My Art Advice: Should I invest in my career?

My Art Advice: Should I invest in my career?

Q. I’ve been working two jobs saving money so that I can buy a larger house. Lately I’ve been thinking that I should invest some of that money into my art career as well. I’ve known other people who have done this and the outcome was good. One friend opened a gallery and has been very successful with it. She has a studio in the back room and displays her art in the other room. What advice do you have?

A. You have to remember that investing in anything is a gamble. I’ve not seen your work so I can’t tell you if your career investment is a viable solution for successful expansion, so to speak. I also don’t know how much money you are talking about. With that said, there are a few things you should consider before deciding what to do with your hard earned money. First, there are ways to gain exposure without investing money-- though you will need to invest time. Second, you need to have some honest feedback about your work before you make a leap like that-- family and friends will always say that they “love’ your art, but that does not mean it will be marketable elsewhere. Most importantly, what worked for your friends may not work for you.

There are many ways to gain exposure online for your art without investing a dime-- aside from Internet fees-- and I assume you already have a computer and access to the Internet. Do you have an online presence? Do you interact with online art communities? Even if you are a novice with a computer you can still do many things online that will help establish or strengthen the market for your art. Years ago art professionals scoffed at the idea of selling art online. Some have yet to get over the stigma of past online failures as far as the art market is concerned. However, times have changed and there are thousands of artists earning a decent profit by selling art online or selling with the help of connections they have made online. Needless to say, I’d invest time before money if I were you.

Create free accounts on sites like www.myartspace.com, www.facebook.com, and www.myspace.com so that you can network with artists, curators, and potential buyers. Posting videos of your process on www.youtube.com can also be a very good way to gain exposure-- just try not to be tacky about it! You will be surprised how many curators and collectors can be found on the Internet. Just make sure that you focus on building good rapport-- you don’t want to be annoying nor do you want to appear desperate. “Hi, I’m an artist. Will you represent me” or “Hi. Would you like to buy some of my art.“ is NOT a good first impression offline OR online. Again, I don’t know every aspect of your situation-- maybe you already have a market for your art? If you have already established an online presence I suppose there are a few ways you could invest in your career. However, regardless of what you do you will still need to network with other artists and curators-- and doing that online is the most time effective option.

You might consider opening your own exhibit space like your friend. However, there can be unwanted consequences from doing that. The simple truth is that artists who run galleries almost always end up being just an art dealer-- and more often than not they become shoddy art dealers. Running a gallery-- even if it is just for your art-- is very time consuming. Even with assistants it can eat away at your day. How much time does your friend actually spend in her studio? How does she define success-- financial wealth or simply the joy of doing what she wants to do? Are you prepared to socialize instead of working on your art? Are you prepared to cancel plans due to the need to have regular business hours? Can you handle creating art, running your space, and working a day job as well-- in your case two jobs? Again, I don’t know the specifics of your scenario, but these are issues to consider.

If you do open a gallery you may also want to consider the geographic location of your gallery. You will want to open a space in a community that is known for supporting art. For example, having a gallery in a small town is not a financially sound choice in the majority of cases. You will also want to consider the expense of running a gallery-- utilities, shipping, fine wine for all… and so on. In the end you will be investing more into your exhibit space than your initial investment. Running a co-op in which you share the burden of monthly expenses with fellow members might be a solution for that. However, if you take that path you must come to terms with the fact that your art will not be the main focus of the space-- which may defeat the purpose of your original intention. Running a co-op gallery can be a MAJOR hassle… especially when half the members decide they can’t pay dues all at once.

There certainly are some things you should definitely avoid as far as investing in your art career is concerned. For example, don’t allow yourself to be seduced by vanity publications. True, those publications might end up in the hands of potential buyers, but your art will also end up in the same pages as artists you may not want to associate with. In most cases anyone can be published in a vanity art publication simply by paying the fee. Those publishers often do not care about the quality of the art submitted as long as their own wealth is increased. The outcome can be very embarrassing-- do a few searches online about vanity publications and I bet you will find hundreds of horror stories. Vanity art publications will not validate you as an ‘artist’. They are more apt to become an obstacle later down the road as far as success is concerned.

