To blog or not to blog — 18 Comments

  1. Thank you all for your thoughtful comments and thank you Teresa Duryea Wong for writing this article. I really appreciated all the insights of artists and jurors and the lively discussion here and at Quiltartnews and at the Quiltart Facebook site.

  2. As a frequent juror, I do not want to see any work come through the system that I have seen ten times before. Since so few shows actually request no publication, I don’t see this as anything but beneficial to the entrants. If the work has been ‘out there’ for however long it’s been circulating, whether it’s bad or good or indifferent, I wouldn’t bother to go see it in person unless it was spectacular! As for an ‘age limit’, it really helps to keep shows fresh and up to date. I’ve been around long enough to remember the beginning of art quilts- the same things would do the circuit until we had all seen them before. This is the only way to keep a show’s excitement level up. There are also plenty of shows that don’t have the age rule

  3. Thank you for this excellent statement. It’s ridiculous to hold onto these anachronistic rules. I also wish magazines wouldn’t have the same shortsighted rules. Well said! Maybe we need a petition!

  4. I am really puzzled by this post as the IQA quilt show at Houston does not have a stipulation that the work be kept secret. They take work from 2013 for the 2015 show in full knowledge that many will have won awards in regional shows or in other countries- and that many will have been heavily published even if they did not win – on blogs or magazines.
    To my knowledge Quilt National is the only show that stipulates no previous publication. Some galleries do – but not quilt shows.

  5. I appreciate everyone’s comments and insights here. This is such a dynamic issue and there are many points of view… so it’s great to put it all out there and discuss openly.

  6. This isn’t true for IQA. You can share your quilts online before, during and after the rejections and acceptances are made.

    Quilt National, you cannot share.

    Most juried shows are done blind, and in some cases, photos shared ahead of time, the jurors do not want to see. This is true for a handful of juried shows. After the rejections and acceptances are released, then everyone can share their pieces. It helps promote the show.

  7. Beth’s right – although I don’t know how many exhibitions these apply to, they would be for JURIED exhibits with either valuable prizes, considerable prestige, or both to go with them. I’ve only ever entered one with this rule – Quilt National. It’s not difficult to comply – my own personal rule about all new work is that once a quilt has been seen on exhibition ie in public, then I will post it in full on my own web pages. Until then, I will happily document what I’m doing in very small segments – some samples I’m considering, a small bit of how I’m choosing to quilt it – nothing that reveals a quilt’s scale or overall design. Jurying in QN is always done blind – and as published photos potentially go far and wide to who knows where on the web – apart from organisers wanting a fresh show, no one would want to be accused of trying to influence jurors, now would they?
    Many of your reasons for wanting to post show that as a quilt maker you want to satisfy the technical curiosities of your readers rather than the overall aesthetics of its art, and they will enjoy seeing how you make discoveries and decisions while patiently waiting to see the whole quilt sometime.

  8. I agree. Seeing an image online is not the same as seeing a piece of art in person. I think attendance would be increased tremendously if shows promoted more online. Our local art museums do, and it increases the chances I will attend when I see works that catch my interest.

  9. I love the online presence of quilts almost as much as I love standing nose to surface (almost), inspecting quilt surface design and quilting lines in person. In an age of instant information, the nature of the art world is evolving, and fiber art is among the newer editions to the list of fine art definitons and inclusions. I am all for a surprise unveiling, but the fact that it is the exception to the rule to keep quilts on the hush until an opening seems to prove the point. If it is a classic it may hang in a museum for centuries. No one will care who saw it first. Just my opinion ;D

  10. Flora Joy – Teresa’s quilt was in the 2014 show. There are no results yet for 2015.

  11. I Totally agree with Teresa, and you for sharing this information. I had No idea that these rules existed. I am a 74year old, so so much of this online world has happened fairly recently in my life time.I was a docent at the University of KY Art Museum for 10 years, and I Constantly was, and still am, “arguing” Teresa’s point about there is Nothing like seeing a quilt, or painting, or whatever, in Person, versus in print. It really makes me sad when people think they don’t have to go to museums, or galleries, or music halls, for that matter. That can do it electronically. Not So!
    Thank you for sharing this important information. I hope we can make a difference in the show rules.

  12. I wholeheartedly agree with Teresa. I think it would be nice to see “in progress” pictures and write ups even before the artist knows the quilt has been accepted. I like to document my work (on my blog) as I go along. Not until I see how the work comes together do I think about where it might be entered and the rules surrounding the requirements for that entry. Because of that, a piece that might be “worthy” of one of these shows won’t be allowed entry.

  13. I’m guessing that the maker of the work has to remain unknown for the judges/juries to be impartial. However, if the work is not juried into the show or judged then there is no reason why it should not be on all media. After all, many pieces appear in many shows and win many awards so after the first show they cannot be anonymous. How come these later judges are considered impartial?

  14. You stated that your quilt was accepted at Houston. Do you mean 2015? If so, where is the site that lists the winners? Many thanks for your response.