Gosford Art Prize: The Game is the Winner

Gosford Art Prize: The game is the winner.

Depending of course which game you are on.

Art Prize Exhibitions.
They are a strange and proliferating phenomenon. They put bums on seats and give the appearance of giving the public what it wants – always a politically savvy manoeuvre. They are cheap to run – artists pay to enter, they are not paid artists fees, and often the cash for prizes comes from sponsorship, private foundations and trusts.

But what do they have to do with exhibiting best practice in art? Is this an objective?

The GAP (The Gosford Art Prize) this year has no video, installation, performance, IT or time based work, non-gallery practice, sound etc.. This is not to say that it should, but that it should perhaps indicate clearly that GAP is for art in traditional media, and in traditional media specific categories.

It encourages a perception of what the main game is, cash for craft. This is not helpful to young artists or to local decision makers who need to recognise that it is through encouraging innovative, strange and sometimes socially abrasive new forms, that we enliven local creative culture. If you make work of this kind, don’t bother running for the gravy train. Mind the GAP.

With the demise of the Australian Sculpture Prize there has been some discussion of the appropriateness of a “winners and losers” model for generating excellence in the arts. Witness the Oscars; and we know from the recent League Grand Final that the referee decides the results. The game must be the winner.
No one doubts the success of “The Prize” as popular entertainment.

Ron Radford’s decision to end the Sculpture Prize was supported by last years winner, who in an a recent ABC interview, said that despite his pleasure with the cash in winning, he thought the greatest attraction for him in entering was to have his work seen by more people. We might ask, which people, and whether the prize money might not have been better spent in presenting more exhibitions and therefore more exposure for more artists.

There is an interesting nexus, a comfortable collusion, between the big “block-buster” competition and the big end of town.

But they are popular, they bring in the punters, attract a huge number of entries, and engage a great deal of community support. The extra sponsorship of GAP this year by Sharpe Brothers was terrific – including the Roadworkers Prize. They set a great example for other businesses.

I do congratulate those artists, including the prize-winners, whose many works were very professionally executed. There was only time for a quick survey at the opening so we will return.

The comments here are about the role of art competition prize exhibitions in the field of art practice and not meant to disregard the undoubted passion, commitment and skill of the artists shown.

Maybe there is something in the water locally. Councillor Holstein commented at the opening that the region had so much creativity and talent because of our beautiful environment. Don’t know how they manage to do so well in New York.

Alternatively, perhaps it is the seduction of the environment, or the absence of anything else, which we need to contend with in developing an art that is conceptually rigorous in the context of emergent contemporary art issues. Anyway the water is almost gone.

Some extracts from Art Life follow – see the link for the full version.


“The prize giving season is the art world's eqivalent to a family Xmas. First the presents, then the booze, then the drunken recriminations then a long silence until next year. Part of this annual art world ritual is to celebrate the winners before turning on them like a pack of savages. Perhaps it's the knowledge that they are the ones that get to leave Australia - a country where any minute now we'll be forced to sign loyalty oaths, where everything will be owned by just one or two companies, where everything that was once ours has been sold back to us and we're expected to say thank you sir, may we have another... The artists get to leave, see how they do it overseas and maybe not ever come back.

Art World FAQs # 2 – Bad Art

What is ‘bad art’?

Bad art is literally art that is bad. Easy, you say, I know what bad is – but do you? There are eight identifiable types of bad art and it pays to know what’s what.

1. Competition Art. The most easily defined type of bad art, Competition Art is found in many different areas of the art world from humble shows in your local church hall right up to and including media saturated events such as the Archibald Portrait prize. Competition Art is easily spotted due to the artist’s complete lack of traditional skills like the ability to draw hands, master perspective or apply the paint. Typical examples of lower end Comp Art feature trad still-lifes, landscapes and horribly misjudged portraits. At the other end of the scale bad art is often veiled by the artist’s own celebrity, early career or better work, but even the so-called professionals turn out some horrible crap.”