X at Emily Carr College of Art Volume 1 Number 3 It’s you that decides This article was carried by the Summer Rick Ross 1978 issue of a newsletter from the Van- 7 couver Foundation. A $20,000 allocation from the Helen Pitt Fund for Fine Arts inaugurated what it is hoped will be an annual event for students graduating in Fine Arts from B.C. institutions. Peter Malkin, Curator of the Vancouver Art Gallery, offers his view of the Exhibition in the following commentary. One of the more acerbic remarks about the nature of contemporary art making and its reflection in the works in this exhibition, was that made by two ladies after a quick perusal of the show — “Where are the ordinary paintings?” by which meaning, no doubt, the Old Masters such as Rembrandt and Titian et al with whose works (naturally) every art gallery is blessed. This puzzled response to new ways of making work/art is a common reaction, for new work is often difficult to grasp readily at first sight, particularly, if you are expecting a Madonna and Child in a gilt frame and are confronted with the image of, say, Wendy Hamlin’s Rhinoceros parading through areas of Kitsilano or Denis Malkin’s twelve foot plywood motorcycle, an object more redolent of the movie “Easy Rider” than of the arena of Apelles. For indeed, the galleries were filled with a great variety of objects, from the large colour field paintings of Robert Youds to the small and intimate drawings of Elizabeth Conway, interspersed were multi-media pieces such as Neil Berecry’s “sometimes i have made here’’ — a stone- henge of the working insides of alarm clocks mounted on steel rods, about which you walked, reading the inscribed messages, all the while anticipating the jangle of alarms as they randomly went off. As well, there were the graphite paintings of Eric Deros with their intimations of ancient markings and tracks apparently fossilized in a wonderfully soft grey materials; and Kerry Noble’s silkscreen prints based on geographical/topographical maps. “Ordin- ary” it wasn’t. Interesting and stimulating it was, changing from large scale to small, from familiar material to the unexpected, all of which reflecting a healthy curiosity and slightly iconoclastic attitude towards what might be the expected work by art school students. The Helen Pitt Graduate Awards Exhi- bition, held at The Vancouver Art Gallery from June 10th to 25th past, assembled the work of fifteen students in Fine Arts from the graduating bodies of The Emily Carr College of Art, The University of British Columbia and The University of Victoria. This selection was made by a jury comprising Tom Hudson, Roland Brener, and Roy Kiyooka of the ECCA, U. Vic and UBC respectively. Chosen were Neil Berecry, Share Corsaut, Eric Deros, Susan Gray, Lawrie Makaseff, and Christopher Reed from The Emily Carr College of Art; Jeannette Bonneau, Eliza- beth Conway, Kerry Noble, Teresa Payne, Malcolm Wright, and Robert Youds from The University of Victoria, and Wendy Hamlin and Anna Kirman from The University of British Columbia. These artists selected, Vera Frenkel, an artist of noted accomplishment and wide ranging interests, was asked to view the exhibition and to award up to five prizes, not one of which was to exceed $5,000.00. In true solomonic spirit, Ms. Frenkel divided the prize money of $15,000.00 equally between five of the artists, who were, in alphabetical order: Neil Berecry, Jeannette Bonneau, Wendy Hamlin, Anna Kirman, and Teresa Payne. The exhibition was a revealing exper- ience, not only from the point of being present at that time when artists start their careers, but also from being at the point where one gets a clear idea of what their training has been and what specifically is the context in which young artists in this province develop. With the experience of this exhibition, and from the evidence of the work included, one might hazard the observation that there are, in fact, specific differences in the natures of the three insti- . " n ! 4 i J 4 f Pee oe Loe MARK ING THe SOME WHERE ALONG THE Percussion and Strings This is the third issue of “X’’. You've not heard of “X’’? This is our student newsletter which will continue to publish each second week. What is the chemistry of this newsletter? What sorts of things can we expect? These are aspects which are just beginning to ‘be talked about. Some say that it must be representative of us as students. . . our opinions, our art and our thoughts. Perhaps a concise way of putting it is that “X” will surely be whatever we want to make it, whatever we want to talk about: some sort of exchange. This inevitably involves a world moving, day in and day out, moving through polar continuums. What we are trying to say is that ““X” is only limited to the extent that we believe ourselves to be. What is certain is that these begin- ning issues will be awkward. Those who produce this newsletter have some ex- perience to gain in virtually every way. First to achieve will be acquiring some space — a recognized place where we can meet and produce “X’’. Its sub- sPoT a cet Fy cae ae eu ten wiTk A NEW LETTER M.L.E. COLD EDGE oF ART stance will be multi-faceted: what's happening with our new student council; features on individual students and instructors and their