Who are the most marketing-driven artists alive & in history

Artist, art . . .

There are arts that are ephemeral. They exist only in time -- music and theatre come to mind. There seems to be a strong, wrong tendency to use the word "art" exclusively for painters, sculptors and so on.

But the more serious error is the use of the word "art" as an adjective rather than a noun. The dictionary defines art as a "noun." As such, we can discuss whether a piece of art is good or bad.

But many people. especially professors, tend to use the word "art" to mean "good art" AS THEY SEE IT! This attitude precludes any discussion because it fails to distinguish how the preferred differs from the excluded.

"I MAY NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ART. BUT I KNOW WHAT I LIKE"

"JUNIOR, SHUT THAT G--D---- STEREO DOWN. THAT'S NOT MUSIC, IT'S NOISE.

"YOU CALL THAT ART! THAT'S NOT ART! I CALL IT TRASH!"

Notice that this attitude about art includes lovers of Kincaid as well as Rembrandt.

I detect a dislike of academicians. My many teachers , were , for the most part, not silent about their preferences and dislikes. I may reject some of their opinions now since Ive begun my own journey to discover "why" I appreciate something. However, I cannot just dismiss them.
As far as exclusivity for the visual arts, we understand, I think that the boundaries of this thread have just stated" yeh we understand" but have chosen to limit our discussions to the visual. Its kind of hard to say the same thing ie "market driven" to present day musicians, when theres so much legal maneuvering going on to preserve rights and profits and market shares of musicians.
Works that manipulate time are a new creative experience each time they are performed, a painting or sculpture each are time arrested.

Anybody know anything about George Tooker ? Ive just seen some work , and they class him as one of the magic realists. There is a link to one of his "embossings" ? (It seems like an embossing in paper) His work here looks like Kathe Kollwitz,



http://nmaa-ryder.si.edu/images/1977/1977.3.1_1b.jpg

What is Art?
Farmerman, asking what is art is a very good question. I set up an on-line gallery to explore that question. In my gallery, I wrote the following introduction:

"WHAT IS ART? by BumbleBeeBoogie

Most people, when asked that question, will respond that Art is painting. We should not limit ourselves. We should expand our concept of the full range of Art.

On this site, we only have the ability to post a few representations of ideas. We have to be creative in the method we use to demonstrate the broad spectrum of Art that surrounds us in our world. So many aspects of Art are not recognized. They are so common in our daily lives that we don't think of them as having artistic qualities. For example, is an engineer's design or an architect's drawing Art? Of course. Are beautifully designed and knitted, crocheted or woven clothing, or decorative household items Art? Absolutely! What about the creations of tattooers, comics strip artists, book illustrators and book binders? They all are Art.

We've posted examples of what we consider to be a broad range of Art. We obviously can't post some categories, such as music. But we can post paintings or photos of the musical instruments that have had a profound effect on styles of the painting arts. For example, the impressionist painters inspired composers to dramatically change the world of music. It was never the same again.

We also prepared several art pages that will be of special interest to young children to encourage their interest in Art.

Some, but not all, of our ideas about WHAT IS ART are posted here. Rather than limit examples to already famous artists, we've searched to discover and include wonderful painters about whom most of us have no knowledge, who one day may be famous:

PAINTINGS FROM AROUND THE WORLD AND THROUGH THE AGES:
Classic and religious; Impressionist; Abstract; Contemporary; Primitive; Realism; Fantasy; Collage; Landscape; Seascape; Portrait; Still Life; Dwellings; Agricultural life to urban life; Industry; Royal life to working class life; High-Tech Computer/Digital; Human life to animal and plant life; Micro-Biological formations; males and females, adults and children; Comic Strips; Magazine illustration and book covers; Engraving; Theater stage sets and costumes; Ancient Cave Drawings; Hobo and Tramp Art; Tattoo Art; Trench Art.

PHOTOGRAPHY: Classic famous black and white photos from professional photographers; high-tech computer-digital photos in amazing colors. Wonderful photos from non-professionals, including children, and a wonderful gallery of Chinese women amateur photographers about their daily lives.