What about your studio space? Do you have enough room? If you buy a larger home, as you mentioned, you will hopefully purchase one that allows you room to create in comfort. Buying a larger home might give you the opportunity to create the studio space that you have always wanted. If you are working in a space that you enjoy you will most likely be more productive. A larger living space will also allow you to invite more guests if you decide to host an open studio visit or something along those lines. In that sense, a larger home might be the best investment you can make for your art career and for your lifestyle-- though one could say creating and selling art is a lifestyle, correct? Just remember to set aside a specific area for your studio.

Another thought… if you honestly want to invest some of the money you have saved into your art career why not use it so that you have more free time? Perhaps you could drop one of your day jobs or simply work less hours? Having some money in the bank will no doubt take away from some of the stress of economic woes. Instead of being worried about bills you can focus on your art. In the end you will have to rely on great art in order to be successful. Again, I don’t know your situation and maybe that is not an issue for you, but it is something to consider. The extra money could also be used to explore new materials or to buy extra supplies for your creative purpose.

To sum this up… it is your dime, your time, and your decision in the end.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

The Myths of Gallery/Artist Relationships: Biting the Hand that Feeds / Feeding the Mouth that Bites

The Myths of Gallery/Artist Relationships: Biting the Hand that Feeds / Feeding the Mouth that Bites

It is safe to say that most of us have heard an artist complain about a gallery owner or a gallery owner complain about an artist at some point during our art careers (even if you don‘t view it as a career). Others have no doubt read horror stories online-- specifically on forums and blogs devoted to art-- involving a disgruntled artist who is unhappy with his or her gallery. The same dialogue-- reversed-- can be found on the other side of the aisle-- with gallery owners and staff ranting about experiences they loathed involving artists they once represented. Both parties tend to post their frustrations anonymously. The remarks fueled by said frustration can enforce negative opinions about the artists and gallery owners involved in these rants. They can also strengthen the mythical image of the gallery/artist relationship in popular culture as well as the stereotypes of ‘the artist’ and the “gallery owner” as dictated by popular culture. These myths have teeth and both artists and gallery owners are sometimes more than willing to bite-- more than willing to spill their share of the bad blood.

We all know the mythos of the gallery/artist relationship-- that it must be filled with some form of hellish drama and that the ‘artist’ is almost always on the receiving end of the emotional and financial beating stick. The majority of novels, films, and other forms of media that depict this relationship do so in a negative manner such as this. The ‘artist’ is seen as a rebellious hero or heroine caught in a position that threatens his or her passion-- his or her drive to exist. The gallery owners are depicted as heartless, passionless vampires who strive to suck the creative blood of their victims in order to obtain financial and material success. Needless to say, popular culture dictates that the stability that should arise from gallery representation eventually causes instability for these societal underdogs. Sadly, people tend to associate with this manner of thinking when debating the gallery/artist relationship and when dealing with the reality of their own situation regarding galleries in general.

One outcome of this media enhanced myth is that the image of ‘the artist’ and the ‘gallery owner’ and their failed or complicated ‘relationship’ tends to sway the opinion that people have concerning galleries and artists in general. The consensus online (which is why I’m writing about this topic) seems to be that gallery owners are the natural enemy of artists. I’ve witnessed this manner of thinking on art blogs and forums on several occasions. It even played out in the comments at Ed Winkleman’s blog not long ago after he released an artist from his stable. Again, the majority of the negative comments were made anonymously.

Based on my experience it seems that a countless number of artists, most of whom have never experienced gallery representation to begin with, habitually rant about the exploitive nature of gallery owners as if they were booted by a mainstream gallery just the day before. They fall victim to the myth. They get angry by the myth. They show their teeth over the myth. There is no doubt in my mind that this apparent hatred stems from the myths that have been created and shaped by movies and other aspects of popular culture that I’ve mentioned.

