A Living as a Fine Arts Painter ?
R. Alzofon
Is anyone currently making a good living - not in fits and starts - but a
solid living over the years by being a painter?
- Don't answer if that person's financial safety net is a job at a
company, teaching, inheritance, short term grants, or anything other than
actually selling their paintings.
Is that person able to afford a house near a major cultural center, have a
studio, buy food, go to the doctor, even have kids all on their income as
a painter?
I want to hear that it can be done. I want to hear it can be done by a
variety of artists, not just, for example, nature illustrators selling
prints.
JohnXFire
check out my post under Re: do artists really starve for some thoughts on
this subject. my boss is a songwriter. he has a nice house in the fancy
section of nashville and does not do any "day work" hasnt for years. but
he is writing # 1 hits for the likes of the judds and alabama.
Thomas C. Waters
max_cri...@qm.sri.com (R. Alzofon) writes:
> I want to hear that it can be done. I want to hear it can be done by a
> variety of artists, not just, for example, nature illustrators selling
> prints.
What you want and what you get are not necessarily the same thing.....
You know.. I just can't comprehend posts like this person's...
Artists make art... AND, they do it by whatever means they can. IMHO,
REAL artists doit, because they have to... they paint, draw, create in
whatever medium because they are "called" to it. Some choose to risk..
and rely solely on sales, others(like myself) find a job which helps
suppliment sales, but all artists stuggle to find what combination of
stuff, work, art, standard of living et al, works for them.
Thomas C. Waters
twa...@pitt.edu
I always assume someone is gay unless they tell me otherwise.
"When evil men plot, good men must plan. When evil men burn and bomb,
good men must build and bind. When evil men shout ugly words of
hatred, good men must commit themselves to the glories of love."
Martin Luther King Jr.
Starr
>Is anyone currently making a good living - not in fits and starts - but a
>solid living over the years by being a painter?
The short answer is: YES. The lengthy answer is: YES, OF COURSE.
Next you'll want to know--How Many. The short is: MANY.
The long is: there is NO SET FORMULA for success. Some are
successful painters of fantasy while others are successful painting
kitchens. And in almost every case, LADY LUCK rode on their
shoulder at some point.
--
________________________________________________________
Success as an Artist doesn't insure success as a person.
Billing, Starr C 1995
Wray Kephart
X Artist Wondering if...
X Is anyone currently making a good living - not in fits and starts - but a
X solid living over the years by being a painter?
Yes.
X - Don't answer if that person's financial safety net is a job at a
X company, teaching, inheritance, short term grants, or anything other than
X actually selling their paintings.
<Swap-meet/garage sales not on list> Ok.
X Is that person able to afford a house near a major cultural center, have a
X studio, buy food, go to the doctor, even have kids all on their income as
X a painter?
Yes.
X I want to hear that it can be done. I want to hear it can be done by a
X variety of artists, not just, for example, nature illustrators selling
X prints.
It can be done.
Kephart
MDolinsky
On 3 Aug 1995, Starr wrote:
> Success as an Artist doesn't insure success as a person.
> Billing, Starr C 1995
You may want to try being a person already. It could help your art.
Starr
says...
In that case you can reverse the quote (vice versa).
--
________________________________________________________
How do YOU measure success? I use millimeters.
Billing, Starr C 1995
Ross Green
>doli...@evl.eecs.uic.edu wrote:
>>Starr [aka Itza Joqual] wrote:
>>> Success as an Artist doesn't insure success as a person.
>>You may want to try being a person already. It could help your
>>art.
>In that case you can reverse the quote (vice versa).
PeeWee Herman sez it best: "I know you are! but what am I??"
Hey Itza, here's a thought for you: In the past 3 months you've
appeared in r.a.f. using 3 different names/addresses--It's a strange
little game you're playing--But if you really want to *succeed*
in not being recognized, you'll have to control that nasty temper
of yours: it always gives you away eventually!!
So, when you come back again with your next new alias, we'll
all be playing "Spot the Itza," and your best way of avoiding
detection will be *consistent politeness.* (Avoid all those dumb
quotes, too.)
Good luck!
-Ross
R. Alzofon
max_cri...@qm.sri.com (R. Alzofon) wrote:
> Artist Wondering if...
OK. I've been watching this. I made the original post here and I think
we've gotton a bit off track. The truth is, I've had connections to the
art community all my life. At 42, having invested all levels of effort
into making a decent living out of what I am - a painter - I recently
started to wonder if such a goal is achievable. I have asked around to see
if anyone knew anyone who is actually painting (not teaching, living off
someone else, etc.) for a living. No one in my circle knows anyone at all
who fits that description. At first, they would say they did, and then it
would turn out that in truth something else was paying that person's way
over the years.
I believe (want to believe) it is possible to do, as some of you have
indicated. But now I wonder if I could hear real life testimonies from
those of you who personally know these success stories. Or, tell me how
can I find this information on my own? It seems we all must, as artists,
take a unique path. At this point in my journey I want to see some
examples of success, not to copy their moves, just to know it can be done.
Thanks to the ones who hear this as it's intended.
R. Alzofon
sl...@cc.usu.edu
> In article <max_crittenden-...@128.18.42.2>,
> max_cri...@qm.sri.com (R. Alzofon) wrote:
[the person who started this thread]
>> Artist Wondering if...
> I have asked around to see
> if anyone knew anyone who is actually painting (not teaching, living off
> someone else, etc.) for a living. No one in my circle knows anyone at all
> who fits that description.
Perhaps your definition of "artist" or "successful artist" needs
a bit of tweaking? Maybe artists can be successful and have multiple
sources of income? Maybe not? Why or why not?
I know some people who are just "painters," but I'll get to that in
a minute.
>At first, they would say they did, and then it
> would turn out that in truth something else was paying that person's way
> over the years.
So what? Nothing's wrong with benefactors, grants, fellowships, extended
loans, etc. You are just as much an artist as anyone else if you are
making art, imho, regardless of whether you're starving or making
a mint or teaching or boozing or whatever.
> I believe (want to believe) it is possible to do, as some of you have
> indicated. But now I wonder if I could hear real life testimonies from
> those of you who personally know these success stories.
Okay, here's one from one of the local boys out here in Utah. (I'm
leaving out his name as I haven't asked his permission to post his
story). He began as a businessman, and worked hard at it for about
ten years I think. But he hated it, didn't like the travelling and
being away from his family, etc. So despite his MBA he quit. He didn't
know what else to do. I believe it was his wife who suggested that
he make more paintings, since he liked doing that so much. So he did,
but he didn't earn much money at it. He took what little money he had &
used his business acumen to start a local art-supply store, and did
very well. But he wasn't getting in much painting while doing that,
so he quit. His family was beginning to wonder how they'd earn enough
income to survive. So was he. The more he painted, the more confident
he became, and he showed his work around to friends and family and
neighbors. He made some trips to big cities, and went to every gallery
he could. On each first visit he dressed as a businessman, a buyer,
and received much attention from gallery staffs. After he left he
made notes about each place and whether he though they might be good
for his art. Then he'd return to the "good" places the next day dressed
as an artist with slides, etc. That strategy worked reasonably
well, but he thought he could do better, and felt he wasted too much time
going to galleries that were too different than his work. Eventually
after much concerted effort his work was noticed by some galleries who
gave him some consignment deals that he was happy with. Today he makes
about a painting a day, and lives very comfortably. He paints landscapes,
with a thick impasto style, which he seems to enjoy a lot. He has
invested his income very soundly and has provided for his family of
eight or nine kids far into the future.
Okay, that's one story. You may think there's a few catches in it.
And there are. Maybe his form of artwork is easily accessible,
decorative, or something. Did he have support from other people?
Yes! As far as I can tell his family and friends stood by his
dreams most of the time. And he's obviously had the support of
a great many people who buy his art.
Here's my "success story" which is very different than the above:
I went to college, because I didn't know what else to do with myself.
When I was a Junior in college at the University of Notre Dame I took
my first college drawing course. I had signed up for it after having
taken some art history courses, during which I had thought I wanted to
make some paintings instead of looking at them. The drawing course
was just about the best thing I could have done -- and it convinced
me that I could be an artist. So I started advertising that, and gained
a few commisions and illustration jobs and so on.
Meanwhile I also took more art courses. And more
art courses. And even more courses. Eventually I realized I could be
getting college degrees for all those courses so I finished up at
Notre Dame and headed towards Washington University, which had been
highly recommended. I had a great time and earned the BFA there. From
there I went to New York City, to study classical drawing and painting
methods. There I also met my girlfriend Laura, also an artist. We
couldn't get teaching experience in the graduate program we were in, so
we sought out schools where we could teach, deciding to focus our
attention westwards, since neither of us had been out there. That's how
we landed in Utah, at Utah State University. They gave us the most money,
the best facilities and the best teaching experience -- basically what
we wanted and needed to continue making and developing our art. And MFA
degrees to boot. It's a very pleasant way to be making art, I'd say.
Now you may think there are some catches in my story. And there are.
