I’m always interested in considering the impact and position of arts organizations.
More than 200 exhibitions, programs, parties and teach-ins is probably well beyond what anyone would have imagined would be the tally of 464 Gallery activities in its first five years: undertaking this much in such a short period would crush many organizations.
This isn’t flattery. Rather, it’s insight that comes from running a larger organization with an equally large appetite. My work at the Burchfield Penney Art Center has helped me better understand why 464 is important and how it has influenced the landscape of Buffalo’s cultural activity.
The Center holds the archives of many of our region’s most influential arts organizations and artists, and reviewing their files – and understanding their impacts – is always a great pleasure. Over the years, the Center’s been fortunate to be part of many important celebrations – among them, Hallwalls’ 20-year and 40-year anniversaries; Squeaky Wheel’s 20-year celebration; and many Buffalo Society of Artists’ milestones.
What the ‘record’ looks like for 464 Gallery (not to mention its affiliate organizations) is something different. Without getting into aesthetic identity (leave that to the critics) or approaches (artist-run galleries – both for- and not-for profit – have been going on locally since the 1950s), the marriage of an artist-support group with a capitalist position embraces a new model. Not to be confused with a greedy hand grabbing money from the notoriously tight market for artists in Buffalo, this is instead the consideration of viable careers, making money for galleries and artists alike. Because of this, there’s a balanced consideration about the development of the talent, skills and sales opportunities to sustain their micro-organism in a phenomenally rich cultural sea.
Accessing this pool is also based on a unique approach.
Over five years, the exhibitions have been a mix of curatorial selection, exhibition rental space and community gatherings. For some, it’s been too easy to look only at the exhibition rental component and assert that 464 lacks a critical eye for selection. This might be true if it were not, at its core, trying to accomplish something different, something more democratic.
In Buffalo, there are hundreds of artists – visual and performing – trying to locate space to share their work and get feedback on what they hope to communicate. The capacity for this, though, is beyond limited and the selection of who and where frequently lacks a clear notion of why: are they the favored artists of the cultural elite, or the time-tested and academically accepted, or just a parade of those dabbling with the right friends? One way to break down the centuries-old practice of the “kept” artist is to level the playing field – and this is what 464 has done. Does 464 show work by those closest to it more than others? Yes. But the door is there for all – to be close just means opening it.
So, after five years, how has the gallery changed – and changed Buffalo in the process? It has opened up a conversation. It has – to the chagrin of some – asked people who are comfortable in their models to be broader-minded. Most significantly, though, is that the community’s response has suggested that – like it, love it, or hate it – you need to pay attention.
Future historians, archivists and curators won’t just measure 464 by the artists it supported and the work that it exhibited but also, hopefully, by what it instigated.
So, as 464 continues forward, if you like it, participate; if you hate it, start something else.
Scott Propeack, Associate Director, Chief Curator
Burchfield Penney Art Center