OBJECTS: Sculpture, classic and modern, in a variety of materials; Porcelains, ancient and modern; Ceramics; Ethnic pottery, tribal and religious objects, ancient and modern; Jewelry and other adornments; Furniture, classic and modern; Music Instruments; Glass blowing/art glass; Miniature soldiers

FABRICS AND NEEDLEWORK. The traditional "Women's Crafts" that are so often ignored as art: Ancient and modern tapestry; Quilts; Clothing; Lace tatting; Weaving; Embroidery and Needle Point; Macrame.

ARCHITECTURE: Classic and modern - exterior and interior.

Even Art Commentary is an art to be learned and employed. For it is commentary, in addition to applause and financial compensation, that inspires Artists to keep working at their crafts.

As you view all of the examples we've posted, we hope it will broaden your concept of the question: WHAT IS ART?"

By and large, it's the dealers like Castelli who create a market for the artist. Keep in mind, it has to depend on seasoned collectors and their money. With someone like Kinkaid, it's "nobody ever lost money underestimating the taste of the American public." Kinkaid is a model for all that is bad with the junk art industry. It's rubber stamped art which milks all it can out of its audience. Worse yet, it's mediocre quality passed off as fine art. It's commercial decorative art, pure and simple. That someone would invest $1000.00 plus in a cheap canvas transer that's been daubled on by some art elves is a travesty. The bad press and the lawsuits may torpedo this trend temporarily but there will be a new generation of suckers to come along and waste their money. Ah, Hell, it's their choice and if it pleases them to waste their money -- that's the American way (the pursuit of happiness? ) However, it also fortifies that idea that one can't buy happiness.

The question should be:

"What is fine art?"

...and "What is commercial art?"

Agreed LW and further more if any art fine or commercial brings pleasure to the viewer and gives them a emotional break from the drugery of most worldly things I am happy for them.

The truth be told my likes and dislikes have changed, and changed, and changed over the years.

FEAR NO ART

It's when it is misprepresented that's the problem. There is nothing wrong with beautifully done decorator art. A very well executed ad can be very stimulating and appreciated as well. The desire on the part of the promoters and marketers to give the illusion that the art has an inflated value, worse yet that the artist is of museum calibre, right down to the person who is selling it on the gallery floor is often too devious to fathom. It's hard to believe people are duped into thinking they are buying anything more than a nice picture for their wall (of which the custom framing, if any, is a huge part of the cost). Kinkaid uses a mass produced stock plastic frame. Of course, it doesn't look bad on his plastic cottages.

Until about the 18th century "art" was used to describe a field of applied knowledge --- the art (or craft) of medicine.
Duriing the 18th century, the arts began to be separated into "useful" and "fine". Fine arts were literature, music, painting, sculpture, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------
There is, I think, a bit of "have you stopped beating your wife" in the question "who are the most , marketing driven artists . . . . " Are monetary success and quality mutually exclusive? That would imply that the public is always in error in its judgments. Is a rich, market driven football player a worse player for all his worth?

---------------------------------------------------

farmerman, Having spent some thirty odd years teaching in higher education, you might say I like academics and academia.
The problem academics face is that they may have a wealth of knowledge and may be experts. They rightly know they are better informed. However, unlike science, one cannot "prove" that a given work of art is better t than another. It becomes a matter of lifelong reading, discusson, persuasion, participation, experience and attendance to become discriminating.

Billy Falcon, "who are the most , marketing driven artists . . . . " Are monetary success and quality mutually exclusive? That would imply that the public is always in error in its judgments. Is a rich, market driven football player a worse player for all his worth?"

While you do have a good point, I don't think saying someone is "market driven" implies they are bad artists. Being market driven can, however, influence the choices an artist makes.

If the marketing technique is targeting those with mediocre or bad taste and it suceeds, there lies the tale. It's true that just utilitizing academics as a judge of good or bad art is still subjective at best.
However, there are qualities in painting that can be discerned as professional or amatuerish. Recognizing basic failures in a painting is essential. Kinkaid, again the model for the artist pandering to a public, makes some gross compositional errors, has a technique tantamount to crockery painting and has a color palette that is so sticky sweet it would make Martha cringe.

BTW, in the commercial end of fine art marketing and accoring to Art Business News, the abstract is gaining popularity with the public (a decade ago, it was the landscape). Does this mean the public is acquiring a taste for art they usually would reject in the past? Unfortunately, the abstract art they are buying is sophomoric and strictly decorator art.

Yeah, I'm so sick of that stuff. It's the shining way out for people without art training or experience. They think more experienced artists can't tell when they do abstracts... Lemme tell you people out there, we can tell. And most of the abstracts that are getting sold are by amateurs and are terrible. The only kind of painting where I can't tell a practiced, intelligent hand from an unpracticed one is color field painting. (Note: not to discourage newbies or amateur artists, I'm just upset that the populace and sometimes the artworld and art critics support things that I don't feel deserve to be supported.)

For non-objectice abstracts and color field paintings, their abilities as decorative pieces has long ago surpassed their conceptual origins.

The truth is that the buying public is fairly well educated in every product they buy but art. It's easy to take advantage of this and it's not whether it is particularly good or bad. It is that it is grossly overpriced. An artist is paid everywhere from $5.00 to $10.00 each to sign a limited edition print. It costs less than $100.00 to produced it. Should it sell for $1,000. or $400.00? It's manufactured art.

As to fine artist who are respected by art scholars and their work is in museums who decide to use their name to "clean up," it still takes a trained eye to look at the work and determine how much of it is actually qualified to be called their best work. In nearly all cases, it is not their best work. The artist can't help copying themselves -- their style is distinctive but the subject matter becomes reduntive.

With abstracts, a trained eye can tell the artist has talent and can create imagery which has compositional integrity, balanced chroma and visual energy. Mr. and Mrs. Smith who last week bought a couch approach buying their art in exactly the same manner. It's a country where one can make a choice of what they like and don't like. I just don't like seeing the unwary being gouged.

I am always amused at how all the hotels in Oak Ridge Tennessee(an area where many highly educated science professionals congregate on energy related research), all the hotels have schlock abstract art prints next to elevators and in lobbies that appear , to me, to be chunks of wallpaper framed and signed IN THE PRINT. talk about lazy.
Goes great with the arrangements of plastic flowers whose real versions are native only to some deep tropical forests. Id rathre see the works of kids that we hang on the refrigerator

Portal star, Lightwizard, I agree with both of you. I was wrong to suggest market-driven implies bad art. I happen to like Leroy Nieman's work. I believe he endowed a chair at Columbia Unversity for about twelve million.
That is not a comment on his art one way or another.

This is a good thread. I'm enjoying all of your stimulating comments.

As an illustrator for "Playboy," Neiman "fine art" output is definitely pretty decorator art (not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with that). I've seen framed Neiman's in hotels -- albeit nice hotels. He is one of the commercial manufactured art purveyors who is commanding pretty hefty prices for prints. Even in a bad economy like right now, his prints sell of in excess of $4.000. Good for him but bad if the "collector" has any delusions it is a wise investment. One should have a huge amount expendable income to purchase a piece. Buy a Neiman poster instead.

The main point here is that these artists are not printmakers. They have only peripheral involvement with the copying of their originals for a limited edition. You can't sell them in most European countries as they do not agree they have value as original art. Mainly because they are no original art. They are reproductions. At least an artist like Eyvind Earle produced prints in his studio and he was well versed in the art of silk screen printing, albeit only the simpler ones. I have yet to determine if he made the plates for the few images that were fine art lithographs.

I posted the idea that the wore "art" is too often used as an adjective when it is a noun. I pointed out that doing so precludes any discussionn because everyone has their "good art" A second problem is that it teaches the ordinary person that art has nothing to do with their lives:

schlock abstract art
decorator art
those with mediocre or bad taste
the art they buy is sophomoric and strictly decorator art
I don't even consider Kincaid an artist.
etc.

The expected response to these kind of statements is, "Well, they tell me that what I like is not art so I guess art has nothing to do with me."

No, completely off the track as far as I'm concerned. It's not whether it is art, good or bad, it's whether the price tag on the art is fair or not. In nearly all cases, this manufactured art is grossly overpriced -- it's snake oil art.

Don't forget antique prints! Those were mass produced, but are now very valuable.