tertiary sector artist 

                    interviewed by A-Desk

QUESTION:  How do you value the traditional distribution of rolls in art, that is to say, artists who produce work, commissioners who organize exhibitions, managers who administer museums, etc.?  Or do we need other paradigms?

ANTONIO ORTEGA: I have always maintained that in the seventies there was a critical analysis of our educative system that took place with the intention to find the root of our deficiencies.

It is obvious that, like the bad bullfighters who blame the sand when they have a bad show, the environmentalist philosophy placed the question of the lack of specialization as the main deficiency comparing our country with the countries that, supposedly, had obtained great success in the education of their citizens.  A double failure had then taken place: On one hand, to not consider the pure genetic base, that is, an explanation of the limits of the human factor was not contemplated from a fatalistic perspective. And on the other hand it was diagnosed badly: We thought that the specialization that in Anglo-Saxon countries was the source of their success:

Error, I do not know in other fields, but in the Anglo-Saxon scene of the world of the art we find d directors of museum graduated in chemistry or artists curators. , This, it is finally happening here, we had a dermatologist as consellera (minister) of culture etc.

QUESTION: What is the influence of you not-artistic work (writing, programming of activities, Commissariat) to your actual artistic work (own projects, exhibitions)? Or are both things really the same activity, but then, how would you define that activity? Is this activity part of a real active intention in culture or is it an adaptation to the Milieu (environment)?

ANTONIO ORTEGA: Although it does not look like it, seem it, because lately I haven’t had any exhibitions  in Barcelona, I carry out a healthy  career of artistic activity, that I combine with my position in the Centre of Art Santa Mònica as  the person in charge of Activities (seminaries, workshops, space Consulta...). This is the picture of the situation the latter one would be the main occupation if I considered that there are two different jobs; but I perceive them as a unique one... I have a  pedantic explanation: Ferran Barenblit (the director), who had contacted  me to include me as artist in one of the exhibitions of the Center, , asked   me with false preoccupation,( because in fact he was checking if I was  going to take the work  seriously),: if to be responsible for activities was  going to damage my artistic career. My answer was: "it depends on  what kind of artist you think I relate to., if it is  Picasso it is obvious  that indeed it will damage my artistic work because I'll need  hours of work  at my workshop, but if it is  Beuys, as I understand myself ,  not only it is not detrimental but consubstantial to my artistic project". So answering to the last part of your question where you suggested the possibility that everything comes up to only one activity and, in such case, what would the definition be, I will say that, observing the cultural production in the context of the economy, and with the aim to obtain the greater degree of effectiveness in my artistic work, I oriented my position to the one I name tertiary sector artist. I mean that I do not take care of the secondary sector, that one who provides consumer goods, but that I take care of the sector services.

Regarding the question where you raise an evolutionist causality versus free will, the unquestionable thing is that people are used to react to positive stimulus:  thus Rod Stewart took an erratic line in his musical profession with clear differences of style in his songs, suddenly "Do you think I'm sexy" great!, congratulations!, and he begun to repeat versions of the same song until he began to bore people. Lesson to be learned: we do what public applaud, and the tragedy is not to find what deserves the applause.