The negative myths of the gallery/artist relationship can be dangerous for artists and gallery owners-- as well as for how the public views both. These myths can enforce an attitude that leads to a lack of opportunities and total cynicism-- specifically in the minds of emerging artists-- because said myths fail to reveal the one truth that artists and gallery owners tend to share in that they both want stability and success. I would go as far as to say that the negative myths concerning this professional relationship has caused many to unknowingly accept a defeatist approach to career advancement in the professional art world-- which is no advancement at all! In other words, if we can’t respect both the positive and negative aspects of our work… why should anyone else?

Popular culture teaches us that galleries are to be feared and that the motives of gallery owners should be questioned. Instead, we should be learning how galleries work. We should learn how they function and remain open. We should take note of how they remain successful and respected. We should remember how they benefit their artists… and most importantly, how they benefit each other within the context of the gallery/artist relationship. On that same note, gallery owners who have experienced difficult artists should remember that not every artist shares those same traits. True, there are petty artists and petty gallery owners. However, those same conditions can be found in any profession. Biting at each other with harsh words is not exactly the way to go about understanding our shared desires.

I think part of the battle that I’ve observed-- both offline and online-- is due to how closely related one is to the other. No, I’m not talking about the obvious need that one has for the other. I’m referring to how close our paths are as far as our work is concerned. Your average gallery owner has many things in common with the average artist. Both work long hours for something they believe in. Both do something that the majority of the population would never consider doing. Both are faced with financial burden based on the career choices they have made. Both rely on a degree of networking and positive exposure in order to position themselves for career success. Few have assistants. Few have great wealth. Both desire-- for the most part --to be published and reviewed. Both must endure criticism. Both must make some form of investment--be it time, money, or both-- in order to gain ground. Both fight to keep a roof over their heads. Both hope to still be doing what they are doing five years down the road. Both can be drained physically and emotionally by their work. Both have bouts of doubts-- though they may not acknowledge it to others. In other words, one could say that the majority of artists and gallery owners live very similar lives.

Perhaps that is why so many artists and gallery owners seem to snap back and forth about this issue? Perhaps that is why we choose sides? Could it be that artists and gallery owners are so close to being the same in ideology-- in work ethic and ambition-- that they will always endure some form of professional or personal conflict-- a conflict enforced by aspects of popular culture and the myths that stem from that source? The myths of old revealed the flaws of humankind--- the burden of professions and passions. Perhaps that is what we fear and why we react as we do? Perhaps that is why so many rant without adding anything new to the dialogue and with no willingness to understand the position of the other. Perhaps this is why both sides sometimes ban together like a pack of wolves to the slaughter. Is this clash over the gallery/artist relationship as troubled as I assume? Or have I fell victim to the myth in my own way?

Don't get me wrong. I realize that both artists and gallery owners can have good reason for their opinions and concerns. I understand that some artists are poorly represented based on gender, age, and other factors that should not matter as far as the message their art conveys and the respect that it should have-- just as I understand that some gallery owners try hard to endure professional relationships with artists who are reckless, to say the least. However, it does seem that these concerns have been beat into our minds to the point that we come to expect those specific outcomes no matter who we associate with. The evidence of that fear can be discovered in the conversations we have, the rants that we read, and the opinions we overhear.

Consider this an open debate about gallery/artist relationships. Feel free to offer your experiences as far as this issue is concerned. Anonymous posting is an option if you wish to prevent yourself from being identified.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
Senior Editor
www.myartspace.com

Adel Abdessemed Exhibit Spurs Bill to Stop the Harm of Animals in the Name of Art

Adel Abdessemed Exhibit Spurs Bill to Stop the Harm of Animals in the Name of Art:

A committee in San Francisco’s city government has introduced a bill with the hope of stopping the abuse, suffering, or death of animals in the name of art. The proposal is a response to a video installation by Adel Abdessemed which involved documenting traditional methods of food production in Mexico. The installation contained graphic imagery involving the death of six farm animals. The installation, which went on display at the San Francisco Art Institute, was canceled abruptly after the artist and others involved with the exhibit received death threats from animal rights extremists. The exhibit involved several sponsors, including the Andy Warhol Foundation.

