PFO

For 17 years I have been writing proposals for open & cold-call submissions. The summer after my MFA I wrote 26 proposals, a time when artist-run spaces were more plentiful.

I was good at them. Through proposal writing alone I secured a string of solo exhibitions in a wave of recycled installations that I generated new work on the back of. I knew my work & what it was saying apropos the current art moment in form & content. I had it down.

Today I got confirmation that I didn’t have it down, when I received yet another open-submission PFO. The best way to describe my reaction to this most recent of rejections was best expressed by my fellow artist-collaborator — “ugh”.

Rejection is obvs part of the process of being an artist in the highly competitive & yocal art scene. You have to put in the work, knowing that work is still not enough, especially when it comes to the vicissitudes of taste & influence… You can also wear out your yocal welcome.

Yet, what this latest rejection letter brings to the surface is the amount of work artists put into the game of crafting proposals for such fleeting events. Invisible work that will keep the institutional conveyor belt of amnesiac & Instagramable cultural production going, but not necessarily for the good of the artist. Cultural production: what & for whom is it good for?

I say this not as an artist rejected, which numbers 250 or so today for this particular open submission, but in the more objective roleplay of curator, which took a lot of work if not emotion.

I will personally redirect this rejection towards other proposed projects to keep the circus on the road. I have conditioned myself to do this on the breadcrumbs of cultural production.

That said, there is something good about such creative — albeit delusional — conditioning, which involves perennially & precariously working towards uncertain outcomes. It keeps the artist on their toes; the parkour of proposal writing.