|
|
Post by sleepboy on Dec 23, 2008 21:13:01 GMT -8
I've recently had this conversation with several different people and then have seen it mentioned on various blogs so I thought maybe some of you would like to voice your opinion.
I've noticed that there are so many new galleries now and sometimes the art is not so good, even at some established galleries. I think that the hard times might weed out some of these bad galleries and artists so it may be good in the long run for the quality of art. Also less galleries means less fighting over artists so may less support for "biters"
|
|
|
|
Post by travislouie on Dec 24, 2008 4:28:07 GMT -8
I agree, . . .there are too many biters out there
it's funny, . . .Michael Hussar warned me that in a few years there would be "a new crop of artists graduating from art school painting just like me", . . .by then, I think my work should evolve a bit more, . . .
as far as too many galleries, . . . it is unfortunate. It waters down the quality of the art that is available and newer collectors have a difficulty determining what is derivative or original, . . .also, if the artwork from this little world of ours wants any kind of real credibility from the larger art establishment, . . .I think we need some kind of art critic of significance, to back us up, . . .and the galleries need to work together to improve the quality as well, . . .I won't name any names but certain Los Angeles Galleries need to look at their artist rosters and tighten up a bit. It's hard to take a gallery seriously if a certain level is not maintained.
This year should be interesting
|
|
|
|
Post by oldfartatplay on Dec 24, 2008 7:32:13 GMT -8
I also agree. Over the last few years I've noticed what seems to have been a frenzy of galleries opening up. Dozens of new "lowbrow/outsider/pop surreal" artists are showing their work. I feel that some are quite good but many just leave me scratching my head, wondering. I think what will eventually occur is something I will call "Art Darwinism". Survival of the fittest kind of thing. The truly talented and original will survive and the others will fade into obscurity. Of course in nature we see something called mimicry, where a certain species will imitate another in order to survive. I don't believe this behavior works in the art word. Being influenced by another artist is one thing but copying someone else's' style does not fare well in the long run. I feel that the current economic state we are in will only accelerate "Art Darwinism". Time will tell.
|
|
|
|
Post by sabotage on Dec 24, 2008 9:36:29 GMT -8
I'm sorry guys, but I completely disagree. Anytime you have a time like we've had recently, where so many people can make a living in art I feel you have an acceleration in the evolution. More artist raise the bar and challenge each other. In a bad economy I don't think this genre we love would have ever become what it has. I feel sad and scared for what this recession holds still for the artist that are struggling to make it and have not yet reached their full potential and may never do so. As far as bad art thriving, that should be left to the free market to decide. Just my humble opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by virtu on Dec 24, 2008 10:05:36 GMT -8
Agree with Sabotage 100%.
|
|
|
|
Post by COOPER COLE on Dec 24, 2008 10:27:45 GMT -8
Agree with Sabotage 100%. |
|
|
|
Post by travislouie on Dec 24, 2008 12:06:07 GMT -8
What bar is being raised?
|
|
|
|
Post by richardtharbaugh on Dec 24, 2008 12:27:53 GMT -8
Preach it. You've gotta fight... For your right... To beeeee taken seriously... I won't name any names but certain Los Angeles Galleries need to look at their artist rosters and tighten up a bit. It's hard to take a gallery seriously if a certain level is not maintained. This year should be interesting |
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Dec 24, 2008 13:10:27 GMT -8
I'll have to agree with Travis here. There are so many galleries showing this sort of work now that there is a growing desperation to find artists who can fill all that wall space every month. (Or in some cases, nearly every week!!!) Young artists are doing way too many solo shows, too close together geographically and too early in their development.
This has been a bit of a bubble... and like the internet bubble, there are solid performers who will take their blows and survive to fight another day, and hyperinflated copycats who will disappear. Unfortunately, there will be some great young artists who will have to struggle for a few extra years to "make it," and maybe some of them won't have the stamina to stick it out. That would be a shame, but only the normal course of things for artists, I'm afraid.
|
|
|
|
Post by ally on Dec 24, 2008 13:15:31 GMT -8
the strong will always survive. there are so many galleries that are clamoring for the "sure thing" the artists that consistently sell out their shows. to me, its pretty easy to book big names and sit back and watch....
without the smaller, lesser known or newer galleries, often times the underdog gets passed by. one of my goals for 2009 is to open a small space that not only showcases what i feel is amazing talent by lesser known artists (many who i find on etsy or browsing flickr) but also, to showcase quality work by more established artists.
while the economy might be horrendous now, i think the one good thing is that the lesser known , more affordable artists are coming out and being discovered and i think its great.
i think in this art world, there is a niche for everyone....low and highbrow, if you will...just my little opinion, of course
|
|
|
|
Post by jakewaldron on Dec 24, 2008 13:36:47 GMT -8
As someone who is starting out and struggling to show and sell my work I personally don't think this economy is going to be too helpful. It will probably make these few years even harder than they would have been to get my stuff out there. Hopefully by that time though I will have progressed even farther and be in a better position to show my work.
