Thank you for the welcome JL. I'm not trying to say anything god or bad about artists, but being the history nut that I am one of my favorite subjects is serial killers. Not always but for the most part they tend to be artists, I was just curious of everyones opinion about this. I know that John Wayne Gacy created artwork that strange people seem to collect, and then there is Hitler. I think that sometimes there is something wrong in the mind that allows free thinking and to be creative and artistic. Now all of this being said I work in a museum in the exhibition design department and am an artist but I haven't killed anyone, yet.
And on this subject the nazis would point to Churchill.
All the time I've spent running art galleries the worst thing I could hear from someone wandering through is, "I'm an artist, too." If they tried to show me their work I'd almost always say that we weren't looking for new work because I have yet to have an artist who was soliciting me show me anything that wasn't amateurish. My tongue was getting sore from biting it. Gacy was an artist -- yeah, sure, like everyone's an artist. I can't even think of any serial killers who were "artists" and the word is bandied around like "I'm an actor."
Lightwizard wrote:All the time I've spent running art galleries the worst thing I could hear from someone wandering through is, "I'm an artist, too." If they tried to show me their work I'd almost always say that we weren't looking for new work because I have yet to have an artist who was soliciting me show me anything that wasn't amateurish. My tongue was getting sore from biting it. Gacy was an artist -- yeah, sure, like everyone's an artist. I can't even think of any serial killers who were "artists" and the word is bandied around like "I'm an actor."
Yes, sometimes when people hear I'm an artist they will show me their (often terrible) work. For example, primitave pencil manga sketches, or roses or something. It's hard to keep a straight face. (Yes, I totally encuorage art and people doing it no matter what it looks like, but that doesn't mean it's not funny.)
If I'm ever near you and need a dealer maybe I'll wave artwork in your face. (Just kidding.... Probably)
Oh, and I'm a moderate libertarian. None of that anarchist bullshit.
A moderate libertarian? Does that mean you want less less government?
I found most all of my artists I exhibited through referrals from other artists. They do seem to hang together. I don't have a gallery right now but I'm considering opening one in Laguna Beach.
You might have a show of (selected) A2K artists. You must admit it would be different.
Would you sell fine art to an ignorant, evil Republican, Lightwizard?
Good. At least you acknowledge that Republicans can recognize and appreciate fine art, even though they do not usually create it.
Whoa, there. I thought you were being facetious so I was returning the thought. Actually I've sold all sorts of art, all in different qualification as to quality. In my experience, the clients I have who would identify as Republican had rather banal taste in art. I was never going to discourage making a sale if someone is not interested in genuine consultation help. They would almost always be attracted towards the commercial, subjective and derivitive art of the heavily marketed artists who are not in museums. Kinkade happens to be one of their favorites. I have lived and worked in Orange County which has been a bastion of the conservative Republican but it is on the wane. In Laguna Beach, it's always been a more liberal community and there are but a few serious galleries that would attract them. The overwhelming majority of the perponderance of galleries is in tourist art.
I've never been fully satisfied from selling this commercial art product which is labeled as "fine art" but is commercial art in fine art clothing. Republicans seem to be smart in getting hold of money (although my last gallery was in the center of the wealthy heirs to estates and few of them earned it) but not so smart in spending it. I found it pandering to the low taste of the general public and in my area, that's by-and-large a Republican audience. When in Rome...
LW, what you say rings true, but let me ask: you say that your "republican" clients "...would almost always be attracted towards the commercial, subjective and derivitive art of the heavily marketed artists who are not in museums." Why do you include "subjective" in this list of deprecations? Isn't much great art "subjective"? As one who favors expressionism I consider art that is not subjectively charged superficial art. Perhaps we are using the term differently here.
interesting post LW - here I would say it is much the same - the more conservative a voter is, the more they relate to illustrative 'art' and are less open to the freer expressive marks of good contemporary artists.
That phrase includes the kind of art that is nearly always objective, or figurative or subjective (including an object, or a figure, or a subject) and rarely abstract. The commercial manufactured art has begun to favor some second-rate abstract art but it's only been marginally successful. Then there's the "combo art" that combines an abstracted background with a figure, or subject if you will. Abstract art has been referred to as non-objective, non-subjective or non-figurative. It is something I've sold a lot of and for people who do utilize it as decoration rather than being true art collectors. Serious collectors are a rare breed and I can't think of one who is, like "great Republican artist," who is a Republican. If someone can find a serious art collector who is a Republican, be my guest. Bush recently toted a piece of Western art in the Oval Office which I've seen and is picture postcard art.
