This article is by Brian Sherwin, Regular contributing writer for FineArtViews. Brian Sherwin is an art critic, blogger, curator, artist and writer based near Chicago, Illinois. He has been published in Hi Fructose Magazine, Illinois Times, and other publications, and linked to by publications such as The Huffington Post, The Boston Globe, Juxtapoz Magazine, Deutsche Bank ArtMag, ARTLURKER, Myartspace, Blabbermouth, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Modern Art Obsession, Citizen LA, Shark Forum, Two Coats of Paint and Art Fag City. You should submit an article and share your views as a guest author by clicking here.
The arrest of artist Ai Weiwei in China has forced many to ask why the mainstream art world continues to support the Chinese art market while at the same time speaking out against the brutality and lack of humanity displayed by the Chinese government. Those with that position feel that key individuals who have stood up for artist Ai Weiwei-- who is currently being held in custody after being arrested in China-- are being hypocritical. In my opinion this recent burst of criticism against the art world powers-that-be opens up larger questions that have yet to be addressed effectively within the mainstream.
The common feeling-- at least from what I've observed on art blogs, art forums, and elsewhere-- is that the want of money is held higher than doing what is right from an ethical standpoint. After all, major museum exchanges between the US and China, as well as international art fair involvement involving Chinese art galleries, tend to bolster the Chinese economy-- and thus, a government that is highly oppressive of its own people. It is like feeding a rabid dog that you know will likely bite you.
I can understand why so many individuals view this situation as hypocrisy. That said, I assume others would suggest that banning aspects of the Chinese art world from international involvement-- specifically in the US-- as a statement in support of Ai Weiwei would have the end result of punishing gallery owners, museums, and artists in China. They would get hit in the crossfire of the statement, so to speak. That said, things do get complicated when influential individuals within the art world say one thing while taking action in an entirely different direction. Why fend off the rabid dog only to feed it and pat it on the head? If these museum directors, art critics, and others were held to the same expectations as politicians-- well, lets just say that they would have lost the positions they hold long ago.
In that sense, yes-- hypocrisy and the mainstream art world walk hand-in-hand. However, that connection between what has been said and hypocrisy has long been evident in other ways within the mainstream art world. You can say the same of art critics, curators, and others who suggest that political and social bias does not exist within the realm of their professions-- but only write, exhibit, or promote, in general, art that tends to embrace a rather closed set of political and social views-- views they agree with-- compared to the plethora of views held by the public at large. In that sense, the public-- and the history of art-- is not being served.
When thinking of the art world and hypocrisy I'm forced to ask: How can an art critic claim that he or she does not allow political, social, or religious bias to dictate his or her opinions on art when he or she reveals solid political, social, religious (often against specific religions) motivations on Facebook or Twitter that downplay all opposing views? If an art critic can't take different opinions serious why should it be assumed that he or she will take opinions expressed visually serious unless they cater to his or her personal political, social, or religious views? Needless to say, I think this is something that should be explored while the smoking gun of exposing art world hypocrisy is still hot.
As I have long said-- want to see hypocrisy at work? Open up any art history book OR look at major museum acquisitions that have taken place in the last decade alone. Bias is clear-- hypocrisy is clear. The mainstream art world is not as open-minded as many assume. You will find that specific hard-line viewpoints are often the status quo of the mainstream contemporary art world.
In closing, I will leave you with a quote that sums up how I feel concerning the mainstream contemporary art world and hypocrisy: "I'm not interested in preserving the status quo; I want to overthrow it." -- Niccolo Machiavelli. No, I'm not suggesting that I have the ability to overthrow hypocritical practices and bias within the art world. That said, I will say what I think-- and stand by it in my actions. My revolution, if you will, starts with integrity. Perhaps it is time for others working within the arts to adhere to the same principle of not flip-flopping between what is said compared to what is done. After all, actions tend to say everything.
Take care, Stay true,