Patricia Bickers on London, PR and journalism (2009)
Patricia Bickers interview: 1 | 2 | 3
R.J. Preece: If PR strategy at times is shaping certain presentations of art in the London/UK art world, why can’t it be presented explicitly by the art-PR team? Would that reduce its power and effectiveness? Does it have to be "hidden" to be more effective?
Patricia Bickers: From their own point of view they would, I imagine, probably like their own intervention to be as explicit as possible, since that is presumably how they solicit more work. I still think it is important for artists either to resist the pressure of PR "shaping presentations of art", or to confront and deal with the implications of such pressures in their work-–after all, Hans Haacke has been addressing those very issues in his work for years.
It is important, too, for institutions to resist. However, the art world is still uncertain to what degree they should relinquish control, though the sight of Sir Nicholas Serota introducing the award of the Turner Prize [in 2007] in front of a wall of logos as if he were at a football match or a Formula 1 event, suggests that the PR and marketing people were running the entire event, though not yet presiding over the decision-making process!
R.J. Preece: Do you think that detailed studies of art, artist, PR, gallery/space and resultant media coverage, in other words, critical media analysis with visual analysis, would generally be encouraged in the London art world? Does something like this support the concerns you raised in your editorials, or are the possible range of dynamics fueling media coverage just something that art professionals and students really know clearly already?
Patricia Bickers: As a teacher as well as an editor, I try to make students aware without destroying ideals or shutting off alternatives.
I do think we need to redraw the ethical map; people are very confused and as usual it is to do with money. Having to go to sponsors, cap in hand, erodes the public service ethos and leads to too many compromises. I don’t wish to turn the clock back, I am a realist, but the partners in the transaction need to be on an equal footing. The arts sell themselves far too cheaply. Public funding stiffens the backbone and clarifies the boundaries of what is acceptable and what is not. Public money brings notions of public service (not the same as giving in to government instrumentalism vis-à-vis the arts) which is invigorating.
Ironically, if people in the art world truly believed in both public funding and in the idea of public service they could make a stronger case for private funding because the private sector is attracted to the public sector precisely because the art world represents an exotic, highly specialised target audience/market.
Patricia Bickers interview: 1 | 2 | 3
ads by artdesigncafe
Facebook comments