Subsititute "objective" in the other word qualifications and it makes no difference in the context as I was pointing out that there is alway something someone of poor abstract intelligence can understand. Now it's photorealistic of wine bottles and glasses that's are obviously done by an advertising art illustrator who perhaps has not been working in that field because of computers, or just as likely they recognize they can sell their work to look line fine art. Illustrator art is the main business of the art publishers. It is not great art but decorative art. Since I've been in the home of some of the richest people in Orange County it isn't hard to smell that they are Republican even if they don't verbally confirm it. That's not to say that there aren't other political persuasions that maybe don't know anything about art. I didn't meet one Republican in any art school, however. The fact that they more often have the money to buy worthless manufactured art which they perceive as fine art doesn't mean any salesperson is going to turn down the money. It's know as qualifying in sales -- to quickly discern the clients motive to buy and if they do, in fact, have the money to buy. By-and-large the work is marketed in malls like our local Facist Island (er, I mean Fashion Island).
LW, speaking of work sold in malls, I was in a frame store at a local mall and was struck with the decorative quality of an set of commercially motivated abstract reproductions, obviously by the same painter. They utilized the best principles of design very successfully. They were georgeous, keeping my attention for quite a while, but mainly for the purposes of learning from them and hedonistic delight. They were a perfect example of purely decorative abstract art. They only said to me "See how attractive we are," and they certainly were that. But the clerk had no knowledge of the name of the painter. I almost laughed in her presence. If a work of abstract art does not say to me "See how joyful I am" or "See my suffering" at some, not too obvious, level of perception I am less likely to appreciate it at a deep aesthetic level. I love it when a work I've done shows, whether I intended it or not, some evidence of a wound.
I think I understand your use of "subjective", but I'm not sure I can explain that understanding. I must work on it.
Speaking also of "combo art," that was a characteristic of some of Klee's work, e.g., the single (stick drawing of a) fir tree amidst abstract squarish shapes.
BTW, I like your use of the phrase "abstract intelligence" regarding art. It is something only remotely akin to mathematical abstract intelligence.
On my SAT tests there was an abstract intelligence grade factor. It did rely on some mathematical problems but mostly in understanding visual relationships, especially geometric. I'm not sure how remote it is from artistic abstract intelligence as the best abstract painters explore color, shape and compositional relationships and don't forget that Bach's music relies heavily on mathematics. You know it when you see it if you have an abstract intelligence. It's not just a pretty arrangement of shapes and colors. In that way, a commercial abstract can be a beguiling as Kinkade's lighted cottage windows -- it's suckered one's taste in effect.
Now, I'm not saying that has happened to me. It becomes in some way a guilty pleasure liked the seascape prints I have by the Hawaiian artist Seikichi Takara who also paints very good large abstract decorative pieces (I also have a print of one of those but in both cases paid very little money for them, about one-sixth their retail). There is a place for good decorative art. Unfortunately too much of it is poorly done and the public isn't informed enough to tell quality from trash.
sort of back on topic--I went by Andy wyeths place today and he has a bUSH CHENEY lawn poster in his field. I assume this was his (or Betsy's) wish.
Farmerman, I don't think we can assume that a conservative republican of the past--e.g., Wyeth--would endorse the policies and actions of G.W. Bush. Frankly, I'm surprised that so many Republicans support him. It's probably only in opposition to a Democratic opponent. As I said before, even though I'm a liberal progressive, I miss the Republicanism of Eisenhower, Ford, and Bush Sr. (even Nixon). I anticipate a real division within the Republican party eventually--and perhaps one within the Democratic party as well.
jL, the gOP conservatives around here are usually locked on single issues. The 'pro-life' GOPers are militant. The issues most recognized to be GOP are
1 abortion
2 iraaq IS THE WAR ON TERRORISM.
I dont support either but , its funny how the big Tent GOPers that you mentioned, are gone from the scene.Even Pas most progressive senator, Arlan Spector, is under heavy pressure by the faanatic right wingers like santorum (who prays for a theocracy).
if the GOP today would recognize that most of the progressive legislation 30 years ago was championed by the GOP. all the environmental law was pretty much written under Nixon and Ford.
i would like my country back, before we go much further into the dark ages
