Author: Tomás Barceló
In 2014, posting artistic work on Instagram bordered on the ridiculous. The platform was associated with photographs of food, feet on the beach, and a kind of light, almost banal self-promotion. Many established artists looked with suspicion—if not outright contempt—at those who began sharing their work there.
And yet, after more than a decade, what began as a marginal space ended up becoming one of the most important catalysts of the artistic renewal we are experiencing in our time, and having a presence on social media is now almost mandatory for any artist.
First Phase: The Village Square
Between 2014 and roughly 2018, Instagram functioned as a meeting place. The first profiles that flourished there were, in many cases, creators situated on the margins: textile artists, puppet makers, toy builders, sculptors working in hybrid languages. What were traditionally called “minor arts.”
Many of them possessed extraordinary technical quality and symbolic power, yet had no place within the official gallery system. Social media offered them visibility and, above all, contact.
Instagram and Pinterest functioned during those years as an almost perfectly complementary system. Pinterest was the territory of discovery: a surprisingly effective algorithm that allowed users to find works and authors, linking images through formal and symbolic affinities. Instagram, by contrast, was the space of relationship. One served to find; the other, to speak. Comments on posts were long, and private messages even longer.
For many, it was a deeply liberating process. In my own case, I could not explain the evolution of my work without that stage. My approach to science fiction through an archaic sculptural language, or my deliberate return to polychromy, were nourished by that constant exchange. The tradition of polychrome sculpture had survived in territories considered minor, and social media made it visible again. It was, in a way, an unexpected renaissance.
Second Phase: The Market
Starting in 2019, the dynamic began to change. Instagram ceased to be only a meeting place and also became an effective economic channel. In combination with platforms such as Etsy or Patreon, many artists began to live from their work without depending on galleries or local markets.
Opening up to the world radically expanded the potential audience. But when a square turns into a marketplace, everything changes. The number of participants grew exponentially and the competition for visibility intensified.
The transition from that “village square” to a crowded space governed by different dynamics was, in fact, logical and inevitable. When an open place works, it attracts more people; when it generates economic opportunities, it professionalizes; when it grows without limits, it needs systems to regulate the flow. The closeness that was possible among a few hundred profiles becomes unviable among millions. The algorithm began to decide what was seen and what was not. I do not believe it was a betrayal of the original spirit, but rather the natural consequence of its own success.
In that context, many artists began, almost without noticing, to pay more attention to their posts than to their own works. The focus shifted: it was no longer enough to create and share, but the need to produce constant content began to impose itself, thinking less and less about real followers and more about the invisible criteria of the algorithm that determined visibility. The work risked becoming a means to feed the machine of dissemination. This transformation opened economic and outreach opportunities, but it also provoked deep tensions and, in many cases, genuine creative crises.
Third Phase: The Consumption Platform
Today most social networks function fundamentally as content platforms. We no longer enter them to see what specific people are doing, but to consume what the algorithm offers us in a passive way.
More is consumed, but there is less interaction, with shorter and more standardized comments. The current form of consumption on social media, based on an incessant flow of content selected by the algorithm, fosters a passivity that profoundly hinders the creation of community. When the user no longer actively searches, but simply scrolls and receives, engagement diminishes. The minimal gesture of following, writing, or delving deeper into a work requires a conscious decision that competes against the inertia of continuous scrolling. In that context, the real exchange of ideas—and also economic exchange—becomes more fragile, because it requires sustained attention that the very design of the platform tends to disperse.
What Comes Next?
What worked five years ago does not necessarily work now, nor was it foreseeable ten years ago. In 2014, posting art on Instagram seemed absurd, yet it bore wonderful fruit—even though replicating that same strategy today will not produce the same effect.
I do not know what will come next, but if I have learned anything from these years, it is that fruitful paths never seem obvious. Whatever opens the next space of encounter between artists and the public will probably sound strange, inefficient, or out of place at first. And that is precisely why we should remain attentive: because real changes are rarely recognized at first glance, and they usually begin at the margins.
0 comments