Thursday, March 24, 2011

On LinkedIn, We're Having a Vigorous Discussion About Selling Art

Toon,  (a Dutch first name), doesn’t understand why people say that they love his Native American themed Art but don’t buy it.  Ah, if Love could only make one’s wallet bulge as well as it does other parts...we’d all have sweet young things in our beds and Rembrandts on the wall.

The LinkedIn crew have gone around and around in circles, but the bottom line remains the same: money. There is none in this Recession, or at least not enough to buy Art. Perhaps something “nice” at IKEA to hang over the couch, but the group is not speaking of prints. We are mourning the real painting or sculpture and the joy they can give a viewer.

For me, Art is a theatrical script with a cast of 20 and 5 sets. But, I can cut the cast and trim the sets, and as long as the core, my words, gets out, I’m happy. And Honey, in Theater, the playwright is the last one paid and we become rich only if it leads to a movie sale.

That’s not what the plastic Arts are about. Paintings and sculpture must be complete. You cannot have a core without the shell. The artist envisions a piece...completed...not an arm or a leg, or the Sun without the Sky.

If it’s about talent, if it’s about skills and vision, the Europeans ask, should they not get paid the proper appreciation? Shouldn’t we all? Then, we’d have the money to indulge in the luxury of Art. But, as I look at the paintings on my it  luxury? I can’t afford many, but aren’t they necessary on some level? The richness and color of real oil and acrylic can’t ever be caught in a print. They can’t be caught on a computer screen. To touch the paint is to touch the artist’s hand. What is the price of that? What are we losing if only the Super Rich can afford it, and the Artists  have to give up their crafts to eat? Just asking.

No comments:

Post a Comment