tzijlstra Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Art is one of the most successful cons in the world, and we are all better as a result of it. The key thing that art does is show us that not everything is about material, it is about aesthetics, about perception, background and ability. A Jacobsen chair, functional, attractive, revolutionary in production terms, or a Rietveld chair that makes us laugh, bemused by its abstraction of form and colour yet responsible for a revolution in the way we started thinking about our houses and how to design them more effectively. A painting by Paul Bailey, building on what exists through the futurist, postmodernist and colourist movements that was painted in 2014, what about a painting by Mark Rothko who completely challenged what we thought was right... in 1952... Works by a group of revolutionary Dutch painters, completely and entirely embedded into the consciousness of Groningen and its inhabitants. It might not mean a lot to you, but I have seen grown men in tears when observing some of these works, that is subjectivism at work. Art is a massive con, and I love it. The world would be a barren, empty and unified place without it. Fortunately it is a part of all of us, whether we understand it or not. ---------- Post added 07-07-2014 at 15:44 ---------- People who actually buy prints, photos and art in galleries, lamb to the slaughter comes to mind. Funny how our painstakingly assembled collection, mainly bought from artists directly or through a well befriended gallery has doubled in value over the last 8 years. Not all lambs then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coutts Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Funny how our painstakingly assembled collection, mainly bought from artists directly or through a well befriended gallery has doubled in value over the last 8 years. Not all lambs then I hate to be the one to tell you this, but the value of your "collection" is completely fictitious until the hammer goes down on auction day. And on that day, be prepared to feel rather gutted. I mean seriously, take a chair, you're going to need to sit down when you realise how much you've just lost. So many people like this, you've got to love the art game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I think this video explains it, or defines it more than words can ,paired with the incredible music of vini reilly true graffitists:thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Art is one of the most successful cons in the world, and we are all better as a result of it. The key thing that art does is show us that not everything is about material, it is about aesthetics, about perception, background and ability. A Jacobsen chair, functional, attractive, revolutionary in production terms, or a Rietveld chair that makes us laugh, bemused by its abstraction of form and colour yet responsible for a revolution in the way we started thinking about our houses and how to design them more effectively. Art is a massive con, and I love it. The world would be a barren, empty and unified place without it. Fortunately it is a part of all of us, whether we understand it or not. I made a Rietveld chair many moons ago, mainly due to the fact that I couldn't afford the real thing (plus I was a cabinetmaker). Although it looks very simple, the construction is rather fiddly if you expect it to last for a reasonable amount of time. Great design! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medusa Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I've no idea whether the art I own is worth more or less than I paid for it. I bought it to enjoy it and it would only matter how much it was worth if I decided to sell it. I don't plan on doing that and even if I did, I think that the pieces I'd be prepared to part with are the ones that wouldn't fetch the small sum that I paid for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 So many people like this, you've got to love the art game. Feel free to be pompous, I know what the value of our collection is and I know how much we get offered for work we have on the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coutts Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Feel free to be pompous, I know what the value of our collection is and I know how much we get offered for work we have on the wall. I don't mean to be rude, sorry if I sounded so, I've just seen so many people buy expensive gallery art only to watch it either fail to sell completely at auction, as in not even getting one bid or it sells for 10%-25% of what they paid and that's on a good day. Add on the auction fees and it's almost a give-away. Offers and valuations all mean nothing until you've got the cash in your hand. You obviously love your purchases and have no intention of selling, which is nice. I'm just saying, if you do come to sell, don't get your hopes up. Most people justify buying expensive gallery art by convincing themselves it's a sound purchase if they ever wanted to sell in the future. There's only one way that is going to end and tears are involved. If someone comes into your home and offers to buy your artwork right there and then for more than you paid, you should be literally taking it out to their car before they finish speaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 My theory, for what it's worth, is that a lot of modern art is a deliberate con. Years ago I read a book on Picasso which contained examples of his work. Upon turning over a page I saw a picture of his mother. At first I was convinced that it was a photo until I read the description which explained that he had painted her when he was 16. It was perfect, he obviously had enormous talent painting in a 'realistic style'. This is my theory, when an artist paints in a way which depicts his/her subject in a normal manner everyone is a critic. We can all look at it and say 'well, it's OK I suppose but...' Now this would really pee me off if I was a gifted artist, knowing that the 'critic' couldn't produce a recognizable drawing of an apple, and yet they feel able to stick in their unwanted opinion about my talents. The way around this is to produce something that only some highly discerning art critic such as that fruity voiced ponce Brian Sewell will 'understand'. This suits the artist, he doesn't have to put up with know nowts like me passing comments on the fruits of his labour. It also suits the critic, because now he has been elevated above know nowts like me, because he 'understands the concept' whilst I'm stood there doing a John McEnroe, 'you cannot be serious!'. It also helps with the sales price, because now people with more money than sense - like Charles Saatchi - can buy this stuff and they are then automatically elevated into the ranks of the cognoscenti, leaving the rest of us stood there saying 'EH! £ 2.54 million for an unmade bed? Are you out of your mind! I've got kids been doing that for years!' When you think about it it's bloody brilliant and I'm only sorry I didn't think of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted July 7, 2014 Author Share Posted July 7, 2014 Also, if you are a highly discerning art critic, and that's how you earn your daily bread; then you perhaps have a financial vested interest in art prices being high; which would in turn, compromise your truthfulness. An art critic isn't going to say it's all a con, not much of it is actually worth anything; as if he did, he wouldn't make much money from being a critic. Rather, he has to say, there is something really very special (and thus, valuable) about this work of art; and it takes a professional like me to really understand it, that's why I'm making money being an art critic. Maybe the entire art industry is a precariously balanced tower of cards? EDIT: If I made a precariously balanced tower of cards, said it was a work of art, and called it 'the art industry'. Maybe there'd be good coin in that for me? (but most likely not, as it would need credibly from the very art critics it pokes fun at). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I don't mean to be rude, sorry if I sounded so, I've just seen so many people buy expensive gallery art only to watch it either fail to sell completely at auction, as in not even getting one bid or it sells for 10%-25% of what they paid and that's on a good day. Add on the auction fees and it's almost a give-away. Offers and valuations all mean nothing until you've got the cash in your hand. You obviously love your purchases and have no intention of selling, which is nice. I'm just saying, if you do come to sell, don't get your hopes up. Most people justify buying expensive gallery art by convincing themselves it's a sound purchase if they ever wanted to sell in the future. There's only one way that is going to end and tears are involved. If someone comes into your home and offers to buy your artwork right there and then for more than you paid, you should be literally taking it out to their car before they finish speaking. I know what you are saying, there are a lot of naive buyers, but we don't fit that category, so my point is that it isn't a rule of thumb that all people buying art directly from artists or through galleries are naive. All our art is by young (and thus living) artists except for a couple of drawings by a guy called Johan Dijkstra. Auctions are a bad way to sell unless you are fairly certain of the bidders in the room, we don't sell a lot of our work, but sometimes we have to to make room for new additions, when we do it happens through our befriended gallery owner who sometimes sends people from the Netherlands over to us here in Sheffield to come and see what we have. Recently we sold work to a gentleman from Harrogate who had been to her gallery, we got offered 80% on top of what we paid for it, not a bad deal for a painting we have had for less than 6 years. I don't want to disclose figures here, but we are pretty switched on what our work is worth, we have several pieces by a gentleman who was recently commissioned by Cunard for the QE2, by P & O for a ferry and by ING in the Netherlands for a massive piece in their new head quarters in Amsterdam. We bought his work when he was still considered a local talent who might have a future. You do the sums Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.