IDENTIDADES 1 ENGLISH IDENTIDADES 7 ENGLISH | Page 106

topic is old. Basically, the difference is
in how one treats a subject. In this last
series of mine, what one sees is everyday, normal actions that reveal people’s
satisfaction and make them feel complete—but they are naked. It’s not even
just about the everyday things, like
washing dishes or cleaning; there is that,
but there is also the professional side of
things, people’s lives as couples, hobbies, folks with their pets, which mean
everything to them. There are people
cooking, fixing things, all those things
that show that people have given themselves to something.
Do you think that everything on exhibit at galleries possesses the required quality it needs? Personally,
I’ve seen exhibits in which work totally lacked quality.
It is also true that works that do have it
are displayed, but unfortunately, not
always. Perhaps it is because of a lack of
project or publicity. I have artists coming to the gallery asking how to put on
an exhibit, not knowing the procedure. I
take good care of them and tell them
they have to work, present their projects,
and take them to be evaluated. Sometimes things end up getting exhibited due
to sociolismo [socios (friends) helping
socios (friends), or because there is nothing else to put up, which should not be.

Could it be the case that artists be required to have a certain academic level to have a right to an exhibit?
What should be required always is a
quality, but in truly doesn’t matter if
they are college educated or self-taught.
I know artists with degrees whose work I
would not like to have in my gallery, and
other self-taught ones who I pursue so
that they’ll exhibit with me. I’m the one
who proposes it to them. In theory, the
college-educated artist should have
reached a certain level and be better
trained, but it is not always that way. No
matter what the field, there are always
those who graduate who are better at
what they do, those who are just okay,
and those who are really bad. Out on the
street, there are a lot of people with talent who have not yet been able to get
into a school, for many different reasons,
but their work is excellent.
Do you think those in charge of the
institutions know enough to be able to
really evaluate the work they receive?
What about curators?
Not as much as they should be, but not
always. It is not my job to qualify their
work as good or bad; that’s what the
specialists in a gallery and a director are
for. They are responsible for linking up
with artists for their curatorial work,
which means they have to be the ones to
communicate the message the exhibit
wants to transmit.

106