16th British Academy Film Awards (BAFTA Awards)

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh presents the Best British Actor award to Peter O'Toole at the 16th British Academy Film Awards in London in 1963. Peter O'Toole starred in the 1962 film ‘Lawrence of Arabia’. (Photo by Les Lee)

Lawrence of Arabia (1962) directed by David Lean

on wednesday evening we met with russ ligtas again, this time at pasong tamo where he goes to work and where we struggled to find transportation out of the area; we decided to wait and we had a lengthy conversation over coffee

after a particularly long bus ride along edsa, we arrived at his friend ea's house in teacher's village at 23:30 and watched the holy mountain by alejandro jodorowsky

we finished the film maybe past 2, went downstairs, and the four of us had a heated argument regarding the problematic parts of the film - which i feel was really about the distinction and separation of art from life 

russ and ea were talking a few feet away and i noticed russ looking at the four of us every so often with an amused grin on his face

we quit at 4 and went to sleep in a room full of books and an unsual (and surprisingly comfortable) blow-up pool for a bed

it was very unusual day; i feel like i'll always remember it

we left ea's at past 8 in the morning to get ready to go ccp where mark salvatus was setting up his show, latitudes

when we got there and was waiting for him, i explored the chabet tribute show and found a treasure - katya guerrero's artist writings - those two small boxes of printed photos and typewritten text on index cards along with her big book of notes and writings and clippings and letters - i don't know this person, this artist, i'd never heard of her before, but i feel like i earned so much from her through those documents

when we spoke to mark at the pasilyo vicente manansala, i really liked how he would sometimes interject with pero 'wag kayong makinig sa'kin (or was it pero 'wag niyo 'kong pakinggan?) -

- because that's essentially the attitude i feel i need to have within this mentorship program - and in my artistic life in general - to be open and receptive to what these more experienced individuals have to say to us - but also to be able to, in the end, filter through everything and discern what applies to me, what i agree with, what works for me, and what doesn't

the one work from his show we saw that day was a video showing his ongoing project (entitled pure) where he's in different locations and he empties bottles of water into larger bodies of water -  which he told us he doesn't straight-out label as "art" or as any genre - and i think this is a good position for inquiry and growth because you get to continuously question your own work and what you do

two days later, on a saturday morning, we ventured to ling quisumbing's house and studio in timog where we were to help her for her upcoming show, float

we had tea and pan de sal while we updated her regarding the program and our individual projects - nakakabusog kausap si ma'am ling - she really listens to what you have to say and gives a lot of great insight

she briefed us very animatedly about the pieces she's working on and we proceeded to do humble tasks like sanding and applying putty - work i found therapeutic as i don't get to do things like that with the kind of work that i make

we had lunch there and met tina fernandez of art informal; michelle, a chef; and vince, who was to photograph ma'am ling's work, and we had an impromptu mentorship/conversation that was candid and very informative as i'd never heard about the art world directly from the perspective of a gallery owner

before we left, ma'am ling toured us around her living, breathing beast of a house - in which i wondered how many things, in figures, there are - then i took an interest in the many books seen all over and she told us she worked for 9 years at the frick library in new york - i told her i dream of a proper job involving art and books - and she agreed to let me help her sort and categorize her library in the future

we went with her to pick one work up from a worker - a very curious object which cost her a lot of money and frustration - then we headed to the vargas museum to see gaston damag's show (where we met the wonderful martha atienza!)

I’m feeling rather indifferent about this article. I appreciated learning about the facts Mr. Cotter presented here as I don’t know a lot about the nitty-gritty of the “current market system” of art, global or local. However, the general sentiment expressed in this article was nothing new to me, nor do I believe it would sound new to any artist.

Maybe what I'm feeling isn't indifference so much as it is despondency. These are problems I don't believe I personally can do anything to help directly solve. I think these sorts of problems regarding the art world have always been there and I don’t see them ever going away. Art will always largely be a commodity and will always be entrenched in the economic highs and lows of the elite. I don't claim to have expert knowledge on art history, but I am aware that this is how it has always been, especially in the West where the article’s focus is.

The author expressing frustration about the gentrification of New York City, the lack of “art-world solidarity”, the inequitable distribution of finances in the art world, the lack of integration within art institutions: these concerns are completely valid and they do affect me, yes, but what can be done to solve these things – by artists, in particular? There will be exceptions, I'm sure; there will be revolutionary works that demand the art industry listen and change, but I don't trust these will be able to completely reverse the status quo.

I agree that there is a need for "an influx of new commentators" in art who will produce criticism that is evaluative and beyond mere advertising. I also agree that public institutions need integration with regards to the art represented regularly and consistently, as well as the inclusion of non-white curators, administrators, and directors who will encourage such diversity. I believe these will greatly help steer the focus back towards art and less towards the market.

I share the author’s disappointment that artists and art institutions have become mere “labor sources” and “support staff” for the industry. I also am against “the current market system shaping every aspect of art”, from how artists live to what kind of art is made and given exposure. The restrictive range of art that the market supports is threatening as it results in little exposure to less marketable forms such as film, performance, and installation (the likes of which I am personally more invested in making).

One of the questions I have in mind is this: Was there ever a time when this was not the way it is? Was there ever a time when the art industry had its neat, little place in the art world and money didn't have such power in art?

What can artists do? Specifically, what can an artist, who is neither rich nor influential, do? I suppose the best course of action is to keep oneself educated about art and its continuously developing life in the world, involve and educate others (if one believes in doing so), do the work, do it often and do it well, work to make it accessible to what audience one intends, and try to survive doing this for as long as one wishes to.

I, in no way, am at ease with the knowledge that this is how the art world is now. I recognize that this situation with the global art industry (and local too, I would assume) makes it monstrously difficult for artists to create work, to experiment, to show, and to sustain their practice and themselves, without succumbing to the pressures of the market.

Ideally, the art world should function in such a way that art is valued beyond its monetary worth. I recognize that there always have been and there always will be artists, as well as various other people concerned, who do function this way and those who even combat this way-of-things actively.