work; poetry; prose; interviews with visiting artists and thinkers; publication of student shows; Opinion and criticism; prints and photo- graphs, be it from those working with etching, lithography, drawing, print- making, whatever. Contributions are welcomed from everyone. Our hope is that “X” will have blood, that is, spirit, animation and growth. We anticipate discussions of all sorts about the forms and implications of art and culture; this entails developing possibilities previously unexplored or considered unworthwhile. For contem- porary artists the implications are as intellectually clear as they are difficult to realize concretely. Further issues of “xX” will hopefully be involved with connecting worlds and elements common to us all. Gordon co-editors Moore and Joshua Berson, All written pieces submitted to “X’’ must be typed and double-spaced. We are a news- letter without typewriters and without the time to type others’ work. In submitting written or graphic work please also write your name and phone number. Deadline for the next issue is Wednesday, October 11th at 1:00 p.m. For this issue only, your work can be left at the main office at Dunsmuir Street. . . in envelopes marked ‘‘X newsletter’. Letters to ‘‘X”’ may be left at this spot too. tutions involved in the education of art students; that the art students of B.C. have three quite individual approaches to art training available to them. Briefly, it would appear that the ECCA has an approach to the art making process which emphasizes the incorporation of attitudes central to conceptual art and multi-media productions. That of The Department of Visual Arts at The Univer- sity of Victoria stresses what might be con- sidered the more specifically and, indeed, art historically traditional concerns of painting, drawing, and sculpture, while the programme of the Department of Fine Arts at The University of British Columbia steers a middle course between these two and includes a major segment of art history. This choice provides a wide spectrum for the students and a healthy situation for the arts in British Columbia. What the Helen Pitt Awards Exhibition underlined, as Ms. Frenkel noted in her comments on the exhibition, is that the creative juices in the visual arts in British Columbia are flowing, and this despite an abysmal market is unlikely to provide any sort of financial base for these students who are stepping into the rough and tum- ble realities of the professional art world. They are stepping out, however, armed with a considerable arsenal of talent and ability — so now we stand back to see where they go and to see what the vision and generosity of Helen Pitt has helped foster. Peter Malkin, Curator July 1978 It’s you that decides The article was received shortly before publication, so X sent out a couple of peo- ple to collect opinions from around the college. The following is a synopsis of those opinions and does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors. It rapidly became apparent that all was not a bed of roses but resembled more a can of worms. Our interviews were brief and it was not possible to talk to everyone involved. In the interests of everyone con- cerned, would those people who have something to say on the matter please let us have their views for publication in subsequent issues. As a whole, our interviewees felt that the Helen Pitt Awards Exhibition was a political game. It was the political nature of the game which made everybody reluc- tant to be identified by name. Whether this fact confirms the political nature of the process or not is for you to judge. Fourth year students are aware that it is their turn next, and are confused and ambivalent. It is such a lot of money; can people afford not to enter? One student said that if she pursues her own work in her own way she can forget about being successful in either the Awards or Honours. She feels that artistic integrity is a loser in a game which she saw to be purely political. The student selection of the internal juries was seen to be inadequate. The meeting was organized at the last minute; a lot of people couldn’t attend or didn’t know about it. A Student Council mem- ber assured us that two members of the Council had spent hours on the telephone in an attempt to contact graduating stu- dents; of the ninety-odd graduating stu- dents only thirty or so turned up at the meeting. Students and faculty felt that this resulted in the selection of a jury biased toward conceptual work from the start, which is possibly reflected in Peter Mal- kin’s assessment of the College’s en- trants: “‘. .. ECCA has an approach to the art making process’ which emphasizes the incorporation of attitudes central to conceptual art and multi-media produc- tions.” Sharp criticism was aimed at our Dean of Instruction, Tom Hudson, who was seen to be an active member in the Awards selection processes and on the Honours committee selection team. People saw that if a student had been rejected from the Awards then the student had no chance in being accepted for Honours. The wisdom of having one person actively involved in both these processes was questioned by both faculty and students. Everybody knew that at the opening of the exhibition, when the winners were announced, Chris Reed