Actually, there is a lot that is very questionable about this so-called (AA Starbucks awards) which I have pointed out before in a letter I've sent to L last year. (all the quotes in parentheses are mine)
a) judging works a year after they were exhibited, you don't even know if the jury have actually seen them when they were still exhibited. maybe not for they all have to be dragged in a coaster to galleries where these were shown. But of course, what will they expect but a different show as it's already been a year ago. Or they go to the artist's studios, go perhaps to the source to see the working process. but according to P. the way they conducted it was like giving a thesis dissertation. It's pointless, really. They could 't see the whole picture, they can only see the bits and pieces and try to reconfigure them in their minds. Basically, the works are being judged in virtuality.
b) No funding or installation allowance for artists who especially have to re-install their works, especially if they are ephemeral in nature.
c) the works will be exhibited in a mall, a posh mall that is not commonly frequented by me or my friends, or even a general portion of the artists nominated such as rockwell. The works will be hung on panels that will line a part of a lobby of said mall. Is this their definition of bringing art closer to the public? But what kind of public? why couldn't they have hung it in a proper gallery instead and just let the people come and view the works in such a venue? Are they trying to equate the price of a Prada bag to an oil painting?
d) now, they have a 'taster's choice' award. Their vain effort still in bringing art to the public ?
(tie-up with Smart, public can text their choice of winner during show at Rockwell. They're giving a ('taster's choice') award. Only Smart subscribers eligible. Only 2.50 per text. You can also download pics of artists works for wallpaper and audio of explanation to work. some may probably be used for wallpaper, i think.)
e) if the nominated artists have gainfully agreed on their works being used for such marketing gimmick, are they also waiving their copyrights? to what extent will their works be used by Smart in line with this gimmick? Will they even be paid for royalties? Will the amount be enough? What will winning the 'taster's choice' award really entail? What will be the actual effect of this gimmick to the public?I asked CC of Ateneo re: this and this is what she texted me back :" ...Artists will be paid royalties sa image ng work pero I just got off the phone with content provider now lang and asked them how much. sobrang liit lang, nashock nga ako, 3% lang daw pero standard daw yun?! Irk. Sa contracts, wala pang ginawa ang content provider at smart pero i-follow up ko na lang. Magpaparticipate ka ba sa MMS program? Kasi tied up yan sa (taster's choice)....."Hmmmm......
f) Fernado Zobel is the supposed honorary flame, seed for such award. But what is his real significance in the development of Philippine art aside from giving a large endowment to Ateneo Gallery. Why is he important in the growth of modernism here? What is his lasting mark on contemporary artists such as on our generation?Or are these all just window-dressing? Or is the experience of Phil. Art history totally different from UP than in Ateneo? Why this is so is because, as someone texted me, ".. we are nationalists at UP....... but Zobel is also a nationalist.....", a Spanish nationalist, but for whom?
(an aside : do the bulk of their collection comprise mostly of reproductions?)
I'm disappointed with MC, one of the nominees and a strong contender for the residency prize, for not taking a stand on such issues nor even having the gall in questioning all these. It looked like all his seemingly radical political declarations are but vain posturings. It's all pathetic.
