This weekend a large international art exposition will be held in Chicago for the 23rd consecutive year, and given that time–imagine: neither Britney Spears nor Serena Williams was born when the fair began!–there is now as much fretting as celebration.
For most of the run, the Chicago expo led the way for art trade fairs in the United States in both size and general quality. But during its span, modern and contemporary art fairs sprouted in almost every civilized country, with some of the North American ones finally giving the effort here competition in recent years.
How can the veteran Art Chicago survive the cyclical nature of art fairs?
More Top Picks Best Womens Knee High Boots For Winter
The majority of visitors to Art Chicago 2003 will probably detect little difference from previous installments. Booths will be bigger for the fair’s 183 participants (down from last year’s 206). Customized “project spaces” again will show less traditional works, now adjacent to their gallery sponsors. There will be the usual complement of panels and lectures. An “alternative” exhibition of 50 emerging art organizations also will take place at an off-site location (see Art page).
But many longtime exhibitors, particularly of top-level material that gave ballast and tone to the fair, are gone, furthering the perception among insiders that the Chicago show is not what it once was.
The question is: If sales at Art Chicago hold up, does a perceived loss of quality matter?
“We obviously don’t have as prestigious a fair as we used to,” says Chicago dealer and exhibitor Donald Young. “It would be stupid to pretend we do. But we give too much due sometimes to the `top’ dealers and collectors when the majority of them do not affect 95 percent of the business. The whole Midwest still comes to the fair every year. They are not necessarily the most `important’ collectors, but they’re collectors. So I’m not sure anything will be the worse.”
It depends on the definition of success. With curated, not-for-profit international exhibitions of contemporary art, success is defined by attendance: the number of people who see the show. But with trade fairs, viewers don’t necessarily equal buyers. So while the majority of the expected 40,000 visitors this year will go to see more varieties of modern and contemporary art from more places in the world than under any other roof in the Midwest–still a good reason to attend–enough sales and contacts will also have to be made to keep the fair commercially viable.
“We have had as many as 1,500 applicants worldwide,” says Thomas Blackman, president of the company that mounts Art Chicago. “And we annually have shown from 200 to 225. So there are a lot of people to fill [possible vacancies], and many represent some of the same artists [as the galleries that have left]. I don’t think the quality level has to change. I think we can bring it back, and besides, this will be one of the great shows in the world even now. Perhaps people are taking it for granted. They’ve had one here for almost 25 years.”
Organized in 1980 by John Wilson, a print dealer and hotelier in Lakeside, Mich., the Chicago International Art Exposition [CIAE] was the first fair in the United States to be modeled after a major commercial event each June in Basel, Switzerland.
Chicago certainly had not hosted the kind of art exposition Wilson’s Lakeside Group mounted at Navy Pier, and immediately touts started the cry “Better than Basel.” The ’80s were go-go years for contemporary art, and dealers soon moved enough merchandise to make sale receipts support the declaration of pre-eminence. So, abetted by a Chicago cultural affairs director who was also a founder investor in the Lakeside Group, the CIAE became the only game in the city.
Organizers of such events in Europe usually attain greater status than they do here, becoming cultural princelings in the cities they entertain. If at all, appreciation in the United States comes from government representatives and rarely seems enough. Wilson spoke openly and often about the debt he felt was owed him. Blackman, his executive director, watched this chafing of the art community and gradually received its encouragement to go off on his own, which he did–charmingly–in a tent at North Pier in 1993.
By then, the contemporary art market had collapsed, and the American economy was bearish in general. Still, for the first time, Chicago hosted three international art fairs that battled for supremacy, without pretense of being sterling culturally. Blackman persuaded several dealers in the other fairs to show in his as well. Wilson did not give up until 1994, 15 years after beginning the Chicago phenomenon. (The third lasted only a few years.)
Blackman’s solicitousness, combined with dealers’ relief, revitalized the fair, going against a theory that the same exhibitors attending year after year exhaust the collecting base and necessarily have to move somewhere else.
“The time-limit theory is far down on the list [of reasons for failure],” says Paul Gray of the Richard Gray Gallery, which exhibits in several fairs internationally. “Basel has been around for much longer than any fairs here, and it always kept itself fresh and vital. Visitors do get more and more demanding, but whether they continue to come is almost entirely a reflection of who the exhibitors are, and that means not just a full house but `stars.’ “
Blackman clearly had such luminaries–a mixture of blue-chip dealers and cutting-edge contemporaries–for most of a decade when art fairs were proliferating. Overall, his selection committees found little difficulty in maintaining an elite atmosphere, and that began to change noticeably only in the last few years, after a younger New York fair gained maturity. But then, in December, the queen of all fairs, Basel, entered the American market with an exposition in Miami that gave dealers enough limousines, parties, collectors and sales to cause significant shifts in allegiance.
