Hands-on artistic creation vs. using "assistants" Sept 16, 2009 12:48:59 GMT -8
Post by sleepboy on Sept 16, 2009 12:48:59 GMT -8
Taken from another thread. Topic sounds familiar but can't find any other thread that talked about it before.
Just curious, and maybe not the best place to start this discussion, but it's been on my mind and I wanted to toss it out there. With so much work, in such a short time, as always, it's rather obvious Mr. Murakimi hasn't created much of this work from his own hand. This is a common practice for those at the top of the art world and it seems to be openly accepted and it still doesn't sit right with me.
So, with this notion in mind, what if say, someone like Audrey or Keyes, announced they were hiring an army of assistants and their upcoming big shows this winter would feature works not actually created by their hand. Would all still be lining up to purchase their works? Some may argue there is a difference here, but why is that? I think this could make for a cool discussion and perhaps already on the boards somewhere and I've missed... but just tossing this out there for folks to think about.
I think the argument for this practice would more or less be that the concept is the art, and therefore it doesn't really matter who "created" it since the artist still conceptualized it. That said, I don't really care for the practice, but I'm not in the position to buy art that's priced anywhere in the remote vicinity of these artists' stuff.
For some artists, as with Audrey, I definitely think it's the art and not the concept. Audrey doesn't necessarily have the most breakthrough ideas, but her execution and approach to the subject matter are unique and that's what makes her popular.
I think that Murakami, Koons, Kehinde Wiley etc would not be able to produce in the scale they want or do the projects they want if they had to do everything themselves. But, I wish they would dedicate several pieces in each show that they do themselves...
Just to keep this discussion going, as I am curious to hear what others think on this...
So it becomes product basically, designed by the artist. Sure, it looks nice, that's not the topic I'm aiming for here.
If not Kawasaki, how 'bout Keyes, who I feel is saying more with his work than Murakami or Koons could ever hope to. Speaking of, what is either attempting to say with their work by the way? So, lil' bears dressed up like a rapper are 'breakthrough ideas'? Just playing moderator here I guess, not picking battles with anyone... just keeping the flow going hopefully.
Todd Schorr went off on this in his recent interview in Juxtapoz, and it just really got me to thinking if that way of making art infiltrated our lil' bubble of the art world - how would folks feel? I mean, I agree for any artist to do three solo shows at once ala Murakami, one would need assistance, but what past greed is really fueling one to do this?