Aspen Surgery Center, John Muir Medical Center, 133 La Casa Via, Walnut Creek
Monday-Friday December 7-January 15
Juried by Arthur Scott King, Diablo Valley College Art Department
Best in Show Keiko Stong Morning Ice
Acrylic/Oil—37 entries
1st place Korianna Kisielprice Chip in the Surface
2nd place Joanne Corbaley Kansas Harvest
3rd place Joanne Corbaley String of Pearls
Watercolor—15 entries
1st place Keiko Stong Morning Ice
2nd place George Ehrenhaft City Rain
3rd place Wendy Oliver Peace Rose
Photography—13 entries
1st place Mark Pemberton Namafjall Hverir
2nd place Katrina Martin Davenport Magnolias
3rd place Katrina Martin Davenport Lily
Mixed Media/Other—5 entries
1st place Yvonne Browne Gossiping Bridesmaids
2nd place Wendy Oliver Sunny Day
JMMC has space for a maximum of 70 pieces of wall art. We started with 31 entrants and 79 entries. JMMC dismissed three quilts that the EBAG show coordinator tried to include as wall art, leaving us with 30 entrants and 76 entries. One entry was dismissed due to lack of wiring, leaving us with 75 entries. With five too many, our juror, Arthur Scott King, looked over all the entries to determine the “bottom” five.
His criteria for dismissal were that these five were not well enough thought out/not fully developed/not fully “cooked.” Conversely, his criteria for awarding the prizes were that the work show evidence of being well thought out/fully developed/fully “cooked.” For example, in one category he went back and forth with the 1st and 2nd places several times. Finally, he became sensitive to one of them having a small under developed area, so back it went from 1st to 2nd because he could find no such area in the other. When he explained his places, he backed up each decision with well thought out and extremely detailed critiques. He also gave similar critiques to several other pieces. He offered to come to one of our meetings to critique a limited number of pieces from the show, including not only the prize winners but others as well. He suggested we find a way to limit the critique session to about 20 pieces. More about this later.
Acylic/Oil was by far our largest category with 37 entries. The juror included all acrylics in this category, even if they were painted on paper, because he said it’s the handling of the medium that is important, and acrylic handles as acrylic no matter the support. He studied each and every painting in this category, looking for things like consistency, variety of passages, variety of techniques, complexity, composition, color balance, follow-through with shadows, among others. He complimented two non-awarding-winning paintings, saying that even though they had weak areas, they showed remarkable creative bravery.
The Watercolor category had 15 entries. He looked for things like a combination of techniques in a given painting, such as both wet in wet and wet on dry. Any evidence of an under developed area in a painting was bad news. He explained how an under developed area has an unfinished look to it—as if the artist didn’t know what to do there/didn’t pay an even amount of attention to every square inch of the painting.
He was similarly demanding of the 13 entries in the Photography category. While appreciating a beautiful and inspiring view, he wanted to see more. He wanted the photograph to reinterpret the world with a unique viewpoint. He also wanted to be able to read the photograph as he would a painting, with an eye for repetition of patterns, interesting tonal variations, among other criteria. He appreciated the way his eye was led through the 1st place photograph and how he kept discovering new nuances. He described the 2nd and 3rd place photographs as wonderful examples of the “momentary” viewpoint.
He had the hardest time with the smallest category: Mixed Media/Other. Only five works lined that area of the wall. After much thought, he chose to award only two places, not wanting to “place” a work that fell short of a certain degree of complexity and “finish.”
When he asked if we had a “Best in Show” award, he was answered by a few shoulder shrugs. It was decided that if he felt one piece was head and shoulders above the rest, we’d be happy to add this award. He chose Keiko Stong’s watercolor entitled “Morning Ice,” and gave a glowing and enthusiastic critique of that sophisticated, complex and delicately detailed work of art.
In addition to the few intense hours put in by the juror, EBAG owes a round of applause to the two show coordinators who each spent more than 8 hours at JMMC handling the show, in addition to many additional hours spent preparing for the show. We’d also like to thank Joan Alexander for donating about four hours helping with drop-off and set-up. It takes more than 40 hours of manpower to put on a show like this.



![IMG_1346[1] IMG_1346[1]](http://ebag.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/img_13461.jpg?w=225&h=300)