How can I afford to go to school? I've used a combination of loans,
scholarships and fellowships and teaching assistantships,
along with hard work at commissioned art (I now run "Flying Crane Creative"
out of my basement in Logan in addition to my studies,
teaching, getting in shows). Of course the federal need-based loans
I'll have to pay back. Everything else was free. Early on I was very
fortunate to have disciplined myself to get the grades that many of
the scholarships required as prerequisites. Other than that I'd
have to chalk it up to a lot of strategic planning and very hard
decision-making, while also marketing my art, writing proposals,etc.,
all the time. I hope everyone recognizes that academia
is not for everybody, & you either have to like it or develop a
tolerance for it. So my success as an artist thus far cannot be
placed *solely* on my ability to make paintings. First, because
I draw and make computer-aided art and sculpt and so on, but
secondly because painting alone has not been my only source of income.
(though admittedly, that end of the equation had been getting much
better).
But I think that's par for the course. Even Roy Lichtenstein makes
money off of stuff other than his paintings (posters, t-shirts,
buttons, cards). We're all so different as artists and we have
different needs and expressions and different
habits about living and thinking...all good ways of doing things...
and then we all have so much in common. Maybe some attitudes or
choices I've made can help you in figuring out your options.
But I must warn you. Do not follow my path.
You can't. It was too unique and the pathway doesn't even exist anymore.
Nevertheless, eventhough you cannot step in the same water twice,
you may yet be able to swim in the same river.
How would you distill the process of how artists survive, as
opposed to the historical facts of what they did in order
to survive?
Greg Scheckler
SL...@cc.usu.edu
Kristi Coulter
is the best thing I've read on the subject of living on your work. Its the
very readable and beautiful journal of an artist who is making it.
John Sindelar
kri...@k.imap.itd.umich.edu
In article <max_crittenden-...@128.18.42.2>,
max_cri...@qm.sri.com (R. Alzofon) wrote:
> > Artist Wondering if...
>
>... At this point in my journey I want to see some
> examples of success, not to copy their moves, just to know it can be done.
>
> Thanks to the ones who hear this as it's intended.
>
> R. Alzofon
Starr
>So, when you come back again with your next new alias, we'll
>all be playing "Spot the Itza," and your best way of avoiding
>detection will be *consistent politeness.* (Avoid all those dumb
>quotes, too.)
>Good luck!
>-Ross
Sorry you feel anger when Starr textualizes--must have something
to do with your sensitive nature. I am NEVER angered by anything
anyone writes in this cyberian environment. I participate because
it is entertaining, amusing, and every once in a great while even
enlightening to spend time amongst the brethren and sistern in
this venue. As for my "dumb" quotes, they are the manifestation
of a serious disease that sometimes runs rampant here in these
nether parts--called hoof and mouth disease. It only afflicts dumb
animals, so you should have no fear of infections. Polite I am, when
others are likewise, but I think I can dish out the impolite just as
well as the next Jaxas in the crowd.
And a fine foam on your Guinness too, laddy.
--
________________________________________________________
Better to be qouted incorrectly than never at all.
Billing, Starr C 1995
Starr
>Hey Itza, here's a thought for you: In the past 3 months you've
>appeared in r.a.f. using 3 different names/addresses--It's a strange
>little game you're playing--
Postscript to (I Ain't Angry): Itza ain't here. Itza's vacationing
idefinitely on the Isle of Farce in the far north cybersea. I am
sitting under her throne, keeping it cozy with my warm nature
uncertain if she will ever return. It's that damned Jaxas that
talked her into leaving in the first place.
--
________________________________________________________
I collect and wear names as I do fine hats, with elan.
Billing, Starr C 1995
Starr
>I believe (want to believe) it is possible to do, as some of you have
>indicated. But now I wonder if I could hear real life testimonies from
>those of you who personally know these success stories.
I seriously doubt that the successful ones spend time dabbling in the
internet forums. So you can probably rule out hearing from them.
I'm referring of course to living legends like Jasper Johns (very top
of the heap), Rosenquist, Close, Fish, Miller, Gorman, Katz,
Freud, etc.--you get the drift.
Take as an example Melissa Miller, who is a neighbor. Her
paintings are sold before she even thinks up the subject of the next
one. Other painters of reknown are in similar demand. Those who
crank them out quickly may build up an actual inventory of unsold work.
Those who paint more slowly, like Melissa, may never do so.
Then there are the artists who are hugely successful because they
commercialized their work, producing huge editions of popular prints
that sell all over the world. R. C. Gorman is one example. There
are dozens of others. A couple of local artists who have made
millions are Amado Pena and Dalhart Windburg. In fact, Windburg
had such huge success selling prints of his own paintings that he started
his own publishing firm and was printing for other artists as well.
I suspect most people have never heard of either of the latter two.
Starr
> At 42, having invested all levels of effort
>into making a decent living out of what I am - a painter - I recently
>started to wonder if such a goal is achievable.
HOT NEWS YOU CAN USE.
Subject: French painting heads for Olympic mass market
Copyright: 1995 by Reuters, R
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 9:10:44 PDT
SAVANNAH, Ga (Reuter) - A specially commissioned painting by
MODERN FRENCH IMPRESSIONIST Andre Bourrie will be sold as a
poster on the mass market in conjunction with the 1996 Olympics,
local organizers said Tuesday.
The work, entitled ``Passage into Savannah,'' commemorates
the elegant coastal city's role as the host of yachting
competition during the Summer Games.
It was unveiled late Monday at a park along the Savannah
River, where the opening and closing ceremonies for yachting
will take place next summer.
The oil-on-canvas painting depicts a shoreline scene of
yachts in full sail on the Savannah River.
Bourrie's paintings ROUTINELY command upwards of $15,000.
Four-hundred and seventy signed and numbered lithographic prints
of ``Passage Into Savannah'' will be sold for $750 apiece at art
galleries across the United States. Posters also will be
available for $30.
Bourrie was commissioned to create the work by Fine Art Ltd,
the St. Louis-based art publisher which has an exclusive Olympic
licensing agreement for art prints and posters.
R. Alzofon
max_cri...@qm.sri.com (R. Alzofon) wrote:
> Artist Wondering if...
Folks:
I appreciate the serious responses you have made to this inquiry.
The question I put out does not suggest, by its asking, that making a
decent living selling paintings is the definition of success, inlusive. I
think the money issue can be separated out and discussed without
cautioning, "what is a successful artist, really?" The successful artist
topic is an endlessly fascinating topic, but can become a red herring when
practical issues need to be addressed.
Keep the (financial) success stories coming. They give me renewed hope.
R. Alzofon
Starr
>The question I put out does not suggest, by its asking, that making a
>decent living selling paintings is the definition of success, inlusive. I
>think the money issue can be separated out and discussed without
>cautioning, "what is a successful artist, really?"
You seem to be contradicting yourself. You say that making money
is not a measure of success, but the question you asked initially is
"does anyone know someone who can make a living from ONLY
their painting?" (that's paraphrased). Making a living has a very
narrow meaning and may NOT imply success, and certainly doesn't
equate to fame. I suppose there are famous painters who haven't
made a living from their painting, but I can't think of any in the
contemporary arts. That is the significant difference between
successful artists today, who are successful while still living, and
those of yesteryear, when the idea of starving artist had real
meaning and many only became famous after death.
--
________________________________________________________
I paint for therapy, but it only seems to aggravate the symptoms.
Billing, Starr C 1995
Wray Kephart
X twi...@star.com (Starr [aka Itza Joqual]) wrote:
X >doli...@evl.eecs.uic.edu wrote:
X >>Starr [aka Itza Joqual] wrote:
X >>> Success as an Artist doesn't insure success as a person.
X >>You may want to try being a person already. It could help your
X >>art.
X Hey Itza, here's a thought for you: In the past 3 months you've
X appeared in r.a.f. using 3 different names/addresses--It's a strange
X little game you're playing--But if you really want to *succeed*
X in not being recognized, you'll have to control that nasty temper
X of yours: it always gives you away eventually!!
Go take a pill, count the grass blades in the front lawn...too
late for recovery status on raf, the weasels lost all credibility.
Kephart
DIGITAL PRODUCTION
****************************************
This Message Sent From CC-ONLINE
A Service of Creative Communications
333 Bryant st.
San Francisco, CA. 94107
Ph# 415-957-0333
Fax# 415-957-0158
FirstClass # 415-957-0343 3-lines @ 28.8
*****************************************
Lynn Mendel
> Artist Wondering if...
>
> Is anyone currently making a good living - not in fits and starts - but a
> solid living over the years by being a painter?
>
> - Don't answer if that person's financial safety net is a job at a
> company, teaching, inheritance, short term grants, or anything other than
> actually selling their paintings.
>
> Is that person able to afford a house near a major cultural center, have a
> studio, buy food, go to the doctor, even have kids all on their income as
> a painter?
>
> I want to hear that it can be done. I want to hear it can be done by a
> variety of artists, not just, for example, nature illustrators selling
> prints.
>
If you find out someone did it, I want to know how they did it
Starving artist
_____________________________________________________________
******* An AFX Communications Company
************* Providing Internet access to Portland
**** ****
** **
* E U R O P A * VOICE 503.222.9508 DATA 503.222.4244
PainterSkp
Also, there's a local sculptor here that has done much more than survive.
He got downright wealthy.