I do definitely agree that it would be nice for some galleries to look over what they have been showing though. But, if lesser known artists can't get through the rough times they will have a hard time finding new people of quality to show. So I'm not really sure how this will effect things.
|
|
|
|
Post by virtu on Dec 24, 2008 14:11:12 GMT -8
What are "Biters"?
|
|
|
|
Post by jakewaldron on Dec 24, 2008 14:26:00 GMT -8
Someone whose stuff looks too similar to another artists. They're ripping off or "biting" their style.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhinomilk on Dec 24, 2008 15:09:33 GMT -8
i think artists are just going to have to start painting smaller
|
|
|
|
Post by amin on Dec 27, 2008 12:04:44 GMT -8
3 random thoughts...
1) Imitation is the highest form of flattery.
2) I don't believe that there is such a thing as "original style/technique." Everyone that puts paint on canvas has been inspired or influenced by another artist. Banksy inspired/influenced by Blek, Yue Minjun inspired/influenced by his neighbors in an art collective (they all pain the same type of figures...check out Ha Shiyou's stuff who has a studio literally next to Yue Minjun's), Michael Hussar by Caravaggio, etc. It boils down to timing, cultural relevancy, and most likely marketing.
3) Last, from what some financially successful artists have told me, it ultimately boils down to luck. One common factor that I've heard is that having a strong online presence has helped their careers as it gives them easy access and exposure to fans/potential fans all over the world. Which is why I started GalleryOps.com.
To directly answer the original question, I think a poor economy isn't necessarily "good" for art. Sure the less popular/successful artists/galleries will have to find something else to do in order to get by but, everyone will feel the pinch. Which means more stuff will appear on eBay at discounted prices especially if it's between making a mortgage payment or keeping a picture on the wall. And, as we all know, lower prices aren't necessarily good for anyone.
All I know is that if the economy keeps going south, everyone will feel it. Not just "bad" artists or galleries.
|
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Jan 9, 2009 16:27:51 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Jan 22, 2009 9:02:36 GMT -8
well, poor economy definitely not good for galleries unfortunately. but for art in general and collectors it might be a different story. vandolog posted up three reasons why poor economy may be good for street art. 1. The not very talented artists who have found their way into galleries are going to be put in their place. So many people have been buying street art either for the name of the artist, or just because it is street art. This year, some collectors are concerned that even great artists won’t sell much work. People have stopped buying for name or genre recognition. Collectors are buying those “special pieces” that they feel are particularly great. At the end of this recession, there are going to be a lot fewer crap street artists because their work is going to stop selling. Nobody wants to buy a piece any more just because the Sotheby’s catalog describes it as “stencil and spray paint on found wood.” 2. Street artists will do more work on the street. That’s why we love these guys isn’t it? They work on the street. While some artists have done a good job of balancing street and gallery work, many have let the quality of street work degrade, used street work as a publicity tool for upcoming shows, or just stopped working on the street altogether. A recession might inspire/force artists to return to their roots of doing quality work for the public. The time is right for innovation in street work. We had artists on the Tate Modern last summer, but I’m sure somebody will go even bigger than that. 3. It’s a buyer’s market (for those who still have the cash) No more being told “You have 10 minutes to decide if this £5,000 piece is right for you. I’ll send you a jpeg.” With flippers out of the market and collectors being much more careful with how they spend their money, those who are still buying can pick up some great deals. I’ve seen available work recently by Vhils, Bast, and even Banksy that wouldn’t have lasted to 5 minutes in last year’s market, but is sitting unsold at bargain prices. Take a look at these Banksy originals up for auction at Sotheby’s in February. |
|
|
|
Post by vandalog on Jan 22, 2009 14:09:06 GMT -8
Thanks for the link Sleepboy
I would argue that the poor economy will be very good for art in say 3-5 years when the economy recovers. As my post eludes though, it will be a tumultuous time. Artists who just aren't very good will start to fade away, and even artists like Hirst and Banksy are going to see hard(er) times. In the long run though, it means that any purchases in the next few years will be at a very good value and that we'll end up with a new crop of artists when this recovers.