had removed two of his three pieces of work. After the first selection process he had been advised by X VeumetNomoe's It’s you that decides ‘This article was carried by the Summer 1978 issue of a newsletter from the Van- 7 couver Foundation. "A. $20,000 allocation from Pitt Fund for Fine Arts inaugurated what it is hoped will be an annual event for students. graduating in Fine Arts from B.C. institutions. Peter Malkin, Curator fof the Vancouver Art Gallery, offers his view of the Exhibition in the following ‘commentary ‘One of the more acerbic remarks about the nature of contemporary art making and its reflection in the works in this exhibition, was that made by two ladies after a quick perusal of the show — “Where are the ordinary paintings?” by which meaning, no doubt, the Old Masters such as Rembrandt and Titian et al with ‘whose works (naturally) every art gallery is blessed. This puzzled response to new ways of making work/art is a common reaction, for new work is often difficult to ‘rasp readily at first sight, particulary, if you are expecting a Madonna and Child in lt frame and are confronted with the image of, say, Wendy Hamlin's Rhinoceros parading’ through areas of Kitsilano or Denis Malkin’s twelve foot plywood motorcycle, an object more redolent of the movie “Easy Rider” than of the arena of Apelles. For indeed, the galleries were filled with a great variety of objects, from the large colour field. paintings of Robert Yous to the small and intimate drawings of Elizabeth Conway, interspersed were ‘multimedia pieces such as Neil Berecry’s “sometimes i have made here” — a stone hhenge of the working insides of alarm clocks mounted on steel rods, about which you walked, reading the inscribed messages, all the while anticipating the jangle of flarms as they randomly went off. As well, there were the graphite paintings of Eric Deros with their intimations of ancient markings and tracks apparently fossilized in a wonderfully soft grey materials; and Kerry Noble's silkscreen prints based on geographical/topographical maps. “Ordin- fry’ it wasn't Interesting and stimulating it was, changing from large scale to small, from familiar material to the unexpected, all of which reflecting a healthy curiosity and slightly iconoclastic attitude towards ‘what might be the expected work by art school students. The Helen Pitt Graduate Awards Exhi- bition, held at The Vancouver Art Gallery from June 10th to 25th past, assembled the work of fifteen students in Fine Arts from the graduating bodies of The Emily Carr College of Art, The University of British Columbia and The University of Victoria. This selection was made by a Jury comprising Tom Hudson, Roland Brener, and Roy Kiyooka of the ECCA, U. Vie and UBC respectively. Chosen were Neil Berecry, Share Corsaut, Eric Deros, Susan Gray, Lawrie Makaseff, and Christopher Reed from The Emily’ Carr College of Art; Jeannette Bonneau, Eliza beth Conway, Rerry Noble, Teresa Payne, Malcolm Wright, and Robert Youds from ‘The University of Victoria, and Wendy Hamlin and Anna Kirman from ‘The University of British Columbia. These artists selected, Vera Frenkel, an artist of noted accomplishment and wide ranging interests, was asked to view the exhibition and to award up to five prizes, not one of Which was to exceed $5,000.00. In true tolomonic spirit, Ms. Frenkel divided the prize money of $15,000.00 equally between five of the artists, who were, in alphabetical order: Neil Berecry, Jeannette Bonneau, Wendy Hamlin, Anna Kirman, and Teresa Payne. ‘The exhibition was a revealing exper fence, not only from the point of being present at that time when artists start their ceareers, but also from being at the point ‘where one gets a clear idea of what their training has been and what specifically is the context in which young artists in this province develop. With the experience of this exhibition, and from the evidence of the work incided, one might hazard the observation that there are, in fact, specific differences in the natures of the three insti SOME WHERE ALONG THE Percussion and Strings This is the third You've not heard of “X” student newsletter which will continue to publish each second week. What is the chemistry of this newsletter? What sorts of things can we expect? These fare aspects which are just beginning to be talked about. Some say that it must sentative of us as students, ions, our art and our thoughts. Perhaps a concise way of putting it is that “X"" will surely be whatever we want to make it, whatever we want to talk about: some sort of exchange. This inevitably involves a world moving, day in and day out, moving through polar continuums. What we are trying to say is that “"X" is only limited to the extent that we believe ourslves to be. What is cortain is that these begin: ning issues will be awkward. Those who produce this newsletter have some ex ue of x" This is our perience to gain in virtually every way. First to achieve will be acquiring some space — a recognized place where we can meet and produce “X". Its sub- Rick Ross MLE. Colo E04 oF ART stance will be multi-faceted: what's happening with our new student coun features on individual students and instructors and. their work; poetry; prose; interviews with visiting artists and thinkers; publication