The bill is still in the process of being drafted. If the bill passes artists who have harmed animals-- and anyone funding or housing the work --will be charged with a misdemeanor or felony. My understanding is that the bill will make it clear that artists can be criminally charged even if the work is ‘created’ in another country where harm to animals is not considered an offense. I have also read that it will be illegal for artists to take advantage of conditions that permit the death of an animal. For example, if the bill passes it would be illegal for an artist to photograph or record a pet being euthanized by a veterinarian-- assuming a vet would allow that in the first place.

Supporters of the bill are concerned that artists will create works that involve harming animals simply to gain the same media exposure that Abdessemed accomplished-- regardless if he wanted it or not. I think the bill is a great move. However, I’m sure there will be some buzz against this bill before everything is said and done. It all depends on what exactly the bill entails-- and how it develops over time. I can see how the bill could end up-- or trigger-- more harm than good if it is not carefully observed.

For example, politicians hoping to win the favor of animal rights groups and other supporters of the bill may push the bill beyond its original intention. That is why people need to pay attention to how this bill shapes. You never know what direction a new bill can take. Will it prevent hunters from having ’trophies’ mounted? Will it prevent grannies from having Fido stuffed? Are those not forms of expression in their own right? Will the bill be strictly against artists who utilize images of abused, suffering, or dead animals that they have caused or taken advantage of as a means of expressing an idea / concept… or will it result in fictional depictions of abused, suffering, or dead animals being illegal as well? I don’t think people will be happy if a student ends up in a youth detention center because he or she drew a cartoon of a dead animal in his or her notebook.

Again, I think the bill is a good step if it is done in the right way. However, politicians tend to drop the ball at the worst of times. At the same time I realize that some people feel that attacking any form of expression is wrong no matter what ethical standards are violated. What are your thoughts on this bill and the Adel Abdessemed exhibit?

(On a side note, I contacted the David Zwirner gallery in April hoping to schedule an interview with Adel Abdessemed. I wanted to offer him the chance to give his side of the story and to discuss his motivation for the installation. Unfortunately, the Press Assistant for David Zwirner informed me that Adel was not interested.)

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

My Art Advice: Is Creativity linked to Mental Illness?

Q. I've been told that there is a link between creativity and mental illness. In school we learned about Van Gogh and other artists and how their mental illness enhanced their artistic ability. I've found some blogs that discuss this. Is there any truth to it?

A. This is a question that I can sink my teeth into-- it is also a topic that needs to be explored in detail rather than the half-baked theories that one can find scattered througout the net about this issue. I have some thoughts about the link between creativity and mental illness, but I can't promise you a clear answer. I do hope that a good debate will come from this.

As you may know, I have two main interests… art and psychology-- specifically mental illness and the insane. In many ways art and psychology share a strong connection. One could say that you can’t explore one without exploring the other. Thus, it goes without saying that I enjoy reading about both and how they may or may not be linked. However, I am often alarmed by the material I find online that attempts to prove the link between creativity and mental illness-- articles suggesting that all artists are mentally ill and that great artists are insane. I am also alarmed by the number of people who tell me about their experiences in school learning about artists like Van Gogh, the mental illness that they had, and the assumed connection between creativity and mental illness. Thus, I would like to know the opinions of others about this subject. Do you think there is a link?

As for me, I know from personal experience-- having worked with mentally ill individuals-- that one could easily establish a link between creative prowess and mental illness or complete insanity, but that is not to say that the link would be based on fact nor would it be an honest reflection of every artist. In my opinion, these links often serve no purpose other than to enforce a stigma about artists in general-- stereotypes that are fueled by popular culture and people who emulate what they observe on TV.

Based on my work in the field I can say that the artwork created in institutions and rehab centers for the mentally ill can spur us to think about our own state of being-- but not anymore than the art we observe from mentally healthy (if there is such a thing) individuals outside of the institutions and rehab centers. We often attach some form of mystery to the art of these institutionalized individuals instead of accepting that someone in an institution can be talented or skilled in a subject such as art-- just as artists outside of the institutions are often associated with having some form of devine gift instead of being acknowledged for the years of experience and practice that they have embraced.