|
|
|
|
Post by desized on Jan 25, 2009 8:00:19 GMT -8
I'm with Travis on this one and here's an article I just put up a couple of days ago that may be of interest: blog.theartcollectors.com/2009/01/22/survey-says-contemporary-market-bottoming-out/Whatever your opinion in, one thing is certain - the current state of the economy is drastically impacting the art market - from blue chip to chump. Several galleries (even good ones) have shut their doors in recent months In NY alone Rivington Arms, Clementine, Riviera to name just a few. More closings will happen and I believe newer and less established artists will find it much harder to find places eager to show their work than lets say, during the frenzy of 1-2 years ago. I am of the opinion that something needed to happen to level things out - there have been way to may artists rising way too fast (their prices along with it) for the market to support over the last couple of years. Its going to be ugly for a while I think, but down the line, confidence in the market will be restored and that is a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Feb 15, 2009 17:52:34 GMT -8
Intriguing article on this topic in the NYT today: "In the early ’70s New York City was on the verge of bankruptcy, bleeding money and jobs. With virtually no commercial infrastructure for experimental art in place, artists had to create their own marginal, bootstrap model. They moved, often illegally, into the derelict industrial area now called SoHo, and made art from what they found there. Trisha Brown choreographed dances for factory rooftops; Gordon Matta-Clark turned architecture into sculpture by slicing out pieces of walls. Everyone treated the city as a found object. ... It’s day-job time again in America, and that’s O.K. Artists have always had them — van Gogh the preacher, Pollock the busboy, Henry Darger the janitor — and will again. The trick is to try to make them an energy source, not a chore. At the same time, if the example of past crises holds true, artists can also take over the factory, make the art industry their own. Collectively and individually they can customize the machinery, alter the modes of distribution, adjust the rate of production to allow for organic growth, for shifts in purpose and direction. They can daydream and concentrate. They can make nothing for a while, or make something and make it wrong, and fail in peace, and start again. ... I’m not talking about creating ’60s-style utopias; all those notions are dead and gone and weren’t so great to begin with. I’m talking about carving out a place in the larger culture where a condition of abnormality can be sustained, where imagining the unknown and the unknowable — impossible to buy or sell — is the primary enterprise. Crazy! says anyone with an ounce of business sense. Right. Exactly. Crazy."
|
|
|
|
Post by tessar on Feb 22, 2009 23:55:03 GMT -8
just a quick thing.. from this side of things...
as painfully awakening as this market is turning out to be for a lot of us.. there is a flicker of excitement in my heart. i am finding, more and more to be in a position where i have to challenge myself; making work that will stand out, finding ways to get out there without necessarily having a ton of buyers and ultimately hoping that my dedication to my work will truly 'separate the men from the boys'.
this will take a few years at best, and my young heart is learning to cope and be patient. but out of it- i know i things will turn out for those who are doing this for legitimate, passionate reasons (and we all will say we are, but only time will tell, myself not excluded). it's going to be a very telling few years, i'm very curious to see where things will go.
as far as opportunities go.. i am going to try and arrange some trades and collaborative work and "cash in" now. because as cheesy as this may sound, if we artists can't get supported with money, at the very least, my hope is that we can be supported by each other's passion for work and initiative.
my name is tessar lo and i approve this message.
no, but seriously.
|
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Feb 23, 2009 0:37:00 GMT -8
You're going to make it through, Tessar. There's no doubt in my mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by kidrobotct on Mar 3, 2009 13:22:34 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by kidrobotct on Mar 3, 2009 13:25:00 GMT -8
as painfully awakening as this market is turning out to be for a lot of us.. there is a flicker of excitement in my heart. i am finding, more and more to be in a position where i have to challenge myself; making work that will stand out, finding ways to get out there without necessarily having a ton of buyers and ultimately hoping that my dedication to my work will truly 'separate the men from the boys'. I truly think that this is one of the "good" side effects of this market. it is allowing artists such as yourself to change the game and really come up with some great ways to distinguish yourselves. I am sure you will be fine in the long run. I've always enjoyed watching your work grow and change. |
|
|
|
Post by kristahuot on Mar 4, 2009 9:54:17 GMT -8
just a quick thing.. from this side of things... as painfully awakening as this market is turning out to be for a lot of us.. there is a flicker of excitement in my heart. i am finding, more and more to be in a position where i have to challenge myself; making work that will stand out, finding ways to get out there without necessarily having a ton of buyers and ultimately hoping that my dedication to my work will truly 'separate the men from the boys'. this will take a few years at best, and my young heart is learning to cope and be patient. but out of it- i know i things will turn out for those who are doing this for legitimate, passionate reasons (and we all will say we are, but only time will tell, myself not excluded). it's going to be a very telling few years, i'm very curious to see where things will go. as far as opportunities go.. i am going to try and arrange some trades and collaborative work and "cash in" now. because as cheesy as this may sound, if we artists can't get supported with money, at the very least, my hope is that we can be supported by each other's passion for work and initiative. my name is tessar lo and i approve this message. no, but seriously. I approve of this message too! Very well said. I worry about the economy as well, but one thing is for sure, hard work is never a bad idea. I'm just going to put my head down and paint harder, and I know so many others will be doing the same, and that's a very positive thing for everyone involved. I'm excited to see all of the amazing work that will come out of a tough period like this for our society. I'm just very thankful that I'm able to enjoy doing what I love. |
|