Skip
Mattison
: >
: > Is anyone currently making a good living - not in fits and starts - but a
: > solid living over the years by being a painter?
I'm doing it -
My works are selling, I have no need for a house and all the trappings it
makes it to hard to travel. You give up much to make it - I won't argue
but no one said it was easy. Besides the American Dream - went - so you
might as well give it up and b happy!
ahahahhah
I am extremely satisfied and happy and the success are comming right
along with it -
Most of my direcction has come from studying all first person works by
women artists as many as I could get my hands on - its all there right in
the stories. I am combining everything I learned there, good public
relations, concidence, karma, the net and the focus on the end of the pool
I leaned in athletics. It appears to be working so far -
One tip is women artists had to work much much harder for the sucesses
and recognitins.
Kandinsky says something about a soul on its true path is irresitble -
I've found mine - If they tell you no then you know -
Mattison FitzGerald
Artist
R.Howard
yes there are those who can buy a house, cars and dog food from
the proceeds of being an artist. I have been very fortunate and
so have all of my friends who work in the art field. It's my day
job...and my night job <G>.
This society is so addicted to novelty that it is impossible for
anyone with REAL talent to starve or be undiscovered. You'd
really have to work at it to keep top notch work from becoming
public. Of course, there are not that many really skilled artists
who have learned enough to develop marketable skills.
..Rob Howard
Artist Forum [CompuServe]
monty Kane
: This society is so addicted to novelty that it is impossible for
equation of novelty with 'real talent'?
In my experience, financial success as an artist is more closely
related to business skills, shrewdness, and a willingness to be aggressive
than to any merit in the work. Plenty of terrible artists, and plenty of
uninspired but skilled technicians, clean up in galleries and
illustration.
(Sorry to be so grumpy about the whole thing...)
R.Howard
equation of novelty with 'real talent'?
In my experience, financial success as an artist is more
closely
related to business skills, shrewdness, and a willingness to be
aggressive
than to any merit in the work. Plenty of terrible artists, and
plenty of
uninspired but skilled technicians, clean up in galleries and
illustration. <<<<<
Actually lack of success seems to be based in the ability to
split hairs and write an apologia explaining why "they" succeed
while the pure of heart (who are not concerned with worldly
pursuits) starve unnoticed. Writing those excuses seems to be a
major use of creative thinking.
I stick by my guns; if you're any good and if you try to bring
your work to the public you will be rewarded. It takes no talent
to fail.
..Rob
Mattison
: : This society is so addicted to novelty that it is impossible for
: : anyone with REAL talent to starve or be undiscovered. You'd
: Frow what do you deduce this? Your own success? And what's this
: equation of novelty with 'real talent'?
: In my experience, financial success as an artist is more closely
: related to business skills, shrewdness, and a willingness to be aggressive
: than to any merit in the work. Plenty of terrible artists, and plenty of
: uninspired but skilled technicians, clean up in galleries and
: illustration.
: (Sorry to be so grumpy about the whole thing...)
I agree with Marty -
Having been an artist my whole life - finally had the gumption and
tenacity to emerge my works 1 year ago
since
published and invited to show and publish internationally in three
countries
2 gallery shows in NYC
and 10 coffee house shows
in SF bay area
has managed to get me recognition with several big collectors -
now this was only one year!
my advice
simple
persistance pays off -
people want artists they need artists
they support vision
so dont give up its the hardest and richest life and career you could
ever have --
Mattison FitzGerald
artist not geek in disguise
Ross Green
> Actually lack of success seems to be based in the ability to
> split hairs and write an apologia explaining why "they" succeed
> while the pure of heart (who are not concerned with worldly
> pursuits) starve unnoticed. Writing those excuses seems to be a
> major use of creative thinking.
> I stick by my guns; if you're any good and if you try to bring
> your work to the public you will be rewarded. It takes no talent
> to fail.
Reminds me of a Marxist slogan: "Failure is impossible" -- but
they were wrong, and so are you.
Whether brilliant or just 'good,' artists & writers (etc.) occasionally
fail. That's historical fact--it's what happens sometimes in the real
world.
So what's the point of those smug views you keep repeating? How
do you measure success? Is someone who makes a living *entirely*
from his/her work successful, by your definition? (What a boring,
sad little bourgeois notion....)
Actually, there are four distinct scenarios that occur all the time:
Talent brings financial success, or it doesn't; mediocrity brings
financial success, or it doesn't... (There are also the ups and downs
in anyone's career; and posthumous success and/or failure.)
Mediocrity is often very highly rewarded in America.
-Ross
=========================================================================
The anonymity of the industrial paint-job is the desire. --E.C. Goossen
=========================================================================
monty Kane
: while the pure of heart (who are not concerned with worldly
: pursuits) starve unnoticed. Writing those excuses seems to be a
: major use of creative thinking.
Now wait a second. I'm not equating failure with 'purity of heart' any
more than success with talent. I'm saying there's not much correlation
either way. Van Gogh did starve unnoticed, during his lifetime at least.
Picasso did not. Nor do the people who do poker-playing-dogs collectors
plates. If there was a direct correspondence between talent or quality in
the work and financial success, you could compile a list of the great
artists in the world today by looking at their tax returns; you wouldn't
have to see the work.
Monty
monty Kane
: from his/her work successful, by your definition?
: Actually, there are four distinct scenarios that occur all the time:
: Talent brings financial success, or it doesn't; mediocrity brings
: financial success, or it doesn't...
That's more like what I was trying to say. Making a living selling
artwork constitutes success as a small businessperson - not success as
an artist. I'm NOT saying the two kinds of success are mutually
exclusive; they're not neccessarily connected at all.
I reread my first posting about this, incidentally, and thought it sounded
a lot more belligerent than I'd intended. My apologies to the author of the
post I was responding to, with whom I was not trying to pick a fight.
Monty
William DeRaymond
many mediocrities well known and supported financially while alive have
been long forgotten. Just because you are a great artist doesn't mean
you will get the recognition you deserve while you live, and just because
you do get rewarded financially doesn't mean your work is great.
Whatever, we must do this best we can in whatever endeavor, and hope for
the best of both worlds.
Ross Green
> lib...@uvsc.edu (Ross Green) wrote:
>> Is someone who makes a living *entirely* from his/her work
>> successful, by your definition?
> Yes, I suppose so.
Well, that's very sad...and shows you don't know your history: many
fine artists (and especially writers & poets) have had to find outside
sources of income (at least temporarily).
I've lost your original obnoxious posting, but you said something to
the effect that: if you're not a successful artist (earning a reasonable
income), then it's *certainly* because you have no talent. Is that
what you meant? That's a lousy message for folks just starting out.
And a lousy message for artists who don't fit the mold. And
generally a very stupid idea, Rob (-if that's what you really meant).
> Whereas achieving inner peace and harmony with nature probably
> fits with your much more jovian view of life.
Well yes, I have been feeling very jovian lately, so I think I'll just
ignore your boring, pathetic personal attack on my lifestyle, (and
your dumb comment re "feeding the missus"), and simply go back
to your previous statement:
>>> I stick by my guns; if you're any good and if you try to bring
>>> your work to the public you will be rewarded. It takes no talent
>>> to fail.
It's hard to respond to that degree of smugness--however, I think
we'd agree that, generally speaking, talent *does* bring rewards.
And yet.....sometimes it doesn't.
Rob, are you really so obtuse (or stubborn) that you won't agree
with that??
Susan King
they were wrong, and so are you.
Ross, I didn't know this was a Marxist slogan. Actually it is also(?)
associated with the suffrigist Susan B. Anthony. I've been an artist in
residence twice in Rochester, NY, where she lived. This is actually a
centenary anniversary of some kind for her. I would guess her death. Women's
Right to vote wasn't won in her lifetime, but the slogan endures and is
associated with her in particular and the Suffrage movement in general.
Best,
Susan
R.Howard
people want artists they need artists
they support vision <<<
Good for you. It's apparent that the artists who do make a
success of their life hold very different opinions from those who
do not. I noticed you did not insist that those who are
successful are mere hacks. That's a refreshing change from that
warmed-over jerimiad we hear issuing from art students, perennial
art students and those on the margins of the art world.
You jumped in with both feet and are to be congratualted both on
your success and your courage.
..Rob Howard [ARtist Forum @ Compuserve]
Ross Green
> You jumped in with both feet and are to be congratualted both
> on your success and your courage.
Thanks for those kind words, Rob---I guess you won't be needing
to see my bank statements after all.
-Ross
Ross Green
> lib...@uvsc.edu (Ross Green) wrote:
>> Reminds me of a Marxist slogan: "Failure is impossible" --
> Ross, I didn't know this was a Marxist slogan. Actually it is also(?)
> associated with the suffragist Susan B. Anthony. [clip]
Sorry about that... They are some of Susan B. Anthony's most
famous words: "There have been others also just as true and devoted
to the cause--I wish I could name every one--but with such women
consecrating their lives, failure is impossible!" (She said that in 1906,
on her 86th birthday.)
