Submit Response is a weblog by Jack Mottram, a Take Photographs In CCA? At Your Own RISK!
The current exhibition at the CCA in Glasgow is RISK, a show described in the press release as follows:
RISK brings together artists who endeavour to make creative political change through their practice, working across art and activism, using a range of strategies and technologies. The exhibition utilises the function of a gallery as a public and social space for engaging with creative ideas. RISK will present social actions and processes, political statements and questions, films, participatory, web and computer-based works, research material, alternative trade systems, workshops, discussion forums, art objects and more.
While taking the photograph below, an invigilator pounced on me, release form in hand, and demanded that I either supplied the CCA with my name, address and telephone number or deleted the photograph from my telephone1.
Now that I’ve stopped laughing, I think I may have to make a poster for the RISK ‘self-regulating poster wall’ hinting at the fact that visitors, while they may be inspired by the RISK project to utilise the gallery ‘as a public and social space for engaging with creative ideas’, their ability to do so may be hampered by the CCA’s new policy on photographing work on show.
1. Due to memory issues, this bit isn’t exactly, well, true! See this comment for a response from Karen, the invigilator in question. (Another update to follow when I make the poster mentioned above.)
Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
Was this the first time you had problems with photographing at the CCA?
Posted by cosmopolitan scum at 11am on 31.03.05
Yep - I always take loads of telephone camera shots at openings there, and took lots with a proper camera at Toby Paterson’s solo show last year - never had any bother before. I asked the attendant if she was part of a RISK performance piece, but she didn’t seem to get it…
Still, gives me a nice hook on which to hang my review of the show for the List.
Posted by Jack Mottram at 4pm on 31.03.05
Dear Jack,
It’s nice to be able to continue our initial chat regarding photographing artwork at the CCA Risk show.
I’m the attendant who, you so eloquently describe, “didn’t get it”. I fear there may have been some miscomprehension on your part as I adequately “got” your point to the extent of assuming you would write something along these lines. I knew you couldn’t let such irony go to waste.
I hope you don’t mind if I add a few comments.Firstly, apologies, I wasn’t aware I’d pounced on you.I’ve never been regarded as a particularly intimidating presence. To be honest I didn’t think I could convincingly pounce on anyone. I must be getting more scary in my advanced years, perhaps the latent Govanite gene is finally kicking in.
I know this is a bit sad - please bare with me -
because while I totally understand the use of artistic licence and exaggeration to prove a point, I’d like to correct some “factual” errors. I didn’t ask you to delete the photograph from your phone; the idea would never even enter my head. I remember you offered to
delete it, I reassured you it was unnecessary and explained that the point of filling in the
“Photography release form”- yep, it even has a name - was just standard procedure to protect artistic copyright. You then reassured me that you were always getting aggro for taking photos, although obviously you must have meant at other arts venues and not the CCA.
Working as an invigilator and as part of the FOH, you often find yourself at the blunt end of institutional/artistic inconsistencies. I’m just sorry I didn’t decide at the end of a long day to spend 1/2 an hour discussing these issues with you, but maybe next time,
Cheers,
Karen
Posted by karen at 7pm on 05.04.05
Hello Karen - sorry to have misinterpreted your getting of it and mis-remembering the deletion - I’ll amend the post in a second to de-demonise you. (No doubt a couple of drunken retellings of the story before posting here contributed to the dangerous excitement of it all - just as well I didn’t wait a week, or you’d’ve probably ended up a 7 foot tall thug in jackboots or something!)
Posted by Jack Mottram at 11am on 06.04.05