Comments on: ‘Interests’: Conflicts Amidst Diversity http://www.quodlibetica.com/interests-conflicts-amidst-diversity/ Writing. Arts. Criticism. Thu, 26 Jan 2012 07:50:47 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Steven http://www.quodlibetica.com/interests-conflicts-amidst-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-264 Steven Sat, 02 Oct 2010 02:50:14 +0000 http://www.quodlibetica.com/?p=672#comment-264 It's odd that Chris Atkins would take on (and in many respects, defend) the subject of conflict of interest. Odd because many artists find his extra-curricular curatorial activities after assuming the position of Program Director for the MAEP to be exactly that: a disturbingly unprofessional conflict of interest. Stewart Turnquist and Cynde Randall operated under a VERY high level of integrity. They made decisions that their objectivity as stewards of the program would be compromised if they pursued - or accepted- curatorial invitations independent of MAEP. They also exhibited integrity/objectivity in their public personas by refraining from either attempting to influence MAEP panel decisions (fully understanding that they were the programs' 'facilitators' , not curators) , and also refrained from freely offering opinions about which local artists they thought were 'great' and which they felt were not. By comparison, Mr. Atkins has juried/curated shows where one of the first three exhibitors was a sitting MAEP panel member. How does that look? He's also in the process of acting as the curator for well-respected local gallery. And quite frankly, he's developed a reputation as a bit of an opinionated 'blabbermouth' who doesn't have clear boundaries about the limitations of his power as the MAEP Program Coordinator. As a result, I think he's undermined trust in the integrity of the program. Is he so blinded by his own ambitions that he doesn't see the problems he has created? He needs to check his 'career building' efforts in the world at large and focus on objectively facilitating the decision making process of the MAEP panelists, while being careful not to unduly influence or impose a personal agenda. It’s odd that Chris Atkins would take on (and in many respects, defend) the subject of conflict of interest. Odd because many artists find his extra-curricular curatorial activities after assuming the position of Program Director for the MAEP to be exactly that: a disturbingly unprofessional conflict of interest.

Stewart Turnquist and Cynde Randall operated under a VERY high level of integrity. They made decisions that their objectivity as stewards of the program would be compromised if they pursued – or accepted- curatorial invitations independent of MAEP. They also exhibited integrity/objectivity in their public personas by refraining from either attempting to influence MAEP panel decisions (fully understanding that they were the programs’ ‘facilitators’ , not curators) , and also refrained from freely offering opinions about which local artists they thought were ‘great’ and which they felt were not.

By comparison, Mr. Atkins has juried/curated shows where one of the first three exhibitors was a sitting MAEP panel member. How does that look? He’s also in the process of acting as the curator for well-respected local gallery. And quite frankly, he’s developed a reputation as a bit of an opinionated ‘blabbermouth’ who doesn’t have clear boundaries about the limitations of his power as the MAEP Program Coordinator.

As a result, I think he’s undermined trust in the integrity of the program.
Is he so blinded by his own ambitions that he doesn’t see the problems he has created? He needs to check his ‘career building’ efforts in the world at large and focus on objectively facilitating the decision making process of the MAEP panelists, while being careful not to unduly influence or impose a personal agenda.

]]> By: Christina Schmid http://www.quodlibetica.com/interests-conflicts-amidst-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-50 Christina Schmid Sat, 20 Feb 2010 14:42:27 +0000 http://www.quodlibetica.com/?p=672#comment-50 Recently, I heard Robert Storr comment on the Joannou-Koons controversy. His words, paraphrased to the best of my ability: "It would be a mistake to think this situation is either inevitable or unavoidable. It bears remembering that there are alternatives." One such alternative: Lawrence Alloway, a Brit who landed a job as curator at the Guggenheim--in the 1960's, I believe--and left the prestigious job to write art criticism without institutional entanglements and possible conflicts of interest. This level of integrity may sound quaint today, but it points to the fact that Storr is right: there are alternatives to be kept in mind. Recently, I heard Robert Storr comment on the Joannou-Koons controversy. His words, paraphrased to the best of my ability: “It would be a mistake to think this situation is either inevitable or unavoidable. It bears remembering that there are alternatives.” One such alternative: Lawrence Alloway, a Brit who landed a job as curator at the Guggenheim–in the 1960’s, I believe–and left the prestigious job to write art criticism without institutional entanglements and possible conflicts of interest. This level of integrity may sound quaint today, but it points to the fact that Storr is right: there are alternatives to be kept in mind.

]]>