“It was a difficult decision for us,” says Robert Landau, president of a modern master gallery from Montreal that for years has shown at the highest level. “We liked coming to Chicago and had good clients. But the fair changed its focus more and more toward contemporary and emerging artists, and the clientele followed suit. Even a number of leading contemporary galleries now are missing, so we took a rest this year, and maybe we’ll come back–if the fair does.”
“None of the [last few] fairs here came close to the quality of those at the Armory in New York and Basel Miami,” says Kavi Gupta, director of Chicago’s Vedanta Gallery, specializing in international emerging and established contemporary artists. “They started out at the top. Miami was how we only dreamed an art fair could be. We’re not in Art Chicago. The reason is just financial.”
“Basel Miami killed themselves for us,” says Rhona Hoffman, who will show in a smaller space than usual at Art Chicago. “So, yes, dealers feel a huge pull toward Miami. But a lot of people here–dealers, curators, collectors, city officials–don’t want Art Chicago to go away. We’ll make a concerted effort to come up with ideas. So far, we’ve just gotten lip service from Tom [Blackman], but nobody’s come up with great ideas either.”
Blackman’s own ideas seem both wide of the mark and familiar. “It would be unwise not to look at every aspect of the fair–size, content, venue, dates,” he says. But upon looking at what modifications his organization can effect, he speaks mainly about moving to Lakeside Center at McCormick Place and possibly timing the fair to coincide with other events in the city, such as the opening of the Millennium Park bandshell or big summer exhibitions at the Art Institute of Chicago.
The first year of Wilson’s effort had 84 exhibitors and around 50,000 visitors. Blackman says he’s been out of room at Navy Pier since 1997. McCormick can accommodate more galleries. But with as many as 225 participants, none of the fairs has had an attendance as high as the first, when energy was high and the concept was fresh. Are more galleries the answer now?
“This year it’s 180 as opposed to 220, and for me that’s just fine,” says Frank Paluch, director of Perimeter Gallery and former president of the Chicago Art Dealers Association. “But any fair that’s been around for 23 years needs to be reorganized. [Blackman] is putting a lot of juice into young, `cutting-edge’ galleries. That’s not going to carry the day here. He needs to do something besides creating a phenomenon with young people.”
But what? This has been asked for a couple of years. Only now, for the first time, an answer has arisen that doesn’t involve a fair at all. The reasoning goes: Chicago needs a major art event that will bring collectors, curators and educators to the city. That it has been a fair in the past does not necessarily mean it has to be a fair in the future.
“I would love to think Chicago could come up with something other than an art fair,” Young says. “Remember the `Carnegie International’ in Pittsburgh? That [not-for-profit, curated] show had a history as long as that of the Venice Biennale. And years ago it was revived to great acclaim. Well, the `American Show’ at the Art Institute of Chicago has a tradition like the `Carnegie International.’ And there has been some talk of reviving it, perhaps as a collaborative effort. A event like that would really help the city.”
For now, however, there is still Art Chicago 2003, a big sprawling fair in the Midwest–which counts.
“Many people in the Midwest don’t travel to New York or Miami but they do come here,” says William Lieberman of the Zolla/Lieberman Gallery, which has participated in every fair since 1980. “We get visitors from Indianapolis, Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Madison, Milwaukee and Kansas City. The fair raises excitement in Chicago more than any other month of the year. I’m very optimistic because my artists create work especially for the fair. The pieces I get I don’t always sell to people at the fair, but I still have the work, and after all, that’s what’s important.”
How to get the most out of Art Chicago
If you want to see art like a landscape from a speeding automobile, one visit is fine. Otherwise, the show will require a full day or repeat visits.
As soon as you feel unable to focus, stop, rest, and try later. A curator at the Museum of Modern Art used to say really looking at two or three pieces is an entire morning’s work.
More Top Picks Best Leather Boots For Women For Winter
Ask about anything you don’t understand. If the answer doesn’t help, ask again. But leave “attitude” at home.
Should you be considering a first purchase, go for a single piece at the top price you can afford rather than two or more of lesser value.
Buy from a dealer who wants a client not a sale.
— Alan Artner
———-
ART CHICAGO 2003
When: Noon-8 p.m. Friday and Saturday,
noon-6 p.m. Sunday and Monday.
Where: Festival Hall at Navy Pier, 600 E. Grand Ave.; 312-587-3300 or www.artchicago.com
Price: $12, $10 students and seniors.