Don’t get me wrong… as a former mental health professional I have personally observed some captivating artwork as it was being created. At one time I pondered the idea that perhaps those individuals were exploring truths beyond my recognition. However, I reminded myself that the individuals I worked with often displayed total disregard for cultural convention and what you and I may consider ’normality’-- both in their lifestyles and in the manner in which they created art... among other things. Thus, that 'extra spark' or 'enhanced ability' that I discovered in their work was nothing more than a reflection of that-- enhanced by my own desire to discover something more than just a person creating a painting or drawing.

The individuals I worked with were free from inhibitions as to how they expressed themselves with a chosen medium. They were not confined by the studio inhibitions that an art student may spend years breaking him or herself from after graduation. However, that is not to say that all of the work was great. The majority of it was mediocre at best… but for whatever reason I had focused on specific images that had caught my eye. I found that we should approach these works as art created by individuals rather than viewing them with the hope of discovering signs of any specific mental illness or aspect of insanity-- OR hidden truths.

With that said, the unconventional nature of the individuals I worked with would often influence their ability to push the limits of the medium of their choice, so to speak. The individuals I worked with, some of whom were criminally insane, would take chances with their art that some of us would never consider. Thus, it is easy to see why some people view artwork created by the mentally ill or insane as overly unique compared to other art that they have viewed… and thus associate creativity-- or high creativity-- with mental illness. It does not shock me that so many people gaze upon these works with amazement. However, it is dangerous when we attempt to project facts based on our curiosities alone-- and that is what I find so many people doing in regards to this subject online, in classrooms, and elswhere.

People tend to have a romanticized image of mentally ill individuals in general… and an ever growing collective curiosity for the ‘genius’ of the insane. In my opinion, this is largely due to the roll that mentally ill characters have played in popular novels and films... and the fact that so many of us emulate what we observe on the screen or take what we see as truth. Think about the popularity of ‘Girl, Interrupted’, ‘Silence of the Lambs’ and other novels and films that portray creative individuals with various forms of mental illness and insanity and you will find exactly of what I speak. I think it is obvious why the public associates creativity with mental illness and genius with insanity. However, I also know that the history and debate concerning the connection between mental illness and creativity can be traced back long before the first television. Is there a link? You tell me.

(I'd like to add that I don't think it is fair when people try to say that creative individuals-- artists, musicians, poets... etc.-- are more apt to be mentally ill when compared to people who rarely tap into their creative-side in that way, so to speak. I think it is safe to say that we all have some form of mental illness. We all have personality traits and experiences that we have to deal with. We all have flaws. An artist might suffer from depression or some other issue... and he or she may explore those problems within the context of his or her art-- which makes the issue more public than private-- but think about how many other people may suffer from the same problems in private. Just a thought.)

Feel free to comment if you have an opinion about this issue.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

My Art Advice: Stop Complaining and Focus on your Online Presence!

Q. I read about an artist who sells work daily online. It was frustrating because I'm lucky to sell once per month and my paintings are better than his. Am I doing something wrong?

A. What works for one person may not work for you. It is also tough for me to give you ideas when I don't know your strategy. Being successful in marketing your art online can be like entering an iron man competition-- you will be tired at the end of the day and you will most likely have a few bruises... both physical and mental.

The strain of trying to discover the online marketing plan that works for you can prove to be very taxing. The key is to not set your expectations too high. Just because you have not sold many pieces online so far does not mean that you will not be successful later down the road. You also want to make sure that you don't distract yourself by wishing you were at the same place as another artist-- you can end up wishing all of your time away.

While it is important to have ambition it is also important to be realistic-- leave your ego at the door. Just because you have read about an artist who sells thousands of dollars worth of art online each day does not mean that you will have those same returns starting out nor does it mean that the artist is being truthful in the first place. Also, remember that just because you think that your art is just as good as the work by this individual-- or better --does not mean that success will come easy for you.

