Posting has been a little light lately as I have jumped in the car and just kept driving. I’m about 5 hours south from home and am freezing. I’m in the Australian Capital Territory, in the city of Canberra to see Jackson Pollock’s Blue Poles: Number 11 from 1952 at the National Gallery of Australia.

It was bought by the Australian government in 1973 for $2 million USD and created a lot of controversy at the time. If the much smaller and much less impressive No. 5, 1948 painting was sold by David Geffen in 2006 for $140 million, Blue Poles would easily be worth $150 million today.. even in a financial crisis. I rarely ever put a money value on art when I’m in a gallery, but for Blue Poles I’ll make an exception.

Also, I find it funny that a city filled with politicians is based around circles. You can drive around and around and not really get anywhere.. just as politicians go around and around and never really get anywhere. See what I mean on Google maps.

My next stop may be Melbourne.. then maybe Tasmania.. but I’m taking each day as it comes and seeing where the wind blows me. A big gust of wind could even pick me up and take me to London or New York. You just never know what’s around the corner when you’re a paper bag blowing in the wind.

There’s an interesting article over at the LA Times on art, manufacturing, brands, and people that seem to enjoy being in court.

“They may not have realized it, but the folks who snapped up as much as $4-million worth of limited-edition prints by artist Takashi Murakami two years ago at the special Louis Vuitton boutique inside his exhibition at L.A.’s Museum of Contemporary Art apparently were getting nicely mounted handbags — minus the snaps and straps.” LA Times

Basically, a collector didn’t like the fact that his Takashi Murakami Louis Vuitton prints were just left over Louis Vuitton material strapped to canvas stretchers.

I can’t see a problem with it. Takashi Murakami is like Japan’s Damien Hirst and he doesn’t hide the fact that he’s a branding machine in the business of selling products. The exhibition at the The Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles was called “Copyright Marakami” which should have gave the collector some idea of what the artist is all about.

You don’t expect a Damien Hirst spot painting to be painted by Damien Hirst.

Artists and galleries seem to be further apart than I thought. The recent art galleries and Internet post created comments that were anti artist or art gallery. A comment by “anonymous” on Starting an Art Gallery (who usually has something controversial to say) said this..

“..here is the KEY.. own your building… this proves your loyalty to art and separates yourself from the others.. so wonderful! then don’t listen to what artists have to say about them having to bear the burden of the costs.. 2 reasons… first. artists (especially abstract painters) are a dime a dozen. second.. it is an artists job to spend money on their lifestyle… so if you were a full time snowboarder, it would cost you equipment, lift tickets,gas to get there, lifestyle clothing, etc..so, being an artist costs, frames, paint, entry fees and The Burden of dealing with art gallery divas like myself.”

Ouch.. No wonder artists and art galleries don’t get along. I would hate to be an abstract artist exhibiting with this guy! I would quickly start painting cow turds and tell him it was important to you and that you’re confident the public will buy, buy, buy.. lol.

Also, the Australian artist Hazel Dooney replied to the recent Art Gallery and Internet post with the following to say..

“But the power of new media, combined with the accelerating decline of traditional galleries, especially in a drastically deteriorating global economy, is such that even the most persistent and grasping middlemen will lose their grip in the near future. While artists will flourish on the net, only a very few galleries are likely to adapt to it, let alone be able transfer offline success online.
As any geek – or record company – can tell you, the web works against any effort to exert control within it. ” Read her full post here.

It seems that artists and art galleries live on different planets. Personally, my dealings with art galleries have left a very bad taste in my mouth, so I decided to take a route that allowed me to forgo selling art, but still allow me to comfortably pay the bills. I now hate parting with paintings and I paint what I want, but I guess my storage will run out eventually

Robert Genn’s latest Painter’s Keys newsletter is an interesting one. He replies to a letter from artist Tom Lockhart talking about how being an artist can be tough. Tom wrote the following to Robert..

“I work 50 to 65 hours per week, teach workshops and serve on the Board of a Local Arts Center. I judge art shows and travel to locations to paint. I earn $75,000.00 to $100,000.00 annually–too much to get a grant. I pay more than my share of taxes, expense out what the law allows and still find it difficult to make ends meet. I’m constantly paying entry fees, dues, advertising, framers, suppliers and travel expenses. I can’t understand why the public insists on buying cheap, crappy art from poorly educated artists who suffer for their craft. Yuk! There are constantly retired lawyers, doctors, architects, dentists and other professionals who decide to become painters. They put their work in galleries and sell to the unsophisticated, taking sales away from deserving, serious artists. And now with the economic bad times, it’s even harder to sell your art. What do you think about this?”

See Robert’s reply here. He basically says things aren’t so bad as you are an artist!

I couldn’t agree more. Being an artist is a privilege that should be appreciated. Listening to an artist complain about being an artist is like listening to someone with 5 Ferraris complain about not having 6 Ferraris. The quickest way to shut me up if I’m ever whinging about being an artist is to tell me to get a 9 to 5 job.