But I've always tended to associate that slogan with certain aspects
of Marxist ideology ('the inevitability of historical processes'), and
also with the romantic notion that just causes always triumph in the
end. She was right about woman suffrage (1920), but regarding
feminist issues in general, failure was and is always possible: for
example, the Equal Rights Amendment wasn't ratified, in spite of all
the dedicated hard work -- And the current anti-feminist climate in
the US isn't very encouraging.
-Ross
Mou10man
along the lines of "Do What You Love. The Money will Follow". The book's
thesis is that if you love what you're doing, you're more likely to be
successful (whatever successful is). Even if this is not always a fact, I
believe the corollary is most definitely true. If you're not doing
something you love, you're gonna do a crummy job. bonnie
Heather Yewall
>
>There is an interesting book - or rather a book with an interesting title
>along the lines of "Do What You Love. The Money will Follow".
Hi There Y'all,
I think the problem with the dictum above is that most people
are not willing to go through the period of deprivation that
most often preceeds success. It's complicated further if others
have to suffer with you during your odyssey--ie; family.
___________________________________________________
Heather Yewall <Success is being able to love yourself.>
H.M. Brown
You bitch and complain about personal attacks, you smug fart, and then
you reply to a post with this little diatribe. Others' ideas might not
jibe with with yours, Green, but that doesn't make them incorrect.
So tiring are your pathetic little whine screes, that I unsub'd from this
group. I come back, not to find that you are writing any better, smarter,
or with any more examples than you did before, but to find that you are
far worse. Not once in your response below do you cite an example to
backup what you are saying, relying entirely on an attack of the person
to whom you respond. Is THIS post any better? No, but I don't pretend to
be anything more than an average person.
Ettiquette dictates that I wait before sending this message, so that I
can reconsider what I've said. Well, it ain't gonna change.
Ross Green (lib...@uvsc.edu) wrote:
<snip>
: I've lost your original obnoxious posting, but you said something to
: the effect that: if you're not a successful artist (earning a reasonable
: income), then it's *certainly* because you have no talent. Is that
: what you meant? That's a lousy message for folks just starting out.
: And a lousy message for artists who don't fit the mold. And
: generally a very stupid idea, Rob (-if that's what you really meant).
: Well yes, I have been feeling very jovian lately, so I think I'll just
: ignore your boring, pathetic personal attack on my lifestyle, (and
: your dumb comment re "feeding the missus"), and simply go back
: to your previous statement:
: It's hard to respond to that degree of smugness--however, I think
Ross Green
> Ross, you are the single biggest snot I have ever seen in this
> newsgroup. You bitch and complain about personal attacks,
> you smug fart
[clipped, garbage]
==========================================================
Only simple and quiet words will ripen of themselves.
-- Lao Tzu --
==========================================================
-Ross
Roberts Howard
I believe Onan said that, but God wasn't buying it. <G>
--
Roberts Howard
quoting it. Obviously, I touched a sore spot, but then I'm used
to those same tired responses from those who reside on the
margins of the art world. They always assume that the reason
success has not visited them is because of sheer bad luck or the
art world not yet getting up to speed wih their advanced
concepts.
Of course that's all self-serving pap and not much different
from the excuses one hears from winos or junkies on what caused
their condition. I've known a considerable number of successful
artists in both the fine arts and applied arts and I've also met
failures in both of those fields. An infinitesimal number of the
failures had anything to offer...really offer. The vast majority
of the successes had something of value to offer. That's not to
say that their work would stand the test of the centuries (very
little does) but my bet would be that the centuries will be
selecting more from the successful artist's portfolios than from
the failures.
It takes a lot of testicular fortitude to risk everything on
one's belief in one's worth. Despite Ross' protestations, those
who operate from a comfortable backup position of having that day
job will never know the joy (and the terror) of being an
artist...a real artist. Today, anyone can claim to be an
artist...as we have seen Ross so demostrate...Rob Howard
Roberts Howard
confess to being as inept with the internet as your are with
creating cogent sentences (however, I do like the way you draped
yourself in the Lao Tse quote...almost a good diversion).
Obviously I have touched upon a sore spot when I speak of
successful artists. The reality remains that you seem to be
sitting on the sidelines and wondering why all of us are driving
past you and you can't get good gallery space, decent reviews and
nobody knows who the hell you are except your family and the IRS.
I have heard similar tired diatribes from every failure who
characterised themselves as an artist. Obviously, you are not of
the brotherhood of full-time practicing artists who make their
sole living from their art. Your words have that hollow clunk of
someone who quotes what they think is hip and keeps their hand in
the game in order to claim to be an artist.
Before you put somebody like me down you'd be well advised to
go to the library and look them up. You'll find numerous
references to me, as well as a number of books of my work and
where my work is featured. I looked too. You weren't mentioned.
That just makes you another wannabe artist. Learn to speak to
your betters in more civil terms and they might, just might offer
a helping hand....Rob Howard
Chris ROSSEEL
>It takes a lot of testicular fortitude to risk everything on
>one's belief in one's worth. Despite Ross' protestations, those
>who operate from a comfortable backup position of having that day
>job will never know the joy (and the terror) of being an
>artist...a real artist.
Meaning...? You need to suffer to be a real artist...?
(cut my ear like Van Gogh did...?)
The idea that only the poor, lonesome and sick underdog can become a
real artist is IMHO a primitive view.
> Today, anyone can claim to be an
>artist...as we have seen Ross so demostrate...Rob Howard
....euh... Rob...? The guys (or girls) that claim themselfses as
artists...? I tought (A)rt was not an olympic discipline.
Chris F.G. ROSSEEL, 41
Lichtaart - BELGIUM (EUROPE)
URL: http://www.club.innet.be/~cfgr/
Ross Green
> Ross, for some reason your original post did not get to me.
CompuServe's newsreader only gets about half (?) the postings that
are out there--I got a free month last spring, and compared. (Maybe
it's 3/4--anyway, they miss a lot.)
> I confess to being as inept with the internet
I've noted your awkwardness. (For example, you always forget to quote.)
> as your are with creating cogent sentences
:-)
> Obviously I have touched upon a sore spot when I speak of
> successful artists. [clip]
Rob, your long diatribes against me are quite silly.... Why do you
care so much about all this?
> The reality remains that you seem to be
[blah blah blah]
> Obviously, you are not of the brotherhood of full-time practicing
> artists who make their sole living from their art.
[blah]
> Before you put somebody like me down you'd be well advised to
> go to the library and look them up. You'll find numerous
> references to me, as well as a number of books of my work
> and where my work is featured.
I'm very happy for you!--(but I've got better things to do than look
you up).
> I looked too. You weren't mentioned.
I don't believe this! Rob, I am *very* sorry to have wasted your
time!
> Learn to speak to your betters in more civil terms
ROTFL--Yes, sir, Mr. Howard, sir!!
> and they might, just might offer a helping hand....Rob Howard
Gosh, thanks Rob! (I'll be in touch.)
Haec olim reminisci placebant,
Ross
Ross Green
> Gee whiz. I guess I must have missed Ross' post. Thanks for
> quoting it.
Uh... who are you thanking here? And to which post are you referring?
(Please use quotes.)
> Obviously, I touched a sore spot,
[blah, blah]
> Of course that's all self-serving pap and not much different
> from the excuses one hears from winos or junkies on what caused
> their condition.
Rob, it's amazing that someone as 'successful' as you are has time
to write all this vitriolic drivel.
> The vast majority of the successes had something of value to
> offer. That's not to say that their work would stand the test of the
> centuries (very little does) but my bet would be that the centuries
> will be selecting more from the successful artist's portfolios than
> from the failures.
Agreed....very nice....
Instead of throwing around all your silly insults, and shadow
boxing, why don't you just talk about the things you understand?
> Today, anyone can claim to be an artist...as we have seen Ross so
> demostrate...
"Today, art is a prison."
Malulani
all.
William DeRaymond
>Ross, for some reason your original post did not get to me. I
>confess to being as inept with the internet as your are with
>creating cogent sentences (however, I do like the way you draped
>yourself in the Lao Tse quote...almost a good diversion).
>sitting on the sidelines and wondering why all of us are driving
>past you and you can't get good gallery space, decent reviews and
>nobody knows who the hell you are except your family and the IRS.
> I have heard similar tired diatribes from every failure who
>someone who quotes what they think is hip and keeps their hand in
>the game in order to claim to be an artist.
>go to the library and look them up. You'll find numerous
>references to me, as well as a number of books of my work and
>your betters in more civil terms and they might, just might offer
>a helping hand....Rob Howard
>
>--
>..Rob Howard [Artist Forum] CompuServe
Congratulations Rob on your successes, I even see where your statements
are meant to be constructive and are even truthful to a certain
degree,ie. your encouragement that making a living is possible. However,
I think your jumping to a lot of assumptions about those who have not yet
found their market niche. I work a job outside the art to support myself
and my family. I value my art work, which I do create to withstand the
test of time. I know who I am. I have not yet found a market and it has
been an incredible yet valuable struggle, will I succeed in marketing my
work? I sure hope so, it is literally a matter of life and death to me.
