These seem like pretty novel ideas that have some merit though it is doybtful that funded organizations , producers or performers would embrace them. Imagine, however, how much easier it would be for the average consumer to purchase a pol or a book or a painting or a theater ticket if that consumer knew thal the price could be deducted

from the annual income tax returm.

TO MARKET, TO MARKET

Last month, we noted that another gallery had gone bankrupt and that a number of crafts persons had suf- fered a loss as a result. A year ago, after the failure of the Harrington Gallery, the Vancouver Sun ran two arti- cles by Peter Wilson {July 26 and 27) that explored the relationship between galleries and artists or crafts per- sons. This more recent event has prompted me to pull the Peter Wilson articles from my files as much of the in- formation in these articles is relevant to all potters dealing with galleries however owned.

Wilson began his two part series relating interviews with representatives of many of the well established galleries along the Granville Street gallery row. He set the stage for the discussion of gallery operations by reporting a con- versation with Nigel Harrison of the Catrionna Jeffries Gallery. The relationship between a gallery and the artists it represents is based on a 50/50 commission split which, according to Wilson, is the standard commission arrangement between galleries and artists except in the case of very well known and sought after work. “Harrison Says it is the ...continual care, intellectual feeding and re- assurance of clients that helps make well established gal- lerves worth the average 50 percent they take from the selling price. ‘If you sell contemporary art it's putting yourself in a position of trust. The client has to trust you because you have to explain the work and put if into con- text.’ Or, to pul it bluntly, clients who spend,..want to be reassured they're not throwing their money away on a dealer's whim or fad."

Wilson goes on to relate that Harrison feels that the artist receives "_,.an attractive gallery space in which to show their works, ... a developed client base, a connection with other galleries...and a built in publicist.”

Andy Sylvester of the Equinox Gallery focused on the un- derstanding between the gallery and the artist in his com- ments, “Artisis have to understand what their gallery is doing forthem, They have to understand how much time it takes to send slides out, to have clients come in to see the work, to send the mailers out, to organize the show...to do all those things to look professional. The gallery owner has to understand that in this culture being an artist Is a reasonably eccentric activity. You have to be flexible. You can't Say, gee, I'd like 10 perfect paint- ings by October 30th. | mean sure you would, but you're not going to get them...

There is then a three part relationship that must be bal-

anced on all planes for it to be successful for all parties. This relationship includes the patron. Ultimately this is the critical relationship. According to Dennis Geden of the Redpath Gallery, it is “one of the strongest suits of any Gealer is a give and take with clients... Artists always find difficulty not just talking about their work but also getting into @ rapport with the client. Often this is because the client can't be quite as blunt with the artis! as they can with the dealer.”

This three part relationship is based on three sets of clearly definable needs that can be identified in these con- versations.

Patron Needs: Whether the patron is purchasing a paint- ing, a work of Sculpture, a book or a pot, the patron is es- sentially Seeking to acquire an object that is the result of an intellectual process undertaken by the artist. Viewed from this perspective, the patron needs to be able to con- nect with the intellectual content in a comprehensible or at the very least sensual way. The patron's ability to

achieve this result is determined to a large extent by his or her own intellectual property. Some intellectual content is relatively common throughout our cultural experience. We all pretty much understand without thought the intel- lectual content of a standard dinner plate or a coffee mug. Very few patrons would not reach the conclusion that a Slandard coffee mug would be intellectually compatible with their own understanding or that of their associates. But, how does the patron comprehend the intellectual con- tent of a coffee mug that looks like a tree and pours from what appears to be the handle? Would acquiring such a coffee mug fit within the intellectual culture that the patron was exposed to? Would the patron be able to explain the mative for his acquisition to others within his cultural cir- cle?

The answers to these questions depend on the intellectual history of the patron at the outset and perhaps, later on, ihe patron's interest in broadening his or her understand- ing. The patron needs to sense that his or her acquisition fits within an intellectual context thal is significant among 4 Number of others within his or her cultural sphere. Also, that the acquisition is based largely in the mainstream of whatever current understanding of that mainstream pre- vails, Satisfying this need provides the patron with some assurance that the acquisition will retain intellectual value over a period of time. It is important to recognize that this intellectual content belongs to the broad cultural context in which the patron lives, It is not the intellectual content of the medium itself that the patron seeks to acquire.

eg. The average patron does not really care that potters think a pot is a good pot.

Artist Needs: The aniist Is at the opposite end of this tri- partite relationship from the patron. The artist brings a creation to a gallery for a variety of reasons, a need to show other artists what is being done, a need to test an idea. a need to expose an opinion, to make a statement, a need to generate an income, li is 2 matenalistic stance, but the need to generate an income appears to be the pri-