of student shows; ‘opinion and criticism; prints and photo. graphs, be it from those working with etching, lithography, drawing, print ‘making, whatever Contributions are welcomed from everyone. Our hope is that “X” will have blood, that is, sprit, animation and ‘growth. We anticipate discussions ofall sorts about the forms and implications of art and culture; this entails developing possibilities previously unexplored or considered unworthwhile. For contem: porary artists the implications are as intellectually clear as they are difficult to realize concretely. Further issues of “will hopefully be involved. with connecting worlds and elements to usall Gordon Moore and co-editors Joshua Berson All written pieces submitted to “°X"" must be typed and double-spaced. We are a news: letter without typewriters and without the time to type others’ work. In submitting written or graphic work please also write your name and phone number. Deadline for the next issue is Wednesday, October 11th at 1:00 p.m. For this issue only, your work ‘can be left at the main office at Dunsmuir Street... in envelopes marked “X newsletter”. Letters to “X"" may be left at this spot to0. tutions involved in the education of art students; that the art students of B.C. have three quite individual approaches to art training available to them. Briefly, it would appear that the EGCA has an approach to the art making, process which emphasizes the incorporation, itudes central to conceptual art and ‘That of The Department of Visual Arts at The Univer- sity of Victoria stresses what might be con: sidered the more specifically and, indeed, art historically traditional concerns. of painting, drawing, and sculpture, while the programme of the Department of Fine Arts at The University of British Columbia Steers a middle course between these two and includes a major segment of art history This choice provides a wide spectrum for the students and a healthy situation for the arts in British Columbia What the Helen Pitt Awards Exhibition underlined, as Ms. Frenkel noted in her ‘comments ‘on the exhibition, is that the creative juices in the visual arts in British Columbia are flowing, and this despite an abysmnal market is unlikely to provide any sort of financial base for these students ‘who are stepping into the rough and tum- ble realities of the professional art world. ‘They are stepping out, however, armed with a considerable arsenal of talent and ability — so now we stand back to see where they go and to see what the vision and generosity of Helen Pitt has helped foster. Peter Malki July 1978, » Curator It’s you that decides The article was received shortly before Publication, so X sent out a couple of peo- ple to collect opinions from around the college. The following is a synopsis of those opinions and does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors. Tt rapidly became apparent that all was not a bed of roses but resembled more 4 can of worms. Our interviews were brief and it was not possible to talk to everyone involved. In the interests of everyone con- cerned, would those people who have something to say on the matter please let us have their views for publication in subsequent issues. ‘As a whole, our interviewees felt that the Helen Pitt Awards Exhibition was political game. It was the political nature ff the game which made everybody reluc- tant to be identified by name. Whether this fact confirms the political nature of the process or not is for you to judge. Fourth year students are aware that it is their tum next, and are confused and ambivalent. It is such a lot of money; can people afford not to enter? One student Said that if she pursues her own work in hher own way she can forget about being successful in either the Awards or Honours. She feels that artistic integrity is a loser in ‘a game which she saw to be purely political, ‘The student selection of the internal juries was seen to be inadequate. The ‘meeting was organized at the last minute; a lot of people couldn’t attend or didn’t know about it. A Student Council mem- ber assured us that two members of the Council had spent hours on the telephone in an attempt to contact graduating stu- dents; of the ninety-odd graduating stu- dents only thirty or so turned up at the meeting. Students and faculty felt that this resulted in the selection of a jury biased toward conceptual work from the start, which is possibly reflected in Peter Mal kkin’s assessment of the College's en- ‘rants: “.. . ECCA has an approach to the art making process which emphasizes the incorporation of attitudes central 10 conceptual art and multi-media produc- ‘Sharp criticism was aimed at our Dean fof Instruction, Tom Hudson, who was seen to be an active member in the Awards selection processes and on the Honours ‘committee selection team. People sav that if a student had been rejected from the ‘Awards then the student had no chance in ‘being accepted for Honours. The wisdom ‘of having one person actively involved in both these processes wat questioned by both faculty and students. Everybody knew that at the opening of the exhibition, when the winners were announced, Chris Reed had removed two of his three pieces of work. After the first selection process he had been advised by