I have in most instances not been well received, at the same time I DO
recognize that I have more work to do to be recieved. At the same time
My work is not based in the popular conceptual veins prevalent in present
day America. BUT, I have done it. No it is not like Fantin Latours work
either, but I consider myself more advanced than him in terms of
understanding style and how painting and consciousness relate. Anyway I
don't expect agreement or understanding anymore, and sometimes it is hard
even to care. Just because you are in the books doesn't make you an
important artist and just because you aren't doesn't make you
insignificant. The truth is I hope your work is important, I hope you
are getting from your work the true depth of joy you deserve as an
artist, and this before you reach the marketplace. Also I hope this joy
is what you value in the work of others, especially when combined with
technical mastery. - William
William DeRaymond
Rob, I think what you have to say about making a living as as artist is
true to a certain degree, and even encouraging. I am in the midst of a
grueling experience of being 43 years old, with a family, and having to
work outside the art to make a living. I am an artist, not wannabe. It
is extremely difficult to market my work and be responsible at the same
time. I would say I'm involved in a life and death struggle. I
appreciate this,more all the time. I can see where I haven't done all
the appropriate steps yet to garner the success in the marketplace I feel
I deserve, or even to survive simply as an artist. I have done the
artwork however. I continue to do the artwork. I know who I am, even if
very few other people have recognized my value. I don't exactly fit the
conceptual veins prevalent in 20th century america. I'm not even like
Fantin LaTour. I think I'm more advanced to him in terms of
understanding the power of the medium and how it relates to
consciousness. Simply and with respect, I say, just because you are in
the books doesn't mean your work is important, and just because you are
not in the books doesn't make you insignificant. The truth is I hope
yopur work is important. I hope your work gives you the joy you as an
artist so richly deserve, and this before you get to the market place. I
also hope it is the joy in the work of others that you appreciate,
especially when expressed with technical mastery. Great ecstasy to you
all. William
Roberts Howard
Inept choice of quote, Ross. You might have gotten away with
forsan et haec meminisse juvabit, but that would have been more
of that lucus a non lucendo logic you use when your bluff is
called. I particularly liked the use of the 'blah blah' when you
found your pose as an artist unmasked. Just another wannabe, just
another big mouthed blatherskite with no balls but opinions about
things with which you have no firsthand experience.
So what next Ross? Will you hold forth on the fine pints of being
an astronaut? You would certainly have no less experience and no
fewer ill-founded opinions than you do about the field of art,
and (I might add) about Latin.
Jeez (shaking head) those Latin quote books are so damned obvious
to anyone who has studied the subject.
Talk to what you really know Ross...hmm, actually you did when
you wrote 'blah blah'. You've mastered that well
To translate from Horace (as you obviously do not understand the
language)..It is always amusing to see a fly vent its spleen.
Roberts Howard
========
The anonymity of the online hand-job is the desire. Ross Green
=================================================================
========
There, now that makes more sense.
Heather Yewall
> Unlike you, I care about the future of art and my fellow
>artists. I try to say, yes, you can make a living in art...a
>damned good living. That's why I care.
>..Rob Howard [Artist Forum] CompuServe
Hi There Y'all,
If you care so much about helping others learn how, why
don't you stop spending your valuable time blowing up gasbags like
Ross Green. Let THEM rave on if they want--most intelligent
individuals see through their masks and are not duped. Quite
frankly, their repetition is simply "too" BORING.
So, if you feel you have so much wisdom to impart to wannabe
artists and feel you have the chutzpah to make yourself the
maharishi of art.rex.fine, get on with it--show us your face and
make us your mirror.
___________________________________________________
Heather Yewall <Blather is universally blithersome.>
Roberts Howard
time to write all this vitriolic drivel.<<<
!!!!!NES FLASH!!!!!
This may surpise you, Ross, but when guys like me were slaving in
the trenches, working our way to be successful in the art world,
none of us ever thought the reason we were doing it was to show
up Ross Green for being what he is...another wannabe. Amazing to
your egocentric world, none of us ever heard of you. Even if we
had, I cannot imagine any of us dedicating our lives to
succeeding in order to make you feel miserable.
So what were you doing while the rest of us were getting good
at this game? I'll bet you were bitching and moaning and trying
to drag down other artists to justify your lack of success. Gee,
talk about commitment to art --make young artists think that
there's no future in pursuing it. Pretty swinish, Ross. Whoever
you are.
--
Roberts Howard
A good question Ross...and a telling one because it shows you are
more interested in using art as a platform for your blather (it
could as easily be politics or religion) and it shows that you
don't care about art or artists, just your sagging ego.. The
reason I care is because I have seen so many gasbags such as
yourself who assume the mantle of a knowledge they do not have
and discuss a life they've never lead.
To bouy up your own sagging self-esteem you and your fellow
gasbags, describe how damned difficult it is to make a living in
art. You discourage young artists in order to justify your
failure.
You're pissed because someone has come along who says, yes to
the young artist. Not only can you make a living, you can make a
living easily the equal of a doctor or lawyer...and you can do it
without being a superstar artist.
That grates against you because it points to your failure at
that which you have been blowing crap and vitiole about. You, and
other failures like you are part of the problem. You drag down
young talent to bring them to the depressing level you find
yourself, all in order to justify yourself.
Unlike you, I care about the future of art and my fellow
artists. I try to say, yes, you can make a living in art...a
damned good living. That's why I care.
--
Ross Green
> The anonymity of the online hand-job is the desire. Ross Green
> There, now that makes more sense.
> ...Rob Howard
Now I'm beginning to understand your motivation.
[Please don't sign my name after your idiocies...Thanks in advance.]
-Ross
Ross Green
> Inept choice of quote, Ross. You might have gotten away with
> forsan et haec meminisse juvabit,
..durate, et vosmet rebus servate secundis...Virgil...<yawn>
> but that would have been more of that lucus a non lucendo logic
> you use when your bluff is called.
No light is excluded from my logic, Rob...(and any non sequiturs
are strictly intentional).
> I particularly liked the use of the 'blah blah'
[clipped pointless insults re art & Latin]
Replace those 'blahs' with <yawns>...
And as always, Mr. Howard, have a nice day!
-Ross
Ross Green
> lib...@uvsc.edu (Ross Green) wrote:
>> Rob, your long diatribes against me are quite silly.... Why do
>> you care so much about all this?
[clipped his insulting garbage]
This is getting boring.
> You're pissed because someone has come along who says, yes to
> the young artist. Not only can you make a living, you can make a
> living easily the equal of a doctor or lawyer...and you can do it
> without being a superstar artist.
But, Rob, I agree with you on that! (--although "the equal of a
doctor or lawyer" may be stretching things a bit). A positive attitude
is really important, and I admire anyone who stays optimistic.
> That grates against you because it points to your failure at
> that which you have been blowing crap and vitiole about.
[clipped further idiotic insults]
Are you confusing me with someone else? You seem to be engaged
in a furious argument *with yourself*--Please let me know who
wins.
-Ross
Susan Eshelman
>>>>>>it's amazing that someone as 'successful' as you are has
>time to write all this vitriolic drivel.<<<
>
>at this game?
Rob, Ross and Heather: Can we get on with it, please. You seem to be
chewing the chewed. I wouldn't mind so much if my Newsgroup server was
faster, and it took less time to cruise through your musings.
Since this discussion began, I've created three of my own pieces of work,
and sold several for other artists (two of whom were 'young'
up-and-coming's). There's nothing like a little direct action to
illuminate the field of mental speculation.
Heather: why not create a web site showcasing your wonderful signature
lines. It would be much more entertaining than this discussion.
Susan
Ross Green
>
> >>>>>it's amazing that someone as 'successful' as you are has
> time to write all this vitriolic drivel.<<<
>
> This may surpise you, Ross, but when guys like me were slaving in
> the trenches, working our way to be successful in the art world,
> none of us ever thought the reason we were doing it was to show
> up Ross Green for being what he is...another wannabe. Amazing to
> your egocentric world, none of us ever heard of you. Even if we
> had, I cannot imagine any of us dedicating our lives to
> succeeding in order to make you feel miserable.
> to drag down other artists to justify your lack of success. Gee,
> talk about commitment to art --make young artists think that
> there's no future in pursuing it. Pretty swinish, Ross. Whoever
> you are.
>
> --
<yawn>
Ross Green
>
> In article <4577g3$sv3$1...@mhafc.production.compuserve.com>, 71154...@CompuServe.COM says...
>
> >artists. I try to say, yes, you can make a living in art...a
> >damned good living. That's why I care.
>
>
> If you care so much about helping others learn how, why
> don't you stop spending your valuable time blowing up gasbags like
> Ross Green. Let THEM rave on if they want
Heather, darling, you've never heard me rave; I don't even know how.
-Ross
Ross Green
>
> Roberts Howard <71154...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
> >>>>>>it's amazing that someone as 'successful' as you are has
> >time to write all this vitriolic drivel.<<<
> >
> >at this game?
>
Sorry to have bothered you: I try to keep it short. Rob hasn't even
noticed that I'm basically ignoring him (he's a little dense).
Anyway, Susan, go back to lurking, and thanks for your concern.
-Ross
Roberts Howard
and sold several<<<
Michelangelo could turn out great art and sell the work of
up-and-comings in such a short period of time.
You didn't mention the Q-word. No, not Quantity, QUALITY.
