The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art May 1966 [antikvár]

Forty-eighth May Show April 20 through May 22 Annual Exhibition of Artists and Craftsmen of the Western ReserveIf this is not the best May Show ever, it is certainly among the better ones. Somé years ago it became obvious that if this exhibition was to perform its proper function in the community and art world somé changes had to be made. We conceive that function to be a selection of the best art recently created in this regionnot just what local artists are doing, but rather the very best of this recent work.In an effort to achieve this goal a program was begun and developed in two stages. Thefirst consisted in reducing the number of entries from ten and twenty, in the arts and crafts respectively, to three and six, thus encouraging artists to pre-screen their own works and resulting in a more effective exhibition. Editions of crafts were eliminated, thus emphasizing the unique qualities of originál works. Finaily, the geographical area covered was increased from one county to thirteen, assuring greater variety of work submitted and keener competition and recognizing the Museum's responsibilities to the region as well as to the municipality. The natural course of events brought about a much-reduced exhibition which may not always have seemed to be on a higher level than earlier shows, but was at least on a more uniformly high level.This year a second stage in the reorganization was initiated. Craft entries were reduced from six to three, bringing them into line with all other categories. The three jurors for the crafts, the three for painting, sculpture, and graphic arts, and the one speciálist for photography all worked alone (each with a secretary) in their respective categories. Each jury member thus chose his own exhibition independently from his colleagues, and the separately chosen shows were finaily assembled to make upthe exhibition. Special Mentions and cash awards in each category were made by a unanimous vote of all the jury members from the works that had received three admission votes. Juror's Mentions were given by each jurorto works (up to three) that he strongly felt deserved recognition but on which there was not unanimous agreement. Each juror knew that he alone was respon-sible for his choices and that he would be identified on the labels and in the catalogue with the works that he had chosen both for inclusion in the exhibition and for mention. This system ends the possibility of the domination of a jury by a strong