When is something Art and when is it just a painting?

The person, aka the artist, has spent significant time intentionally crafting the pieces. Sometimes the thread of the art can be better understood after creating multiple pieces. But the artist has intentionally set out to make a body of work. We have the rule at the gallery, if one artwork is amazing, but the rest does not compare, then this amazing piece was an accident.

At the gallery, we look for an artist who has intentionality as well as dedicated themselves to their craft. This allows for works to not only be aesthetically pleasing but continue to evoke emotions. 

Bring us to point 2. The artist's artwork has an impact on the viewers. Provoking thoughtful discussions, or emotion. 

When an artwork speaks to you, this is when you should consider it art. As long as an artwork continues to intrigue and evoke a response from viewers, it is art. Now, this can be manipulated by marketing and shock factors, but I would like you to consider what artwork does to you and if it continues to engage you.

Another aspect that is important to me and I hope to you as well does the art align with my social and political values. As a female gallery owner, I am often disgusted by the amount of artwork present at art fairs with large pieces that have images of young hurt or nude girls and boys in the artwork. Children. I am horrified every time again by how widespread P is in the art world and how comfortable people are in portraying it. On LinkedIn and other social media platforms, I constantly flag this type of art. I digress but also urge you to spend time reflecting on your aesthetic likes and also maybe add a layer of doing research into what type of artist is behind the work. Unfortunately in an unregulated market, as the art world is, a lot of abuse goes unchecked. A lot of gallery owners will continue to support problematic artists, as long as it keeps selling.

This art is evoking a very strong emotion of anger and repulsion in me, while still being showcased to a large audience at an art fair. I, however, do not consider this art, but rather as a disgusting visual reminder of how much still needs to change in the art world. So simple evocation isn't art on its own. One should also consider the artist's intent. We look for artwork that is open to multiple interpretations, has a soothing quality and tends to provoke thoughtful discussions in its viewers. We strongly select pieces that bring joy, beauty and make us think about what it means to be human. Art that is suitable for your home, a space of rest.

In art, once it is made, the artist can no longer control the narrative of the artwork. Some artists hate this, other artists embrace this. I for one do not believe that artists are only artists when another recognizes that person as an artist. No artist's body of work will speak to all people and that is okay. If the validation of being an artist comes from external authority, I think leads to a lot of depression and self-doubt in an artist. The validation cannot be solely from an external factor. But for a very long time, it was bad etiquette to call yourself an artist without external validation. 

The artist of the gallery has to acknowledge themselves as artists and take themselves seriously before I can work with them. The intrinsic belief of being an artist is what makes them an artist. Whether or not the artwork is good. At Gallery Sorelle Sciarone we expect artists to first and foremost be able to say they are an artist. Then from their body of work, we can decide if their pieces fit into the gallery's vision. Here is an article articulating exactly what we look for in artwork.

Its important that the artists are intentional in their being and craft. Not use art as an external form of validation.

Criteria at Gallery Sorelle Sciarone

This brings us to the next point: capturing the hearts and minds of people viewing the art.

The importance is that the artwork is shown to people. If art does not have an audience, or fails to capture the imagination, it is no longer art. Not many artworks manage to capture the attention of everyone and even less pieces continue to capture the attention past a generation. So the moment an artwork captures your attention, it becomes art. The audience can be for one, a family, an office, an institution etc. As long as it is shown it is art. Displaying art in public spaces allows for a larger and larger audience. Therefore building more cultural capital around the artwork. Rather I would like to use the following part as a better marker of art.

The gallery is an institution, so we do not use this as a marker to define art. However, we do spend a lot of time looking and finding art, before we settled on who we represent. For many people you know going to a gallery we have sifted through countless works, separating the wheat from the chaff. 

Some people will only recognize artists if their artwork sells, and also only when it continues to sell. Just for example only published authors are considered authors, even though there might be some lady considered a housewife in her normal life, but has published several thousand chapters of fanfic with a large following without any payment. I find this a tricky criterion, as many great artists might sell well for a few years, before fading into obscurity, while other artists, will only really sell after their deaths. I would never use this criterion to decide whether or not something is art. The art market is extremely fickle as well as unregulated and biased.

Another reason we do not make use of this criterion, some art fairs we will sell 8 pieces by one artist and none by another other artist. And at another art fair vice versa. Also one year we will sell 12 pieces by one artist and then none for 2 or 3 years. We think it is highly unethical and destructive to the environment and artists to continuously demand new artwork and only showcase new artworks while disregarding older works. Which has been an unsustainable trend in the contemporary primary art world. Sometimes it takes time before an artwork lands in front of those who will cherish it.

And some of our artists sell dozens of artwork per year and others only one or two, but they sell at different price points, where one makes more a year in a single sale than another does in two dozen sales. 

When a piece is taken up into a gallery, museum or other institution, there are often articles and documentation made around the piece. From the sale receipts to the articles written and archival receipts made. This way the artwork is written and thought about. Academic texts and institutions reflect on the artwork and make reproductions of the artwork allowing it to be studied even if the actual artwork is lost to time. As long as there is ongoing engagement with the artwork, no matter at what level, it is art. The more prestigious the institution, space and people engaging with the artwork, the more cultural capital is awarded to the artwork, increasing its "Art" status.

The lowest form would be marketing texts. Followed by analysis by experts, critique by critics and finally being incorporated into academic and archival writing. With the hopes that the academic and archival writing is not lost to a too-small audience. However, it does increase the longevity of the artwork being considered art. 

We are dedicated to documenting and exploring all the artwork at Gallery Sorelle Sciarone. Tascha Sciarone is an Art Historian and knows the importance of contemporary documentation. We aim to capture how the artwork made by the artists is perceived by the public and academics alike.

I wrote a long part about the art canon and how that is supposedly created by artists and the work that signifies a dramatic shift in our culture. Then I went on to explain how this canon is neither impartial and was created largely during a patriarchal and colonial period. This second attempt tries to be less preachy but knows that the foundation of how we perceive canon is academically and institutionally regarded as wrong and detrimental to the greater history of art and creation. 

So to summarise since the Second World War we have stepped away from this type of thinking around art. This model of linear innovative growth with one pioneer or genius is no longer the way we view the world. 

To further read about this I suggest the following pieces:

Part 1: Why we love the term Golden Age

Part 2: Dutch Golden Age vs. Seventeenth Century the Debate

Understanding Post Studio Art Practices

How to understand contemporary art.