The Other Side of the Dark Side
One of my paintings is being displayed at this time under the group show theme, adapted from the old adage, “Home, Sweet Home.” Admittedly I am pleased; sufficiently pleased that my personal achievement would not need mention, except for its inextricable involvement with a yet greater matter of interest, that of the curator, and organizer of the show.
It could be objected that I am stealing the honor of being shown. In consideration of that, I argue the show is an accomplished fact, one which needs no further publicity by me to become manifest. The only events still remaining are the dismounting the show, and, importantly, meeting the curator, and other participating artists, at the reception on the final day of the exhibit. It is (for now) a Happening.
The exhibition is entirely “organic,” neither a co-op (paid membership), nor a mark of favor (patronage). That is significant, given the circumstance that the exhibit is being exhibited in a public forum. The initial call for entries arrived in my email inbox, subsequent to my subscribing to updates about the arts in my local jurisdiction. Anyone was eligible, it said. Indeed, to be modest, I doubt any artist submitting work was rejected.
The scale-of-achievement curve was not steep. Not, that is, by private sector standards. Oh, sure, there's a 3-figure prize for Best of Show. I, myself, provided a value on my submission of $1,000.00 for liability purposes. Other than that, there's little in the way of material benefit for making the effort to participate. Why, then, did I bother? Because it is a breakthrough for me -and my work. It is my first exhibit in a public forum, which (ipso facto), had to meet public standards of taste.
My submission merits approval for cooperation, at least. That, despite the controversy swirling around the subject of homelessness. As of this date and time, that might be too obvious for note, except for the not-so-obvious “resistance” to open discussion of the issue. I prefer to call it a reaction, as in “politically reactionary,” to be precise. That factor of the problem is what is less obvious. Nobody want to be reactionary. Not, that is, unless it happens in my backyard!
I am experiencing “push back” against my efforts to exhibit my art about homeless people. There are two sides to every argument. One would think (as I do), that differences of opinion should not preclude expressing opinions on the matter. Art is expression -or it's not art. Granted, it could be argued that some art may be considered incitement, and, therefore, unacceptable in a public forum. Too politically "incorrect," as it used to be said.
What I find lacking, today, is an objective rule about what is, and what is not, artistic incitement. Let's dismiss personal preference. Everybody has likes and dislikes. Mine cancels yours. Yours cancels mine. Don't get excited. This isn't the playground. Negotiate like adults, or no consensus about what minors should, and shouldn't be exposed to in public will ever be reached. “For all ages” is the standard of consensus. I would go further. Let's make “for all” the definition of public decency.
What anyone does in private is at the absolute discretion of the private person. What happens in public is not a private matter, but public. The fight about “what to do about the homeless” concerns the civil right of the public—including the homeless—to be seen, or to see, in any public space. We all “own” the public space, which is to say (without hyperbole), that we all have a right to be there.
This affects the public display of homeless art in parallel with the right of anyone and everyone to be literally, physically, and in-person, in public. The rights of artists and the homeless are alike existential. An artist without a place to exhibit is like a homeless person. Art that is not seen might as well not exist. The concealment of both from the public sphere is not a mere philosophical debate.
A reason must be given for exclusions. If all are to be held accountable, all shall be counted. The police tend to prefer vagrants outside, in the open, where they can be seen. Visibility lowers the level of fear. That's the short answer why there appear to be so many homeless persons. You may be certain all visibly homeless persons have been warned. They are following the rules. Visibility is existence. It is the unseen that we do not know.