Two years is a century now
Horace Brockington
Excerpts from a conversation between Horace Brockington and Jessica Murray, who recently moved her non-profit space from Brooklyn to Chelsea, and became for-profit along the way.
Murray on the move:
One of my thoughts was: Why shouldn?t I open a commercial gallery when I was a not for profit person? Why do you have to keep those things in separate boxes? It?s a terrible baroque relationship when you work in a museum?tons of restrains, grants, socialization, endless complex relationship. When you?re selling the art it?s rather straightforward. I can do whatever I want every day. I think the galleries are extremely important in creating art history and the advantage I have is that I don?t have to apply for a grant and I don?t have to schedule an exhibition sixteen years in advance. I can do it tomorrow if I want.
For me, one of the challenges from going from curating to running a gallery or going from Brooklyn to Chelsea is that people see you with different glasses on now. One recent reviewer suggested that I and few other young gallerists have changed our artistic position now that we?ve moved to Chelsea. I think people see what they want to see. I would show the kind of work I like in any of my spaces.
Brooklyn is still the engine of the art world. My move to Manhattan is really one for the careers of the artists. Most things produced in art now are coming out of Brooklyn. It?s pretty much in Williamsburg. All these galleries moving is in a way a statement of its success. We did so well, so much traffic, the businesses were able to grow financially so that they were able to move. We wanted to have more long term relationships with the artists. So you needed a house to do that, and the Brooklyn spaces were just not big enough pots for these plants to grow. They were getting root bound. The exposure here is different than in Brooklyn. We had great collectors, and I made great relationships there, but they would not see every show. Here they see very show.
With collectors, the relationship is much more equal, more satisfying, and much more interesting than working with patrons. Each collector collects for a different reason. Some people are looking for the avant-garde, some are looking for something to move them spiritually, and some people are looking for that "something" which is going to keep working formally, day after day after day. Part of what I do is educate the collector, and I enjoy that.
On the New Art Dealers Alliance:
One of the things that has fortified me is the New Art Dealers Alliance. We formed an organization of young galleries. So it wasn?t just me having relationships with other people, it was me thinking: What should my relationships be like? So I was going to call my friends that have galleries and discuss various related matters. NADA is a fortifying place to be as a young gallerist because there is strength in numbers. We created a fresh energy, while forming friendships early on before we get into these types of cold war adversarial relationships.
On fastracking young artists:
The concentration on younger and emerging artists is a problem for the gallerists because it means you basically have to jump on board with these very young artists and they are not really mature enough to be married? I do think a lot of what we do is actually like a marriage. To represent an artist is basically a long-term relationship. It?s not a date. That?s one of the biggest differences between curating and having a gallery: in the former context my relationships were temporary and fun. Now they pretty serious relationships.
A lot of young artists are not really ready for it? it?s like flying into the sun. Today you can?t let it evolve in a way that you think would be natural. For example, you can?t take one work from a young artist, put it in a group show, have a nice relationship for year, see how things are going and maybe in two years go to their studio and perhaps inform them you might like to think about doing a show in two and half years. That would be the old way, the normal way. Two years is a century now. It?s really terrible for the artists, for the young artists just graduating from school because their expectations are so high. It feels like everything is being harvested, if anything too early. I?ve actually been very conservative about taking on relationships long term. I will include good work in a group show and see how it evolves, but again there is this quickening of everything that is not good for the artists.
On the gallery?s program:
I think the idea of a gallery’s "signature look" is a negative concept .I think it?s confusing to the collector, and I think I would find it difficult to speak to as a gallerist or a curator. I think we?re still trying to promote the uniqueness of each individual artist. Ann Pibal?s small abstract paintings on aluminum was a very different show for us. I had never really shown abstract art before, so when I first saw her paintings they really captured my attention even though they were quite small and modest. I looked at them again, again, and again, and I couldn?t get them out of my head, they were really possessive, incredible paintings so we decided to do a show of her works. I think we were going against the grain there. But then they were included in P.S.1?s "Greater New York," and there was a great response to them.
When I look at work, I look for two things: its formal resonance, and its conceptual resonance. The work could be moving intellectually but I also like it to be moving personally. For example, the last show "Pent-Up and Under Gone," by Jesse Bercowetz, Matt Bua, and Carrie Dashow, was a collaborative effort that involved an installation/investigation of Roosevelt Island, and how strange the island used to be. The intrigue for me is: Does it ask a question? Like the famous quote from Bruce Nauman, "Good art ask questions." That?s what I look for.
On looking at unsolicited work:
I have looked at unsolicited materials for the last three years, and I had gone to a lot of studios for a long time. Recently, I stopped because I didn?t find any work that way. It?s labor intensive and time consuming to look through all that work. Most of the work that I found that was good was through word of mouth or an artist, or a curator, or through another venue. If someone sends me something I still will look at it, but I stopped saying I do it.
I do rely on the artists I work with to refer me to other artists, but in the end it?s my decision. That is actually the one thing that I feel is my strength: I know which work is good. I wouldn?t be egotistical and say that all the work I show will survive thirty years and everyone is going to be famous?. But a few will. My eye stays fresh. That?s the one thing I can rely on. I can?t imagine coming to work every day and not feeling that you are behind the work. Whether I can sell it or not is a question every day I walk in?
