My thoughts on this year's City-Wide Open Studios

Artspace
50 Orange St, New Haven, (203) 772-2709
City-Wide Open Studios 2008

My overall thoughts on this year's City-Wide Open Studios, in brief.

As a preface, I think it's important to note that there is no way of knowing how the economic meltdown caused by three decades of conservative economics impacted attendance. But it couldn't have helped. According to Artspace Executive Director Leslie Shaffer, a key reason for changing the format this year was to "broaden" the audience. Specifically, the hope was to attract curators/collectors from New York and Boston. Needless to say, this didn't turn out to be the best year to attempt that.

First, the things I liked:

• The Artist-In-Residence Sites, or AIRS. While it is arguable whether they really fit into an "open studios" concept, the AIRS each had their own unique identity. I visited each of them and was impressed both with the art being shown and the general success of the curators in finding threads of commonality.

• The Artist Directory. Setting aside the fact that so many artist statements are impenetrable nonsense, the directory is a great resource. (I do think, however, that the image reproduction could have been better. Most of the images printed dark and/or muddy.)

• Seeing the work of artists evolving over the years. A few, in particular, at 39 Church Street: Jerry Saladyga, Steve Grossman (Web) and Silas Finch (Web). Adding complexity without sacrificing their distinctive personal approaches.

Next, my take on what didn't work:

• CONNcentric. Yes, there is a lot of interesting, professional, well-made art being shown at Artspace right now. But as the anchor exhibit of this sprawling event it failed, in my opinion, miserably.

That letdown was experienced the night of the opening. Where previous Open Studios' openings were packed with visitors—creating a palpable sense of excitement befitting an event kickoff—attendance this year was dispiriting. And it's not surprising. Having several hundred artists showing is a surefire recipe for having a big turnout.

Personally, I also found CONNcentric less interesting than previous main exhibits. The layout of the show seems uninspired and haphazard. I missed the pleasure of finding an artwork that I really liked and cross-checking it against the numbered list. (I don’t think the directory was an adequate substitute.) Yes, I know that many artists felt constricted by having to work within the 18x18-inch format. Too bad. I also very much missed the democratic presentation of previous shows.

• Attendance. My impression and anecdotal accounts from artists indicates that attendance was significantly down from previous years.

I believe that the welcoming and inclusive nature of previous CWOS fostered a broad audience for the entire event. Whether by design or not, the changes narrowed participation and probably constricted the audience. Was the work being shown then, on average, of a consistently higher quality? Probably, but I don't see the tradeoff as having been worth it.

I would be interested to hear from any artists who might have been visited by the coveted curator/collector cohort. From the few artists I talked with in which the subject came up, none of them reported being visited by well-heeled out-of-towners.

• One weekend. Way too little time.

• No alternative space. Perhaps there wasn't an appropriate venue available. No doubt the alternative spaces are logistical nightmares to organize. But they have been major attractions. (Again, I return to the notion that weeding out many artists hurt attendance as well as impacted the democratic nature of the event.)

As always, please feel free to comment. If you are a "local studio" artist, did the changes work out better for the you? Anybody meet any New Yorkers/Bostonians? How do folks feel about CONNcentric as compared to previous main exhibits? Is this the end of CWOS?