Don't waste your time complaining-- you will find little sympathy. You need to remember that most of the successful artists who sell online had a collector base offline to begin with. Other successful artists online have had to work long hours both online and offline in order to reap the fruits of their online marketing effort (that is where the bruises come in... if you were wondering). One could say that a great deal of luck is involved either way.

The best advice I can give you is to be relentless in your online marketing efforts. Join social networking sites. Create accounts on art sites like http://www.myartspace.com/. Post videos of your art on http://www.youtube.com/. Place links to your personal website-- or the main site that you use to sell your art-- on the profile of every website that you have joined. Communicate on those sites and include links to your art. Maintain a blog about your art and comment on other art blogs. If you want to market your art successfully online you need to establish an online presence. You can't expect a website and one post to do all of the work for you nor can you establish an online presence if you are rarely online... so spend some time each day and post, post, post. If it is important you will find time.

Starting a blog about your art-- and art in general-- can be a very interesting venture. For example, if you honestly feel that the artist you mentioned does not deserve the credit and collector base that he has obtained... why not review his work on your blog? Don't be nasty about it or do some sort of 'his art, my art' comparison-- just critique his work and see what kind of reaction you get. You never know, the artist in question might end up returning the favor which may result in his blog readers-- and collectors -- visiting your blog... at which point they can make the decision about who creates 'better' art. Shifty? Perhaps. However, throughout history artists have reviewed their peers. Trust me, you won't be breaking any rules of etiquette. Isn't that a better idea than simply complaining?

If you establish an online presence other avenues may open as far as selling your art is concerned. I know a few people who have been invited to exhibit their work after someone observed their work on a forum. It can happen. The hard truth is that you won't get anywhere if you spend your time complaining about what others have accomplished. That goes for online art marketing as well as offline art marketing.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

My Art Advice: I hope this does not sound selfish. How will donating my art to charitable fundraisers help my professional career as an artist?

Q. I hope this does not sound selfish. How will donating my art to charitable fundraisers help my professional career as an artist?

A. Well, you could have put it a different way. It is hard to donate anything without having some form of good intention, true? Dr. X is not going to destroy the world by donating something to charity, right? I suppose that could be debated. Actually you hit on something here... artists often mention the fundraisers they have been involved with and are apt to include those ventures on their resumes. However, few are willing to reveal that in the back of their mind they hope a collector or curator will notice their work during the event. If they value their art they obviously value what people think about said art and of them, correct?

The idea is that you will do a good deed and may very well do good for your future at the same time-- two birds with one stone, so to speak. That idea is not exactly something to feel guilty about because you are-- I hope-- donating to a charity that you agree with... and with any luck you will have future success with your work so that it earns more when you donate art in the future, right? Charitable events can be great for making connections.

As for how donating art might help your career... well... who is to say. In other words, don't donate art to a charity if your only goal is to garner fame and fortune. The reality is that you will leave with one less piece and hopefully a burst of warmth in your heart (come on guys, I'm not all bullets!). That said, if you choose to donate for the right reasons it is acceptable-- in my opinion --to hope that maybe someone influential will admire your art beyond the charitable action that you have taken. Also, If you are just starting out and have had few exhibits donating art to charitable events can be a great way to add something to your resume. If you happen to have dozens of paintings, sculptures, what have you, just sitting around... why not donate a few to a charity that you believe in?

To sum this up, the best expectation that you can have is that you will help someone or something in need. Leave your flights of fancy at the door... but keep an eye open for future possibilities.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

My Art Advice: Ask a Question

I don't know why I did not think of this before! As you may know, I ask people to send My Art Advice questions to my email or to my account on www.myspace.com, www.facebook.com, or www.myartspace.com. For now on simply ask your question here. It will be easier for me to keep track of what has been asked. From this point on I will include a label 'Ask a Question' on all My Art Advice posts so that everyone can refer to this post to see what has been asked already and add new questions if they want. I moderate comments so if you have a question that you do not want me to make public be sure to let me know or comment anonymous so that it can be made public without being attached to your identity, so to speak. You can still contact me by email or on one of my profiles, but I can't promise that I will read it.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin