Current research on artistic groups suggests the career benefits of being place-based. This article examines the Chicago Imagists—a group defined by local recognition in Chicago and limited national renown—to explain the limits of these benefits when actors’ interests within a local scene diverge. Studying critical discourse on the Imagists from the 1960s to 1980s, we explain how “critical circles,” tied to the interests of regional evaluators, mediate artistic reputations. During initial group formation, Chicago artists and critics shared the goal of developing a distinct local art. However, critics’ investment in defining the boundaries of a “Chicago” style to further their careers ultimately diverged from Imagists’ investment in mastering a broader “American” style to further theirs. Chicago critics’ ensuing debates about the parochial limits of the label—and New York critics’ framing of Imagist work as provincial—further came to organize the very regionalism Imagist artists hoped to evade. We argue that attending to the divergent interests in the cultural field within which collaborative circles operate expands understanding of how affordances of place shape artistic careers. This study has further implications for theorizing the interplay of impression management and strong program perspectives on cultural wealth.

当前对艺术团体的研究表明，以地方为基础的职业优势。本文考察了芝加哥意象派——一个由芝加哥当地认可和有限的全国知名度所定义的团体——以解释当演员在当地场景中的兴趣出现分歧时这些好处的局限性。通过研究 1960 年代至 1980 年代关于意象派的批评话语，我们解释了与区域评估者的利益相关联的“批评圈”如何调节艺术声誉。在最初的团体组建期间，芝加哥艺术家和评论家的共同目标是发展独特的当地艺术。然而，评论家在定义“芝加哥”风格的界限以促进他们的职业生涯方面的投资最终与意象主义者在掌握更广泛的“美国”风格以促进他们的职业方面的投资不同。芝加哥评论家随后关于标签狭隘限制的辩论——以及纽约评论家将意象派作品定为省级——进一步组织了意象派艺术家希望逃避的地域主义。我们认为，关注协作圈所在的文化领域的不同利益，可以扩展对地方可供性如何塑造艺术事业的理解。这项研究对于将印象管理和强大的计划观点对文化财富的相互作用进行理论化具有进一步的意义。我们认为，关注协作圈所在的文化领域的不同利益，可以扩展对地方可供性如何塑造艺术事业的理解。这项研究对于将印象管理和强大的计划观点对文化财富的相互作用进行理论化具有进一步的意义。我们认为，关注协作圈所在的文化领域的不同利益，可以扩展对地方可供性如何塑造艺术事业的理解。这项研究对于将印象管理和强大的计划观点对文化财富的相互作用进行理论化具有进一步的意义。