I saw a demonstration of someone with equal success in the
Enquirer, he billed himself as The World's Fastest Painter. He
didn't use a brush, he used toilet paper with his paint...no
kidding! It sounds like you might be able to give him a run (no
pun intended) for his money.
Slow ol' me, I've been working on the same piece for almost a
week and I don't market other artists work. Of course, there's
that Q-word again.
So stop reading this. You could have turned out five paintings
and changed toilet paper rolls in the time it took you to read
this.
It sounds like you've got a regular cottage industry going on
in your kitchen.
--
Roberts Howard
lonesome and sick underdog can become areal artist is IMHO a
primitive view.<<
I could not agree more. What this discussion was about was Ross'
contention that somehow success spoiled the artist...the "true
bleeding inner soul' that was an artist. My contention is that
one can make a very good living as an artist provided they are
first willing to take the plunge and give it a real try...not
hold onto the safety net of a teaching job or something that will
distract them from pursuing a career in art with vigor.There's
nothing romantic about that view.
As to art not being an Olympic event, again you are right.
However, that does not mean that it is free from suffering
judgements. There is good art and there is bad art. That has
nothing to do with it adhering to a set rule book. it has to do
with its quality (and I don't want to get into that silly
relativistic debate over who is going to judge the quality).
Perhaps you just came in late on this conversation and did not
download the entire thing.
Ross Green
> [Rob, learn how to quote]--Some unidentified person said:
>> Meaning...? You need to suffer to be a real artist...?
>> (cut my ear like Van Gogh did...?)The idea that only the poor,
>> lonesome and sick underdog can become areal artist is IMHO
>> a primitive view.
> I could not agree more. What this discussion was about was Ross'
> contention that somehow success spoiled the artist... [clip]
Stop being such an idiot... I never said that success spoiled anything!
You're arguing with *yourself*--not with me.
> Perhaps you just came in late on this conversation and did not
> download the entire thing.
Hello? It takes at least two people to hold a conversation.
-Ross
Roberts Howard
a doctor or lawyer" may be stretching things a bit). A positive
attitude is really important, and I admire anyone who stays
optimistic.<<<
from the Department of Labor Statisics. While listing anyone who
claims to be a painter would be futile, at least they were able
to list applied artists by category and, until very recently the
profession of Illustrator was the highest paid profession in the
country. It has fallen to be only the second highest.
Nowadays, the gap between illustration and fine arts has
narrowed to the point of great overlapping of talents and of
commissions. It is a lot of work. The leisure of a 9 to 5 job is
non-existent because you are either with clients or patrons or
gallerists and always under dealines from whatever source. But
the living is there to be made
I always recall a line from an interview with Bernard Buffet
in which the writer said simply..."his Rolls Royce is chauffer
driven." That stuck with me and showed it was possible. And my
point throughout this has been that not only is it possible, for
the talented artist, it's almost impossible to fail in a country
in which a form of artistic expression is also the best paying
profession.
Chris ROSSEEL
>Heather: why not create a web site showcasing your wonderful signature
>lines. It would be much more entertaining than this discussion.
Chris ROSSEEL, 42, photographer
HomePage URL: http://www.club.innet.be/~cfgr/
Lichtaart - Belgium - Europe
Roberts Howard
artist so richly deserve, and this before you get to the market
place. <<<
Thank you William. Yes, I should have mentioned that aside from
providing me with a fine living, working as an artist is also the
most fun you can have with your clothes on.
It sounds like you could use a little help marketing your work.
Just making it is one thing, but getting it in the public eye is
another. On Artist Forum we have one member who started painting
three years ago. He has had shows in New York, San Francisco,
Cologne, Berlin and he's currently at a group show in London.
His method is simple and straightforward -- have excellent
slides made of your work. Have duplicates made and put them in
sleeves. Produce a curriculum vitae and sned the package to every
galery you think might be interested. After all, they need
artwork to sell if they are to stay in business.
Ross Green
> I could not agree more. What this discussion was about was Ross'
> contention that somehow success spoiled the artist... [clip]
I never said that.
> until very recently the profession of Illustrator was the highest paid
> profession in the country. It has fallen to be only the second
> highest.
The average illustrator earns more than the average doctor or lawyer?
> I always recall a line from an interview with Bernard Buffet
> in which the writer said simply..."his Rolls Royce is chauffer
> driven." That stuck with me and showed it was possible.
Unfortunate choice, Rob... Success doesn't necessarily ruin artists,
but it certainly ruined Buffet (not that he had much talent to start
out with).
> And my point throughout this has been that not only is it possible,
> for the talented artist, it's almost impossible to fail [clip]
I don't disagree with "possible"--or even with "probable"--But clearly,
your straitjacket is your obsession with economic determinism--the
market as the sole arbiter in questions of talent... And by the way
Rob, how do female and/or minority artists fit into the picture? Is
there no prejudice at all in this wonderful system of ours?
Roberts Howard
As to minorities and women, you'll have to speak to my partners
about that. They doubtless tell you that they only thing that
matters is what's in the portfolio.
The point with Buffet and his Rolls being chauffer driven was
not to cite quality that would meet your standards, just to show
that an artist of modest talent can gain financial success as an
artist. Marketing is some of it -- Picasso showed us how to do
that.
My "obsession with the market determining talent" shows your
inability to comprehend simple declarative sentences. I said that
an artist with talent cannot be ignore in this society unless
they choose to keep their work from public view.
So what's your point? Are you jealous that me and my female and
minority partners wiork as artists and drive Benz's? Understand,
all of us have had our work in museum shows, so we're not all
painting highlights on baked beans for magazine ads.
If you were at all familiar with the workings of the
professional art world you'd never even entertain the idea that
race or gender has anything to do with success. Obviously you are
bringing your 9 to 5 work standards to a field about which you
clearly know little. What we do is not like your day job.
Thomas C. Waters
newsgroup, but I gotta admit that this Roberts Howard takes the
cake!!!!!
In article <45jk8d$c6e$1...@mhafm.production.compuserve.com>
Roberts Howard <71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> My "obsession with the market determining talent" shows your
> inability to comprehend simple declarative sentences. I said that
> an artist with talent cannot be ignore in this society unless
> they choose to keep their work from public view.
But the statement itself is of little to no value. What is of value is
the inferences it presents... all of which are speculative and
therefore about as meaningless as your initial statement. Talent is
about as important as... hair color. What our society does and does
not ignore has little to do with talent. That is not to say that some
talented people don't capture the interest of society. But society is
fickle and what the society does and does not ignore can change with a
whim and isn't based upon talent per se.
> So what's your point? Are you jealous that me and my female and
> minority partners wiork as artists and drive Benz's? Understand,
> all of us have had our work in museum shows, so we're not all
> painting highlights on baked beans for magazine ads.
Well I didn't make the initial comment, so I can't speak for anybody
other than myself. No, I'm not jealous that you and your female and
minority partners work as artists and drive Benz's, (however I do feel
sorry for you). As to having work in Museum shows... of what
difference does that make??? Any idiot can submit slides to a juried
show at a museum and has some chance of getting the work accepted.
And, having juried several shows as well as having assisted in the
jurying of MANY shows, I can say that talent is not necessarily the
factor that determines who will or will not be shown.
As to baked beans.. didn't Andy Warhol paint them????
Magazine illustration???? Richard Prince comes to mind....
What is tremendously interesting is your excellent use of symbols/words
that imply power but that in reality mean so very little.
In our culture, we interpret driving a car like a Benz as a symbol of
greatness.. when really any asshole with enough cash can own one. I am
not calling you names.. I AM however pointing out the fallacy of the
implication of what the Benz means.
Same thing with the Museum. Generally we equate a museum with great
art, but that is a fallacious and questionable assumption too. I was at
the Warhol Museum last week and there is a corridor covered with these
psycdelic silk screened flowers and cows. Some would call that great
art and others would call it pure bull shit (pun intended). "Museum"
is a construct not a reality. You demonstate a real compentcy at
throwing around the facade these "symbols" are, while saying so very
little.
For the right price an artist can buy there way into a lot of
different shows in a lot of different spaces. Again, I am not accusing
you of anything except throwing around symbols that in and of
themselves, mean absolutely nothing.
> If you were at all familiar with the workings of the
> professional art world you'd never even entertain the idea that
> race or gender has anything to do with success.
On what planet do you live Roberts???? This is just too funny. I bet
you don't believe any Jews wqere killed in the Holocaust either... and
that a person can be ANYTHING they want to be.....
But, IMHO, it really isn't important anyway. Your comments are merely
meant to deflect the dialogue away from the real issiuues so you do two
things:
You attempt to discredit the individual by belittleing his/her
"familiarity " of the professional art world. You really are one
condescending jerk sometimes aren't you???
And, you make such a fallacious absurd contention. I bet you think
that minority men and women have all the same opportunities as straight
white guys, huh???
>Obviously you are
> bringing your 9 to 5 work standards to a field about which you
> clearly know little. What we do is not like your day job.
Possibly the biggest most damaging thing we do to the world of art and
all artists is to pretend that the art world doesn't operate like the
rest of the world. In that, we push art and artists farther and
farther away from the general population. Is it any wonder why artists
are so much less supported in this culture when they are busy thinking
that they operate so much differently than everyone else.
