U-turn e-zine
August 26, 1998

All Chicago: An Electronic Exhibit
Juried and written by Claire Wolf Krantz

            The computer's capacity to store and disseminate volumes of visual information to a general audience via the Internet has opened up new and unique possibilities for exhibiting artwork. The editors at UTURN E-Zine are committed to exploring how the Web's visual potential might be exploited creatively as a means for displaying and understanding art.
For this second issue, Uturn will provide an overview of Chicago area artwork to an audience that goes well beyond the physical limits of the city. In addition, our goal is to explore ways to help make the work accessible and interesting to both a professional and a lay public. Because "hard copy" artworks (or objects) are transformed by the very nature of the Web's modality -- namely, transparencies on computer screens, this exhibit effectively removes the work from its usual modes of transmission. We hope this new environment will encourage viewers to look freshly at Chicago art and thus rethink what is significant and valuable in current art.            
In this Uturn exhibit we (the editors at Uturn) are attempting to communicate, via images and texts, good facsimiles of a great deal of heterogeneous artwork. To this end, we devised strategies for obtaining as much different work as possible, a time-consuming but rewarding task. We solicited submissions in art publications, posted information in public places, telephoned and sent letters to everyone we knew or had been recommended to us. Our call for artists was clear and wide-ranging, and the requirements for entry minimal and easy. The responses, from many different segments of our community, were gratifying, although we had hoped for more contributions from African American and Hispanic artists. While this show cannot represent all aspects of Chicago art -- Chicago is, after all, a big place, it is representative of the many artists who actively seek and respond to exhibition opportunities.
Because this is a survey of all kinds of visual art, we set aside our own personal preferences in art, as much as possible, for our choices. We acknowledge that even in an exhibit as open-ended as this one is, no curatorial judgment can be completely objective. This strategy implicitly reflects certain editorial convictions regarding broad systematic issues in the art world. Questions of value depend a great deal upon the judges. As they are currently structured, art institutions tend to promote certain ideas and values, and champion the artists whose works embody them. Although strong curatorial points of view are crucial to airing ideas in depth and contribute a necessary component to the art world, in general they are by definition limiting in scope. Viewed as a whole in one season, an accumulation of strongly articulated theme shows often repeats the same point of view, and often the same artists, over and over again. Over time, it is not possible to get a broad picture of what is actually happening in the city because the art that doesn't fit whatever parameters are in fashion is consigned to relative invisibility. These structural problems create a situation in which the diversity of Chicago art is not adequately reflected in the institutions that exhibit it: when viewed through the lens of its galleries, museums, and publications, the breadth and depth of Chicago art becomes shallow and constricted. Its complexity lies beneath the surface like a subterranean web, a rhizome, out of which isolated segments pop up here and there - like potatoes - in exhibits and in print.                         
 By means of this exhibit, we are attempting to open up the dialogue, to give voice to artists who don't fit into particular categories, or whose work or ideas are currently unfashionable. In doing so, we have kept our parameters of judgment as permeable as possible, basing our decisions on aesthetics, seriousness of purpose, and ability to be seen on a computer screen. Because judgments of aesthetic merit and artistic significance depends a great deal upon the audience's desire, we set aside questions regarding which contents, styles, or media are most significant or most cutting-edge, or if it performs any useful function. Thus, we are displaying all the work on a level field to enable viewers to think about some of these questions for themselves.             Another issue that we implicitly address pertains to who has power over artists' work. Whenever artists curate shows that involve issues found in their art, they are either denied the opportunity to include their own work or criticized for doing so. The ostensible reason is that artists are merely devising ways to exhibit their art. Such an explanation begs largely unacknowledged broader and deeper problems within the art world in which art is used as a means for jockeying for power. As artists ourselves (each from divergent backgrounds), we contest these "rules" because they curtail the artists' authority over their own images and surrounding discourse, while simultaneously enabling other members of the art community to control the artist' voice. Instead, we suggest that the artists' passion for the show's idea is usually inextricable from their artwork; therefore, leaving out the organizers' artwork denudes the exhibit of important and relevant material. Accordingly, we have decided to include our own work in the show (we are, in fact, Chicago artists and writers).            
Artists are also accused of not really knowing what they are doing: they are not expected to be good judges of their own work, and their statements are considered useless for communicating their ideas to others. While some artists are not good writers, their opinions are a necessary component of the larger picture, which constitutes the work. Thus, we are asking the artists to choose what they wish to exhibit and publishing the statements that they write (which have, for the most part, been clear and helpful).
We wish to utilize some of the unique characteristics of the Web for our show rather than claiming to replace the immediacy of a direct encounter with the art. Because of its capacity to easily store and cheaply present an enormous amount of material, we can actualize a giant exhibit of this kind. Images on the computer look different from both printed ones and the actual work: they may look much better on a computer screen than is possible in print. Moreover, unlike printed photo reproductions of images, there is no question of the virtual image being a substitute for anything else. (Unlike the "fine art print" market, in which reproductions of artworks are sold as "art," video transmissions of images make no claims to being the same as the objects they represent). "All Chicago's" availability for many users (unfortunately tied to computer accessibility) frees the viewer from time, location, and space constraints. No one has to travel to visit our site, to consider hours it is open, or park the car. We have no printing or exhibition costs or spatial limitations to consider. Since there are no firm publication deadlines that are dictated by the physical processes involved in printing and distribution, we can expand, change, and reorient our thoughts as time goes by.                        Taking advantage of the Web's capability for interactivity, we designed several sections of the site for feedback from different groups: We invited some critics to comment on the show; We set up sections for specific responses from artists about other artists' work and for general audience responses; We have a place for late-arriving additions to the show and an e-mail section in which private arrangements can be made with artists to view the actual work. We hope these sites will be used for serious discussion about what we have presented and for suggestions regarding further development.            
We are beginning to sort through this information. Initially, we're listing artists alphabetically for quick access to a particular person. Our next sort is by ordinary media classifications for viewers who wish to find certain types of artwork. As the show goes on, we hope to find other, more interesting ways to link or arrange the work. We hope that our audience will come up with some suggestions for us to try.             Now comes the toughest job: What do we make of all this? One interesting result of our general call for images is that we had numerous responses from mid-career artists -- people who have been developing their ideas over time, in relative isolation, and who are not necessarily part of any group or style with which they can be easily associated. Other connections may emerge from all this information: perhaps new ideas or concerns will materialize, or some continuing ideas may find fresh expression.            
We have many questions about whether the Web, as a venue for presenting artwork, will change the structure of the art world over time. We also wonder how images are actually perceived on the Web, as well as what can be learned from the way that we organized this particular show. We ask whether the Web will help make art more relevant to more people, and artists more responsive to a larger world that they often ignore. Can we break through all the habitual art world barriers of self interest to get people to look at each other and consider points of view that compete with their own? Is it possible to create new and meaningful connections among diverse works with only the artists' statements for contextual information? Can works be understood if presented relatively unmediated by art world structures? Will alternative kinds of shows, such as this one, in radically different venues, broaden our base; get our images out to a wider audience in Chicago and beyond? Can it help change the way we and our disparate audiences look at and think about art? And can "All Chicago" stimulate some new sensitivity, knowledge, understanding, or perception throughout its lengthy duration - or afterwards - in all of us: artists, critics, curators, dealers, collectors, and just plain viewers?

Claire Wolf Krantz is an artist, freelance critic, and guest curator.
As an artist she works in a combination of painting and photography as well as digitally created images.