WWBFD
By: Margaret Archambault Spivey
During a recent trolley hop at Tim Faulkner Gallery, I overheard a man saying that, “Art is nothing more than money” and that the defining parameter between "Professional Artist" and “Amateur Artist” is "Are you being paid the big bucks? If not, then you’re not much of an artist." These ridiculous comments were then followed by a deep and hearty laugh of ignorant confidence. Not only were these statements inaccurate, broad generalizations, but this warped mentality began to concern me when I considered that there may be others with this blatantly foolish viewpoint. This sort of thinking falls into the same category of those artists who say that they “don’t care” if they sell their art, they just do it for themselves. It’s shocking that anyone would actually have such a contorted opinion about art and have decided the subject needs attention; just in case this is an indication of a more widespread view threatening to emerge.
First, let’s look at the misguided individual who believes money makes the artist. Why care about these labels? Not only are they inconsequential, but it’s not always the case. I know many very talented and serious artists who are not rolling in cash. Does this mean that they are amateurs? Hardly. The distinction between the two has little to do with money and neither is significant, unless of course you have a narrow view about what it is that art and artists really are. An artist creates, regardless of whether or not you like it, whether or not they make any money from it, or if they are recognized as a quote “Professional”. All art is NOT producing vast sums of cash; in fact most art produces nothing to very little cash. When you consider that there are hundreds of thousands of artists worldwide creating pieces that never see the inside of a gallery you have to wonder why are they doing this?. Why are they sticking with these non-lucrative artistic endeavors? Maybe it’s because art is much more than money. When we focus on the monetary aspects of art that is been produced today, alongside pieces from the past that bring astronomical prices at New York auction houses, or from high paid commission work, we confuse our ability to see clearly.
Because, the extraordinary prices that some, if not most, of the artwork from the past brings, we cannot compare them with work being produced today. Work from the past needs it’s own category of consideration. When we see the money these pieces bring at high dollar auctions, we need to recognize that it isn’t just the artwork itself that garners these bids. These pieces have a special intrinsic value due to their age, their historical context, their condition (especially pieces made before 1900), and of their subject, medium, etc. I worked in the antiques business for more than thirteen years and couldn’t help but develop an appreciation for early works of art. Consider this: If I paint a basket of strawberries spilling out onto a simple wooden table it might be attractive, but it won’t be nearly as well received as the c.1850’s oil painting depicting a basket of strawberries spilling onto the table. The value is intrinsic. Is that some horrible conspiracy? I think not. I think it’s as simple as having an appreciation for antiquity and its inherent connection to supply and demand.
It is also important to reiterate and explore the point about making money off the work an artist produces. Maybe I’ll be a bit more blunt. Any artist who pretends to not harbor a desire, or fantasy, or dream, no matter how fleeting or inconsequential, to someday make money or to be recognized as a talented or desirable artist is a liar. Sorry folks. Let me clarify that I don’t mean to imply that all artists are only working only FOR money, because that is obviously an inaccurate statement. What I am saying though, is that we all want our work to be appreciated as much as we ourselves appreciate it. If we are fortunate enough to actually make money off of our work then GREAT! What the hell’s wrong with that? Damn, I hate the all-virtuous, loner; pay no attention to me, façade that so many people adopt. If this idea of introversion were accurate than the photo pools of online art groups would be completely empty. I also know this to be true because I spent a good nine or so years claiming that I didn’t care what people thought about my work because I was only doing it for myself. Granted there is a certain degree of truth to this statement, in that it is not always my goal to please others with the work I produce, but it is equally true that my former subconscious fear of rejection was a powerful tool that prevented me from bringing my work out into the open. Once I received positive responses which landed me representation with an important gallery, I recognized the power that our fears, conscious or not, have over us. I’m making money from my work, not much, I surely won’t buy an island or anything, but damn it feels good to know that someone I don’t know personally pulled out their checkbook and bought a piece of my interpretation of life. Pardon me if I don’t see the negative attachment to this concept.
Every artist, even the ones making money are trying to express something, or at the very least relieve some creative aspect of their personality. If you’re an artist and pour your passion into your work, heart, body, soul, and so on, and you become recognized for this, then that becomes just another aspect of your work. I say Congratulations! If you are a misguided individual who thinks that Art is about money and the only “Professional” artist is a well paid one, then I challenge you to expand your apparently narrow corner of the world to explore galleries and events where art happens every day. Art is about truth and the truth here is that it has nothing to do with money. Benjamin Franklin who adorns the front of our hundred dollar bill spent the majority of his artistic life struggling for his passion and look where that got him.