Thomas C. Waters
twa...@pitt.edu
I always assume someone is gay unless they tell me otherwise.
"When evil men plot, good men must plan. When evil men burn and bomb,
good men must build and bind. When evil men shout ugly words of
hatred, good men must commit themselves to the glories of love."
Martin Luther King Jr.
Roberts Howard
which escapes people of my ilk. Perhaps the both of you will be
so kind as to edescibe your successes and what constitutes them.
Also, are they successes which are acclaimed by others whose
opinions are generally conceded as being worthwhile? ARe you able
to derive enough income from your pursuit of art to be able to
describe your major source of income as ARTIST on your income tax
returns?
What exactly do you and Ross do to promulgate art and to help
other artists. I have heard from you and Ross that there is no
part of my artistic career which you find acceptable. Ross claims
that the statistics I quote are false (an amazing feat
understanding he has not read the articles in question). You pity
me my Benz. Just what, exactly are your standards of success and
excellence. I bet they have to do with some "deep inner spiritual
feelimgs, wooo woo woo feelings" and other art schoool. sandbox
horeshit. Do you actually sell work or just, like Ross, say you
do. In what galleries and museums have you shown (remember, any
idiot can submit slides). Just what the hell have you two
blabbermouths accomplished? I find your names are not mentioned
in any art journals. You and Ross are mighty secretive about your
art. I suspect there's a good reason for keeping it hidden.
Roberts Howard
artists and feel you have the chutzpah to make yourself the
maharishi of art.rex.fine, get on with it--show us your face and
make us your mirror<<<
I had hoped that the sig line would direct those without reading
comprehension problems to where they can get help. It's Artist
Forum on CompuServe for the hard-of-thinking and, if you have the
balls to actually show your work online in front of a group of
working artists, gallerists and museum curators, you'll see the
difference between the way wannabes operates and the way people
who actually do it for a living operate.
We have online shows from noted galleries and museums tat are
put on in conjunction with the openings. The reproduction of the
pieces is first rate. Many of our members have sold work and
received commissions as a result of showing in our libraries.
It's simple to join. It cost $2.95 a month. None of us derive
any income from it and it is an eleemosynary effort on the part
of a large number of working pros in a wide range of disciplines.
I'm sure that you can come up with lots of good excuses as to why
you can't join. I've come to see those excuses as the most
creative output of the wannabe artist. Their work NEVER measures
up to the excuses. If it did, Ross Green's name would be a
household word..."pass the Ross Green, please."
Roberts Howard
which galleries, museums or books?
Kay April
<71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
>>>> you are what you live.you live what you are.<<<
>
>Wow! That's intense. Did you make that up all by yourself or is
>it from Bartlett's Familiar Quotations?
>
>You wouldn't be trying to suppress the free exchange of speech
>under the rubric of being well mannered would you? Naah, you
>wouldn't do that. Even if it was to preserve your comfort and
>your place on that couch.
>
>=========================================================
>I yam what I yam...Popeye the Sailor Man
>=========================================================
>
>--
>..Rob Howard [Artist Forum] CompuServe
If I wanted to see children argue I would go to a playground,
and not this newsgroup.
Now waste more precious time overanalyzing that statement while i
paint!
K.April,fine artist
sl...@cc.usu.edu
> In article <45jk8d$c6e$1...@mhafm.production.compuserve.com>
> Roberts Howard <71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
> In our culture, we interpret driving a car like a Benz as a symbol of
> greatness.. when really any asshole with enough cash can own one. I am
> not calling you names.. I AM however pointing out the fallacy of the
> implication of what the Benz means.
Yes. It's like using an advertisement to make an argument true.
What I don't understand is why an artist would spend 60k on a Benz
when they could get a damn good car for 20k or less and spend the rest on
art materials or studio space.
> Possibly the biggest most damaging thing we do to the world of art and
> all artists is to pretend that the art world doesn't operate like the
> rest of the world. In that, we push art and artists farther and
> farther away from the general population. Is it any wonder why artists
> are so much less supported in this culture when they are busy thinking
> that they operate so much differently than everyone else.
I agree, and I'm glad Thomas said that.
the actual art "product" (if there is one) is of course subjected
to very different notions of tradition, quality and usefulness, etc.,
but the economic forces at hand are quite the same as for everybody else.
Greg Scheckler
SL...@cc.usu.edu
Ross Green
> Ross Green wrote:
>> The average illustrator earns more than the average doctor
>> or lawyer?
> Yes, according to the Bureau of Labor Stitistics.
Sorry, Rob, I don't think so: Please quote the exact source.
> So what's your point? Are you jealous that me and my female and
> minority partners wiork as artists and drive Benz's?
Snob appeal? -- You're not *too* transparent, are you.
> If you were at all familiar with the workings of the professional
> art world you'd never even entertain the idea that race or gender
> has anything to do with success.
I certainly know a lot more about the art world than you do.
(I suppose your next statement will be that there's no discrimination
at all in America!)
> Obviously you are bringing your 9 to 5 work standards
I don't work 9 to 5, Rob--That's just another fixed idea in your
muddled little mind.
-Ross
Roberts Howard
Having previously confronted the myth that swirls in the minds
of 'those who cannot' it becomes tedious to offer the hope that
one can (and many do) make a good living in the field of art and
have it so thoroughly decried by those who have never tried it.
The only reason for denying such a thing appears to be a
justification of the writer's failure as an artist. It's easy to
say that any fool can submit slides to galleries and museums and
get accepted. But it's a lot more difficult to do it and get
accepted. Such comment points to one who never will be able to do
it.
The one thing about which every one of those people have been
exceedingly mute is the question..."in what galleries and museums
has your work been exhibited? And in what books can I see your
work?" A simple question yet it strikes them dumb. Obviously such
inquiry is beneath the 'real' artist. The real artist is a
success in his or her own mind. As long as they are satisfied,
it's alright and it has meaning. Of course, that sounds more like
art therapy for people who truly need therapy.
So I ask it again...Which galleries handle your work? Which
museums have shown it and the titles of the books that show it?
d.
<71154...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
[quoting me with no attribution]
> >>>Gee, Rob, you don't like much of anything or anybody, do you?
> Having previously confronted the myth that swirls in the minds
> of 'those who cannot' it becomes tedious to offer the hope that
> one can (and many do) make a good living in the field of art and
> have it so thoroughly decried by those who have never tried it.
How do you know that *everybody* who has disagreed with you has "never
tried it"? This seems to be what you are saying.
> The only reason for denying such a thing appears to be a
> justification of the writer's failure as an artist. It's easy to
> say that any fool can submit slides to galleries and museums and
> get accepted. But it's a lot more difficult to do it and get
> accepted. Such comment points to one who never will be able to do
> it.
It must be nice to maintain such a black-and-white view of the world.
Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.
> The one thing about which every one of those people have been
> exceedingly mute is the question..."in what galleries and museums
> has your work been exhibited? And in what books can I see your
> work?" A simple question yet it strikes them dumb. Obviously such
> inquiry is beneath the 'real' artist. The real artist is a
> success in his or her own mind. As long as they are satisfied,
> it's alright and it has meaning. Of course, that sounds more like
> art therapy for people who truly need therapy.
Why? Why can't someone make art in their spare time, as a hobby, or why
must a "serious" artist who works oh his or her art full-time feel
compelled to constantly promote and show it? And why should anybody let
money get in the way of making art? If an artist makes a painting, and is
satisfed with the work, then the artist is a sucessful artist. Period.
If someone wants to buy it, then that's great, too. But if the artist
doesn't show the painting, it doesn't mean that the artist is crazy
("people who need therapy") or a failure.
By your reasoning, Van Gogh was a failure...his art generated almost no
money for him while he was alive.
> So I ask it again...Which galleries handle your work? Which
> museums have shown it and the titles of the books that show it?
*shrug* I don't have to justify myself to you. I have stacks of canvases
leaning against the walls around my space. I haven't shown any of them.
Last time I showed anything was 1992. I've just been quietly working
since then, developing and learning on my own. Right now, I want to
concentrate on making art rather than marketing art. When the time is
right, I'll show my work. If galleries turn it all down, I'll show it
myself.
What is right for you is not necessarily right for the whole world.
--
nort...@mindspring.com
http://www.mindpsring.com/~northcut/no-thing.html
Andy Pearlman
> There have been a few unfortunate artists who have been forced
>to live in penury. But the only ones who extol the virtues of
>it...or put down those of us who adhere to tradional want of
>luxury seem to be those "artists" with absolutely no hope of ever
>making any money.
No one is putting all artists who want to have luxury. They are putting *you*
down, because you are saying luxury/market values = art. Your interpretation
may be valid for you, but it isn't for everyone.
Andy
--
Andy Pearlman - artwork at http://tsb.weschke.com/iiw/gallery/pearlman_a.html
apea...@panix.com
Deus Ex Machina found to be Gerbil in a Wheel.
Roberts Howard
when they could get a damn good car for 20k or less and spend the
rest on art materials or studio space.<<<<
perforce already have an excellent studio and art materials in
order to make a living, it's just another luxury. Love of luxury
is probably the most constant thing that artists share...the real
masters, that is. Rembrandt was a high-roller and bought jewels,
a fancy house and studio and lots of nifty toys for the missus.
