You Can't Please Everyone

Last Tuesday I had the wonderful experience of my first show reception.  There was a great turn out and all of the work that went into it was worth it!  One of the best things was meeting new people and getting an unbiased opinion from people I did not know.  I am very aware that my work, while thought-provoking, is not something people may wish to hang in their foyer.  One of the best things that happened was that I was asked to take one of my paintings down.  To me, that means I have accomplished one of my goals.  I was able to put the painting up for the night, but then had to take it down.  Even though people were not comfortable with the image of a man in a ski mask, it sparked conversations and made them think!  Once I was able to explain my concept, the distaste they felt previously seemed to be replaced with questioning and insight.  

In contrast to the paintings that made people uncomfortable, I also showed a painting of my best friend.  This proved to be the favorite, hands down.  I do love that painting, but the response got me thinking.  My goal for my art is to make people think and confront their judgments and those they judge.  At times I know that the discomfort they make feel by looking at those characters may discourage them from paying attention, I thought that a room full of them would force them to confront those feelings.  In actuality, however, the people who came seemed to cling to the most pleasant painting there.  I got questions about the others, but there was a lingering audience in front of the only female nude in the bunch.  Even though I had a price list, I knew ahead of time that there was only one sellable painting being shown.

The question then is, who do you please?  Should an artist compromise his or her original intentions to sell art?  I know that I am far from being the first to debate this unoriginal question, but as a senior in college, I realize the dilemma.  There is a balance between doing the art that you love and letting it pile up in storage and doing what you are good at, and others love.  How do artists get to that point where they can do what they want and have others appreciate it.  Frida Kahlo is not famous for beautiful self-portraits, but people like Madonna have paid millions of dollars for her paintings.  So what do you do if you are not famous and museums do not want your paintings and people do not yet know your name.  It is a catch 22.  If you do not sell paintings, you cannot afford to paint as much because you must have a job.  However, you will not be known as the artist you want to be if you sell out.  

Although I do not  have a solution to this problem, I can only hope that in my own art I will have the will power to be the artist I want to be.

You Don't Know their Story

I was asked to hang some paintings at a local wine bar.  The idea of showing my work somewhere other than school or my parents house was was exciting and nerve-racking at the same time.  Although it is just 5 paintings, it is a bigger deal to me than I thought.  I first planned on bringing in some paintings from my Abstract Painting class.  Mostly non-representational, larger, more marketable and pleasant paintings.  To my surprise, however, they wanted me to hang my more current pieces.  As it turns out, I am not the only person who likes controversy (who would have thunk it?). The Wine Vault has a main room with all of the wine, a larger room to relax, and a smaller room where my paintings are.  But the reason they're in the smaller room is because that is where they do all of their wine tastings.  People can drink wine and talk about my "thought provoking work."

The real problem here was hanging the paintings.  Since they usually only show smaller works on canvas or photographs, they hang the pieces by a hook attached to ribbon.  This, of course, did not hold my 6-foot-tall paintings.  The ribbon was holding, but not the hooks so I got some plastic hooks that I nailed in and hung that from the ribbon.  The next day I got a call saying my largest painting had fallen.  I reinforced it with two more hooks and it seemed fine.  Then, the next day I found out that all of my paintings had fallen.  Finally, I went to my dad.  Picture Hanging Wire!  Why didn't I think of that?  Now I just had to take them all down and put them back up again.  I never realized what went into hanging art work.  I always  assumed that my paintings would be easy since the stretchers are thick enough to just hang on two nails and that would be that.  You never know though, and you should always be prepared for where you will show your work.  Know your location and your materials (i.e. size and weight of your work).

Kudos to the real professional artists who know what they are doing.  I guess we all need a good learning experience.  It would be no fun for anyone if you always got it right on your first try.

My paintings aren't finished, they are hung

We are all, no doubt, aware of Vincent van Gogh's infamous signature. However, in viewing a recent show of his work, my father brought to my attention that some paintings were not completed with his signature, "Vincent." This observation then led to a question I have asked many times: when is a piece of art finished? In regard to my own work, I say that my paintings are not finished, they are hung. My father does not consider a photo or drawing finished until he has signed it. So, could we then assume the same for van Gogh? Imagine how art history could be reinterpreted if we stop assuming that all of these works were finished. Just because we would feel more comfortable knowing that the paintings we have studied are finished does not mean that the artist felt that way.

I find myself always revisiting work. As an artist, you must grow to some degree or cease to call yourself an artist. This is because the word "artist" is synonymous with "student." As I "finish" one painting, I have already started on another. Especially in working with the figure, each painting is likely more successful than the last and I constantly wish to change the one before. However, the reason I say my work is hung, and not finished, is because I have to just move on. It is completely possible to paint one painting for an entire year and not even begin another. So many times artists paint numerous paintings on one canvas in hopes to "complete" the original. What I now realize is that although my paintings may not be finished because they are not perfect, it is imperative to move onto the next in order to progress.

All this makes me wonder is if the great painters of the past may have struggled with the same things. Maybe then, I have an explanation as to why Vincent did not sign all of his paintings. And maybe we can humanize those great painters that have become immortal in history.

Teacher! Teacher! He's Cheating!

If you copy an answer off of a test or from a paper you found online, you will get in trouble.  You cheated and you undoubtedly know that.  Yet somehow, art makes a simple, cut-and-dry situation complicated...again.  What is "copying" in art?  What is the artistic equivalence to citing your sources?  And when can you say that you have made something your own?

I am sure that everyone has heard about Shepard Fairey and the legal issues that have resulted from his "HOPE" painting of President Obama.  If not, the Associated Press is suing Fairey for using a photograph taken by Mannie Garcia, an AP freelance photographer.  Now, the problem we must address is, at what point are we copying art?  One could argue that clothing is art.  And by these standards, a fashion photographer is plagiarising the clothing designer by "copying" the design.

I do appreciate the argument that the painting is a direct representation of the photograph, but it is not a photograph of a photo.  The painting in and of itself is original because it was created by the artists hand.  Not to mention, the graphic technique and other changes make the new work a unique piece of art on its own.  At the very least, Fairey is not the first.  Apparently many have forgotten about Andy Warhol.  We do not assert plagiarism on Warhol's work.  Apparently, we believe that Andy Warhol changed enough of the image to "make it his own," but Shepard Fairey did not.

Fairey used an objective, practical photo and created his own image.  This image became the icon for the Obama campaign.  I do believe the artist should give credit where credit is due, but... HE DID!  The AP did not even know that he used one of their images until 7 months later when he said so!  At most, the AP lost the licensing fees they would have charged for the actual photo, which Fairey offered to pay.  As an artist who sometimes works from photos for reference, I sympathize with Fairey.  I think that his intent was for his HOPE painting to help Obama's campaign.  He just so happened to be one of those really lucky artists who got his big break.