PCA/National Litho Exhibition

This show would hopefully strike a balance between technical excellence, inclusive representation across skill levels, and creative applications that productively transcend the traditional constraints of the medium. Ideally, this exhibition would eventually tour nationally.

• Personally, I would prefer that the exhibition would showcase excellent printing as much as excellent images — I have seen work in at least one significant institution that was printed by a studio that I expect to be professional, for a significant artist, yet the impression on the wall was.. underwhelming. Let's show what litho can do. That said, I do not want to exclude expressive and meaningful work that showcases the strengths of the medium but are perhaps compromised by access to suitable materials or training, or acheived in spite of adversity. One solution I would propose is to set up an accompanying online exhibition (also promoting accessibility outside of in-person visits) and a screen installed at the show rotating every submission received that meets final criteria. In this spirit I am not motivated to build in a prize component unless there are several categories in play.. but I'm not opposed to it.

• I am not interested in limiting submissions to a particular timeframe — some practitioners may feel that they were able to make their best possible work in litho at a residency ten years ago, and that's what I'd want to show, not their only hastily-made work within the last year. However, we may have to decide whether we want to include work in posthumous honorarium to celebrate work by persons no longer with us, such as work submitted by a gallery on behalf of an artist.. it may be best to require that the artist submit on their own behalf even if printed by a collaborating printer for example, to prevent this drifting too far from reflecting our contemporary practice.

• I am open to non-lithographic elements being included including traditional, digital, and experimental media — but my personal preference would be to require that work on display had meaningful and legible physical contact with a lithographic matrix. Even that statement is complicated. I would appreciate community input on whether to include prints that have been captured and output by other means for a meaningful reason, such as video works that rely upon print media — or works that rely on lithographic processes to generate transfers for other media, such as ceramics. How shall we ask the community? Rely on a survey like these Jotform platforms?

• A survey of "Australian" practice?...
It would be great to get community input on what lines we draw here — again, not the decision of one person! I would vastly prefer that this show reflect the spread of Australian practice, including Australians living abroad and works made in Australia by visiting artists collaborating with our studios but let's talk about the scope you feel is a good start for this iteration.

• "This iteration?"
If we could ever get together the resources, wouldn't it be fantastic to use this as the seed for a regular (biennial, triennial?) showcase, potentially with a prize component when more feasible? Or the potential for a permanent collection housed in an institution?

• Funding
It's difficult timing to even identify let alone apply for grants, and I don't pretend to be on top of the funding schedules these days. While the Print Council may contribute auspicing for funding and a letter of support, understandably they do not have a direct budget to contribute. Any help with funding opportunities, sponsors we feel good involving, etc. is great. There are ways we can manage this on a very low budget, even just trying to cover the gallery fee, but every bit would help. This scales exponentially if it tours, but looking out beyond the end of 2025 gives us time to line up more resources. In any case, I'd really prefer that artists and administrators minimise out-of-pocket expenses to make this happen. This might be another reason for the digital display and online component, for artists who can't afford to get an artwork physically to the gallery to choose digital submission only.

• Curatorial Rigor & Transparency
Most persons motivated to contribute efforts to such an exhibition are of course practitioners who truly deserve to be represented in it — motivating me to seek curatorial guidance that will navigate around concerns of producing an insider / vanity project. Likewise, I don't pretend to know the length and breadth of litho in Aus and won't presume to speak authoritatively without help even if I exclude myself to do so! This ties to funding — scholars and curators would deserve if not expect an honorarium for contibuting. Likewise, it's a concern running prizes if the management of this show relies on practitioners who would deserve to be contenders. This boils down to whether the physically exhibited work is selected by juried submissions, an invitational basis, etc. and who will make these calls.

• Scale
Our first limiter on displayed work will be the size of the PCA Gallery (though it has recently expanded). Then, it may need to be flexible depending on what touring venues are available/selected, but could equally lead to opportunities for expansion in larger venues.

Special thanks to the International Specialised Skills Institute and George Alexander Foundation for the fellowship that sparked this venture. You can learn more and access the resulting fellowshp report here:

https://www.greyhandpress.com/fellowship

Likewise, deepest gratitude to all family, friends, community members, and contributors that make anything possible in this world.