Ruben's studio is a virtual palace. Picasso live a life of
extreme luxury. When one of his mistresses expessed a desire to
learn to drive he bought her a car...a Benz. He did not buy her
driving lessons so she promptly crashed it. He had it towed away
and bought her another. He bought her three Benz's before she
finally got the hang of it.
There have been a few unfortunate artists who have been forced
to live in penury. But the only ones who extol the virtues of
it...or put down those of us who adhere to tradional want of
luxury seem to be those "artists" with absolutely no hope of ever
making any money.
what philosophy is or aesthetics is, there is a body of artists
who wake every morning, eat well, dress well and go to a job they
love and which rewards them admirably. What I have seen here is
the jealousy of the Can-Nots.
William DeRaymond
here. I for one would appreciate it if you brought less bullshit to the
discussion and more knowledge. At least discuss art and not marketing. I
have heard very little intelligence from you concerning aesthetics, which is
not to say you don't have any, but lets hear it.
--
William DeRaymond/Artist
WorldLightProductions
http://www.worldlightproductions.com/~draymond/
'The abstract nature of reality is the source of beauty.'- William
Andy Pearlman
>>>> I personally have never heard of you before reading your name
>in the postings.<<<
>art. If you are a techie artist and use Photoshop, you can get
>Photoshop 3.0 Bible and the CD has a section devoted to the work
>I do with that tool. Or try London's Photoshop 3.0 Special
>Effects How-To. If you are a good researcher, you can easily find
>at least a dozen children's books listing me as illustrator. You
>will have to get up off your duff and go to the library for that
>because they have their own proprietary system on their
>computers.
Which doesn't answer the question - which galleries and museums are you in?
Thomas C. Waters
Roberts Howard <71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> The one thing about which every one of those people have been
> exceedingly mute is the question..."in what galleries and museums
> has your work been exhibited? And in what books can I see your
> work?" A simple question yet it strikes them dumb.
I am not so mute, I just haven't read the newgroup for a few days.
Your question doesn't strike me dumb... but I do find it rather
humerous that you ttempt to make a big deal out of this when you
yourself haven't posted such information about yourself.
>Obviously such
> inquiry is beneath the 'real' artist. The real artist is a
> success in his or her own mind.
And here is your attempt of weazzleing out the back door......
>As long as they are satisfied,
> it's alright and it has meaning. Of course, that sounds more like
> art therapy for people who truly need therapy.
> So I ask it again...Which galleries handle your work? Which
> museums have shown it and the titles of the books that show it?
Answer this yourself!!!!!!
What I hate most about people like this Roberts idiot is how they turn
art into a pissing contest. Look who has the biggest penis....
Artists make art. Period. Some of us show in museums and some of us
choose to not show in museums. Some of make work which is purely
aesthetic, while others make work which is activist or conceptual or
visionary. Success???? I didn't realize we were talking about
definitions of success. I thought we were talking about being an
artist. I was at anopening last night for a group show, a benifit for
a local non-profit org. As part of the opening, there was a poetry
reading and a friend of mine Jan Beatty was one of the poets who read.
Jan is a wonderful poet and is quickly climbing a ladder of success.
Each year seems to bring her another award, another book... but Jan's
perception of this as "success" are not one in the same. Quite often
artists have difficulty seeing their own success in the process, but
then afterwards, can look bck and see just how far they have come. Jan
looks at me as some kind of sucess story and I look at her the same
way. She thinks I'm nuts, and I think she is too. I don't have near
the national or even regional reputation she has... or so it seems to
me from my perspective. One's perspective of success and Success
itself and rarely one in the same thing.
That's why I think you Roberts are such an ass, trying to push your
perspective of what is success onto everybody. If it works for you,
that's fine with me. But get off your high hourse when you think your
perception is univeral.
Success for me???? I was at the opening of a group show at the
Carnegie Museum of Art here in Pittsburgh, and was in a conversation at
the table of food when someone walked up and began speaing to the
person I was with. "Go up and see the sculpture with the casket..."
she said to her friend, it is wonderful. She was so excited about the
sculpture, her eyes beaming aand animated. My freind introduced her to
me... oh your the artist who did the piece in the Three Rivers show
about four years ago.. and she went on to describe in rather great
detail a mixed media piece I had done five years ago... Then my friend
pointed out to her that I was the artist who had made the piece in this
show she was so excited about.
Yes, I feel kinda successful when someone five years after a show can
describe a piece in so much detail. When the work has a lasting
impact... I feel successful.
Thomas C. Waters
"The views expressed here are mine, take what you like and leave the
rest."
"I always assume someone is queer unless they tell me otherwise.
Straight society has been doing this in reverse forever, and I'm tired
of it."
******************************************************************
* Send any direct replies to: twa...@pitt.edu
*
******************************************************************
Thomas C. Waters
Roberts Howard <71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> I'm sure there are many things and peopleof whom and
> which you have no the slightest knowledge. Seeing as you revel
> youself to be a true couch potato who doesn't frequent libraries,
> rather than ask you to get off your ass, you can probbaly access
> Books In Print right from the comfort of your own couch. Just
> type in my name or Watson-Guptill publications for the books on
> art. If you are a techie artist and use Photoshop, you can get
> Photoshop 3.0 Bible and the CD has a section devoted to the work
> I do with that tool. Or try London's Photoshop 3.0 Special
> Effects How-To.
So he helped write a book on photoshop.... he still isn't going to
point out what museums he is shown in, what galleries rep his work....
>If you are a good researcher, you can easily find
> at least a dozen children's books listing me as illustrator.
Oh damn... he isn't a fine artist, he's an illustrator!!!!! Now
illustration is both important and one needs great talent to do it, but
it isn't the same thing as fine art.
>You
> will have to get up off your duff and go to the library for that
> because they have their own proprietary system on their
> computers.
Only goes to point out what most of us here knew all along. Some folks
make art and others hake hot air and try to call themselves artists.
rec.arts.fine, home of some of the best clowns on the internet!!!!
In the end, we all learn how to survive, we all make $$$$ and make our
work.
Susan Eshelman
>BTW if you are a bona fide buyer, I will upload my curriculum
>vitae with an abbreviated client list.
>>Do post your C.V., Rob. Then we can send your many patrons copies
of your newsgroup postings. I'm sure they'd be interested in the tone
of your public statements, and would want to buy just that much more of
your work.
William DeRaymond
>
> In article <45o743$svt$1...@mhadg.production.compuserve.com> Roberts Howard
<71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
> >to live in penury. But the only ones who extol the virtues of
> >it...or put down those of us who adhere to tradional want of
> >luxury seem to be those "artists" with absolutely no hope of ever
> >making any money.
>
*you*
> down, because you are saying luxury/market values = art. Your
interpretation
> may be valid for you, but it isn't for everyone.
>
>
> --
> Andy Pearlman - artwork at
http://tsb.weschke.com/iiw/gallery/pearlman_a.html
> apea...@panix.com
> Deus Ex Machina found to be Gerbil in a Wheel.
I'm in agreement with you on this.
On a different subject, I'm wondering if you could help me. I noticed your
website address in your signature is a live link. How do you do that. I
just got some pages up, but can't find out how to do that. Could you point
me in the right direction? Thanks.
Thomas C. Waters
he...@glenn.com (Heather Yewall) writes:
> we can all go back to putting your name in our kill files.
Heather, you're lucky!!! My newsreader doesn'thave a kill file
ability!!!!!
Peter MacLeod
...
: part of my artistic career which you find acceptable. Ross claims
: understanding he has not read the articles in question). You pity
The exact quote from Ross Green was:
"Sorry, Rob, I don't think so: Please quote the exact source."
So...do you have a citation for the publication from the Beaureau of Labor
Statistics to which you refer, or not? If so, don't call people names,
just list it. I find your claim farfetched as well, so I'd like to
see the source publication. If you don't have such a citation, you must
have *some* basis for making this claim, eh?
--P
Doug Quarnstrom
: The one thing about which every one of those people have been
: has your work been exhibited?
... a question that seems not too tedious to be asked over and over
ad nauseum.
iAnd in what books can I see your
: work?" A simple question yet it strikes them dumb. Obviously such
: inquiry is beneath the 'real' artist. The real artist is a
: success in his or her own mind.
"Success" or lack of it is in no way an inherent measure of value.
It is simply a measure of popular appeal. If your assertion is
that popular appeal is, in all ways, synonymous with art, I would
suggest that you are demented.
doug
Doug Quarnstrom
: In article <45o743$svt$1...@mhadg.production.compuserve.com> Roberts Howard <71154...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
: > There have been a few unfortunate artists who have been forced
: >to live in penury. But the only ones who extol the virtues of
: >it...or put down those of us who adhere to tradional want of
: >luxury seem to be those "artists" with absolutely no hope of ever
: >making any money.
: No one is putting all artists who want to have luxury. They are putting *you*
: down, because you are saying luxury/market values = art. Your interpretation
: may be valid for you, but it isn't for everyone.
Exaclty! There is nothing wrong with making money from art, but why
should making money from art be considered the litmus test for what
is art and what isn't?
doug