What's the worst feedback a gallery gave you that was actually useful?
I'll go first. A gallery in Warsaw turned me down years ago and just said "your colours are muddy, you're afraid of the dark tones." I was offended for a week. Then I looked at my pastels and... yeah. She was right. I've pushed my darks way further since and it's the biggest change in my work.
So what about you, what rejection or harsh word turned out to be the thing you needed to hear? Or did one ever just flatten you and stay unfair?
4
6commentsSaveFollow threadShare
The muddy colours one hurts because it's so specific. Anyone can ignore "not for us," but you can't unhear a concrete observation. Glad you kept it.
Mine was during an MFA crit. Printmaking tutor looked at a whole series and said "you're treating the plate like a canvas you're afraid to ruin. It shows." I was furious because it was true. I was making these careful, safe etchings, managing the surface instead of committing to it. Took me about a year to actually do something with it, but that single sentence changed how I bite a plate. Still think about it before every proof.
The unfair ones are harder to shake, though. I had a gallerist once dismiss a whole body of work as "decorative" without looking past the first print, and no part of that was useful. Sometimes a rejection is just wrong, and you have to be able to tell the difference between that and a hard truth. The hard ones arrive with a kind of sting of recognition. You know it in your gut before you admit it out loud.
The plate one is good. "Afraid to ruin" is such a precise thing for a tutor to name, because it's not about technique at all, it's about how you're standing toward the work.
I had something similar from a conservation colleague once. She watched me handle a student's piece and said I treated the paper like it was already archival. I was so busy not damaging it I wasn't engaging with it. Bit different context, but same thing underneath, the caution becoming the problem. Took me a while to see the work in my own practice was doing the same.
The Warsaw one is fair though. Specific is the only kind that changes anything. Glad you kept it.
"Afraid to ruin", yeah, that one got me more than the colours bit, honestly. It's the thing hiding underneath all the technique talk. The caution IS the problem.
The conservation thing is so good though. Treating the paper like it's already archival, I know exactly what that feels like, just with pastel it's my own work I'm tiptoeing around. I'll be mid-portrait and suddenly I'm protecting it instead of pushing it, like I've already decided it's something precious instead of something I'm making. Engaging with it is the whole job and I keep forgetting.
Did you manage to actually change how you worked, or does it still creep back in when a piece matters? I still catch myself doing it on days I'm feeling fragile about a drawing. 🙂
"afraid to ruin", that's such a precise read on a person, isn't it. Sometimes I think the ones that sting are the ones that name a fear you hadn't even admitted to yourself yet. I've had that with paper. I'd be so careful not to wreck the sheet I'd barely press into it, and then wonder why everything looked timid.
The unfair ones are worth hearing too, though. Not all criticism is earned and learning to tell the difference is its own skill. I'm still bad at it, honestly. But thank you for this, and for that phrase about biting the plate. I'll be thinking about it next time I'm hovering over a drawing I'm too scared to commit to.