Well, seen from a North American perspective it is creepy, but seen from a European, and specifically French perspective, perhaps not so much. You need to remember that in many cases those countries are on the whole much more "regulation-intensive", if I can put it that way, than we are, and their societies are accustomed to this fact of life - though there are growing forces against this kind of structured approach. As it is, craft guilds, artist guilds, etc. have great influence in respect of market structure, qualifications and participation over there. Different cultures. It doesn't mean that such structures and rules have a high risk of being replicated at a governmental or industry-wide level over here, but at the same time all those who disagree with this kind of approach need to be vigilant, so Mark L.'s admonition against complacency is good advice.
Not to mention that there is a long and rich history of craft along with art in those countries, including France, where guilds, 5 year apprenticeships, certifications, admittance to special societies, etc., exist. Family generations did what their parents and parents parents did, hence names like Fletcher, Smith, Wright, Taylor, etc. In Japan, family traditions of craft go back in many cases for 800 years or more. So the French have made very specific distinctions between art and craft, although the lines are becoming blurred in some cases as craft begins to blur the boundaries. As I mentioned before, when I had a significant show of sculpture in France, there was a problem whereby the local authorities tried to proclaim that since the work was made of wood and turned on a lathe, it was a product of craft, which meant the taxes charged would be obscenely higher. The Minister of Culture himself showed up, asked me "is it art or craft?" and when I answered and showed him a poster on the wall, he then pointed to the poster made from a photograph of one of the sculptures that said simply "Mark Lindquist" above the sculpture and "Sculpture", below the sculpture. With that he made a typical gesture spreading his hands out and then sort of walking/waving his right hand and made a "poooof" gesture with his mouth, and with a shrug, it was over. The work was deemed art and everyone went on their merry ways.
This is a very big deal in France, but it is in America as well. When the sculptor Brancusi's work was shipped to the US for an exhibition, apparently, if I remember correctly, US Customs tried to identify his bronzes as machine parts instead of art, and of course that raised a very big comotion:
"In 1926-27, Bird in Space was the subject of a court battle over its taxation by U.S. Customs. In October 1926, Bird in Space, along with 19 other Brâncuși sculptures, arrived in New York harbor aboard the steamship Paris.[5] While works of art are not subject to custom duties, the customs officials refused to believe that the tall, thin piece of polished bronze was art and so imposed the tariff for manufactured metal objects, 40% of the sale price or about $230[6] (over $3130 in 2016 U.S. dollars). Marcel Duchamp (who accompanied the sculptures from Europe), American photographer Edward Steichen (who was to take possession of Bird in Space after exhibition), and Brâncuși himself were indignant; the sculptures were set to appear at the Brummer Gallery in New York City and then the Arts Club in Chicago. Under pressure from the press and artists, U.S. customs agreed to rethink their classification of the items, releasing the sculptures on bond (under "Kitchen Utensils and Hospital Supplies") until a decision could be reached. However, customs appraiser F. J. H. Kracke eventually confirmed the initial classification of items and said that they were subject to duty. Kracke told the New York Evening Post that "several men, high in the art world were asked to express their opinions for the Government.... One of them told us, 'If that's art, hereafter I'm a bricklayer.' Another said, 'Dots and dashes are as artistic as Brâncuși's work.' In general, it was their opinion that Brâncuși left too much to the imagination."[5] The next month, Steichen filed an appeal to the U.S. Customs' decision.
Under the 1922 Tariff Act, for a sculpture to count as duty-free it must be an original work of art, with no practical purpose, made by a professional sculptor.[5] No one argued that the piece had a practical purpose, but whether or not the sculpture was art was hotly contested. The 1916 case United States v. Olivotti had established that sculptures were art only if they were carved or chiseled representations of natural objects "in their true proportions." Therefore, a series of artists and art experts testified for both the defense and the prosecution about the definition of art and who decides exactly what art is.[5]
Brâncuși's affidavit to the American Consulate explained the process of creating the piece, establishing its originality:[5]
I conceived it to be created in bronze and I made a plaster model of it. This I gave to the founder, together with the formula for the bronze alloy and other necessary indications. When the roughcast was delivered to me, I had to stop up the air holes and the core hole, to correct the various defects, and to polish the bronze with files and very fine emery. All this I did myself, by hand; this artistic finishing takes a very long time and is equivalent to beginning the whole work over again. I did not allow anybody else to do any of this finishing work, as the subject of the bronze was my own special creation and nobody but myself could have carried it out to my satisfaction.
Despite the varied opinions on what qualifies as art presented to the court, in November 1928 Judges Young and Waite found in favor of the artist. The decision drafted by Waite concluded:[5]
The object now under consideration . . . is beautiful and symmetrical in outline, and while some difficulty might be encountered in associating it with a bird, it is nevertheless pleasing to look at and highly ornamental, and as we hold under the evidence that it is the original production of a professional sculptor and is in fact a piece of sculpture and a work of art according to the authorities above referred to, we sustain the protest and find that it is entitled to free entry.
This was the first court decision that accepted that non-representational sculpture could be considered art.[7]"
Brancusi's Brid in Space Controversy LinkSo regulations are nothing new when it comes to art, it's just that things can become distorted, ideologies confused, boundaries blurred.
It's a complicated issue and one that continues to confound. Slobodan is correct that jurors, organizations, directors, curators, et al, attempt to control what they can, and imposing rules is about the only way they can justify selectivity which in this regard pointing to the issue of LE's , they hope will become mostly self-selecting. (But I don't think it really does.)
Mark
