block with some shockingly low numbers. That included two portraits of the singer that went for less than what a lot of parents paid for their kids to see Taylor Swift. One of the portraits was by 1960s “It girl” Anita Pallenburg, a film actor (Barbarella) and model who had three children with Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards. That would be double celebrity cred. As my spouse said, Faithfull has been out of the spotlight for a long time, although for me her album Broken English is among the great rock LPs of the 1970s. While I am tempted to say that being dead will take you out of the spotlight, recently there have been a number of women artists who are resurgent at auction and commanding big prices, of course long after (sometimes centuries) they could have possibly benefited from it.

















