Navigating Barriers in Art Submissions: Why Curatorial Committees Disadvantage Diverse Visual Artists

Art submission processes often appear straightforward on the surface. Artists prepare their work, follow guidelines, and send their portfolios for review. Yet, beneath this simplicity lies a complex web of challenges that many visual artists face when submitting their work to curatorial committees. These challenges disproportionately affect older artists, artists with disabilities, and those from culturally and sexually diverse backgrounds. Additionally, artists living in rural or lower-socioeconomic communities face significant hurdles that limit their opportunities. This post explores these barriers in detail and offers insight into how submission structures can unintentionally exclude talented creators.

The Hidden Challenges in Art Submission Processes

Submitting artwork for consideration is more than just sending images or physical pieces. It involves navigating rigid systems that often favour certain groups over others. Many artists find themselves at a disadvantage due to factors beyond their control, such as accessibility, cultural biases, or geographic location.

Complex Submission Requirements

Many curatorial committees require detailed documentation, including artist statements, CVs, high-quality images, and sometimes even video presentations. These requirements can be overwhelming, especially for artists who:

• Lack access to professional photography or digital tools.

• Have limited experience with formal art language or documentation.

• Face physical or cognitive disabilities that make preparing materials difficult.

  
  

For example, an older artist who has spent decades creating but never needed to formalise their portfolio may struggle to meet these demands. Similarly, artists with disabilities might find digital submission platforms inaccessible or confusing.

Implicit Bias in Selection Committees

Curatorial committees are composed of individuals who bring their own perspectives and preferences to the table. While most aim to be fair, unconscious biases can influence decisions. These biases often favour younger artists, those from dominant cultural groups, or those whose work fits established trends.

Artists from culturally and sexually diverse communities may find their work misunderstood or undervalued. For instance, a queer artist exploring themes of identity might be overlooked if the committee lacks diversity or cultural awareness. This bias limits the range of voices and stories represented in exhibitions.

A rural artist's studio showing handmade sculptures and natural light

Leith's rural studio highlights the challenges of geographic isolation in accessing art submission resources.

Geographic and Economic Barriers

Artists living outside urban centres face unique challenges. Rural communities often lack art institutions, galleries, and professional networks that support artists. This isolation makes it harder to learn about opportunities or receive feedback.

Limited Access to Resources

• Internet connectivity: Slow or unreliable internet can hinder online submissions.

• Professional networks: Fewer local mentors or peers to guide artists through submission processes.

• Transportation costs: Sending physical artwork to distant galleries can be expensive.

  
  

For example, a talented artist in a remote town may miss deadlines or submit lower-quality images due to poor internet. The cost of shipping large pieces to a city gallery might be prohibitive, effectively excluding them from consideration.

Socio-Economic Disadvantages

Artists from lower-income backgrounds often cannot afford the materials, professional photography, or travel expenses required for submissions. This economic barrier means that even highly skilled artists may be unable to compete on equal footing.

Programs that require entry fees or costly framing add to the financial burden. Without financial support, many artists must choose between investing in their art and meeting submission criteria.

Accessibility Issues for Artists with Disabilities

Physical, sensory, and cognitive disabilities can create significant obstacles in art submission processes. Many platforms and procedures are not designed with accessibility in mind.

Digital Accessibility

Online submission portals may lack features like screen reader compatibility, keyboard navigation, or captioning for videos. This exclusion makes it difficult for artists with visual or motor impairments to submit their work independently.

Physical Barriers

For artists who create large or heavy pieces, transporting artwork to galleries or submission centres can be a significant challenge. Venues may not have accessible loading docks or assistance available.

Communication and Support

Artists with cognitive or learning disabilities may require explicit instructions and additional support. Unfortunately, submission guidelines are often written in complex language, which can confuse.

How Curatorial Committees Can Improve Inclusion

Recognising these barriers is the first step toward change. Curatorial committees and art institutions can take practical actions to create more equitable submission processes.

Simplify and Clarify Submission Guidelines

• Use plain language and provide examples.

• Offer alternative formats, such as audio instructions or videos.

• Allow flexible submission options (digital, physical, or in-person).

  
  

Increase Accessibility

• Ensure online platforms meet accessibility standards.

• Provide assistance or accommodations for artists with disabilities.

• Offer shipping subsidies or local drop-off points for rural artists.

  
  

Diversify Committees

• Include members from diverse cultural, age, and ability backgrounds.

• Provide bias training to committee members.

• Encourage community consultation to understand different perspectives.

  
  

Support Artists Financially and Logistically

• Waive or reduce entry fees for artists facing economic hardship.

• Partner with local organisations to provide resources like photography or framing.

• Create mentorship programs connecting emerging and established artists.

  
  

Real-World Examples of Inclusive Practices

Some art institutions have begun addressing these challenges with promising results.

• The Accessible Arts Initiative in Australia offers grants and support specifically for artists with disabilities, helping them prepare submissions and exhibit work.

• Rural Art Networks in Canada connect artists from remote areas with curators and galleries, providing workshops on submission processes.

• Diverse Voices Panels in several U.S. museums include LGBTQ+ and culturally diverse curators who advocate for broader representation.

  
  

These programs demonstrate that thoughtful changes can open doors for many artists who have been overlooked.

Moving Toward Fairer Art Submission Systems

The current structure of art submissions often reflects systemic inequalities that limit who gets seen and heard. By understanding the specific challenges faced by older artists, artists with disabilities, and those from diverse or rural backgrounds, curatorial committees can redesign their processes to be more inclusive.

Artists deserve submission systems that recognise their unique circumstances and talents. Institutions that commit to equity will enrich the art world with a broader range of voices and perspectives.

If you are an artist facing these barriers, seek out organisations and networks that support diversity and accessibility. If you are part of a curatorial committee or art institution, consider reviewing your submission policies and practices with inclusion in mind.