A new article suggests
that the traditional gallery model is "structurally weak"
that a series of fairs and Internet based modes are supplanting the old walk-in
model. This is partially correct, I can see galleries choosing smaller downtown
spaces and cheaper/larger and less finished project spaces in the future. The
trick is keeping collectors engaged and interested and simply scaling back (+ showing
more conservative work) without coherent, large scale or adventurous shows won't
create more excitement. You have to put collectors in the mood by impressing them and setting their minds at work. Fairs are so overwhelming it promotes buying but that doesn't work for
everyone. I think there is a balanced approach that makes more sense by creating
destination programming. Unless you are selling blue chip work a large downtown
gallery doesn't make sense anymore.
Ohr Museum took a beating from Katrina, then the BP oilspill... now it is demographics
on the so called "Redneck Riviera"?
Honestly, I want this to survive,
Im a big fan and at some point it is up to patrons to step up to protect culture...
charging admission (now $25 at MoMA) isn't really viable in out of the way places
with lower museum attendance. The have's must protect what is worth protecting
so the have not's can enjoy culture as well. Culture isn't just for the rich
who can buy up George Ohr's pottery.
Nouvel's granite and vegetation monolith at the world's busiest fishing port
is a new twist on harbor lighthouses?
Thanks for signing in,
. Now you can comment. (sign
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by
the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear
on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)