I’m not saying that being an artist doesn’t have it’s ups and downs, but look at the alternatives. Take an office job or get into sales for a while if being an artist ever becomes a chore. If you really are an artist you’ll quickly come running back to the studio and the many privileges of being an artist.

I never feel sorry for struggling artists as it’s hard to have any sympathy for a person with the equivalent of 5 Ferraris in the garage. I don’t care if you can’t pay the rent or you’re tired of eating 2 minute noodles.. you’re an artist!

A mad junky in the name of art (Part 1 of 2)

Should being an “artist” automatically excuse for immorality and capriciousness?

The joystick of attitude
When someone is established in a path of spiritual awareness, in faith, he realizes his essence and uses every daily doing as a lift to spiritual enhancement, to personal growth, to the aspiration to all that which is noble, pure and luminous. It’s a question of attitude and attitude is an expression of the freedom of choise which God gave us, Humans.

A deep and intense spiritual awareness to the existential suffering of oneself and of mankind is a gift, but awareness which is not accompanied with equilibrium of the mind begets fear which might result in hatred, rather than a balanced and aware mind which begets love and faith.

Art can also be created out of love and faith and it will be as deep, impressive, creative and colorful as art emerging from the darkness of the artist’s psyche. Again, it’s a question of choise and once you do believe that God indeed contains everything – including the devil – because everything is within the boundaries of His Creation and His Providence governs all with absolute and infinite awareness, than the logical outcome of that realization, is that art which is lofted by the creative forces of the mind can soar much higher and further than art which stems from the rotten roots of the destructive forces of the mind.

Asceticism
Those artists who choose to create art out of self-hatred and conflict do so on their own, but by no means because it is necessarily the way of nature. Perhaps they choose to believe that if and when they will stop suffering they will also stop being unique. Perhaps it is the rooted belief that being miserable is being deep and that happy people are superficial and stupid. But that depends on where from this happiness flows, and of course when I say happiness, I mean true and profound blissful joy and not that unaware vapid hypocritical charade posed by most of them “happy” people.

Now, the happiness of sensual pleasures may indeed be superficial and stupid, but nevertheless it is an expression of the human nature just as much as stubbornly uncompromising and haughtily pretentious debatement concerning ‘deep’ philosophical issues. At the ultimate level of reality, enjoying a good steak like a beast isn’t more superficial than embittering your life with asceticism and self torture, as did certain artists of the past, since it does not indicate spiritual greatness but rather the greatness of the ego and it’s arrogance and the illusion that shields them and then turns them into a distorted and dangerous belief, that it is indeed for a higher cause – Art – nonsense.

Happiness
But there is true joy, what which we call ‘Happiness’ – that which derives from the knowledge that in any situation and at all times there is something unfathomably bigger than us, which is aware of us into our entire depths, which knows the purpose of our existence and tries to guide us through a universal scene of illusions and misery which he created for us.

From within those short moments of the happiness of faith and the experience of the radiance of truth, art is born which is not the outcome of misery and indecisive conflict, but rather one that, for a start, expresses all those objectively and impartially. Perhaps at a later stage an art emerges that is all of the nature of radiance, happiness and faith – art which is the embodiment of the divine, the exalted and the complete.

Attraction of similarities
As an incidental remark to the above and as a side effect of the suffering human, the frequencies we generate draw to us those people who generate the same frequencies. A magnet will not be pulled to or by glass or wood but only to iron. It is the law of nature. A man – an artist, a cook, a teacher, a driver or a cashier – who generates frequencies of self destruction draws to himself other people of the same frequency.

Someone who, in the name of art and out of deep soul affinity for art, generates frequencies of self destruction, will attract ‘artists’ or those with ‘the soul of an artist’, who ruin the lives of themselves and of those who surround them, without any aware striving towards the origins of all phenomenon and the real solution to their personal despair. This is also a law of nature.

And that is all I had to say about that. Thank God for the wisdom, the insight, the pride, the journey and the conflict.

Created by findigart On 04/16/09 At 08:09 AM

Want to win an original Damien Hirst painting worth £125,000? Me too, but I don’t live in the UK!

UK residents over the age of 18 can have the opportunity to win a painting by Damien Hirst or one of 20 litho prints by the artist. The Guardian’s Observer Music Monthly is teaming up with Hirst and the band The Hours to give away the painting. The painting was used to create The Hours album cover.

It’s not as easy as just signing for up the newsletter to win either as they’re making entrants work a little for the prize (it is a BIG prize.)

The first step is to register your details here before the 19th of April. Then on launch day they will “be setting a new question every day for 20 consecutive days. To be in with a chance of winning, you’ll need to follow our blog story, find the clues and then answer every single question correctly. We’ll be testing your determination and your initiative so make sure you’re paying attention. Every time you answer a daily question you’ll automatically enter another prize draw to win a further signed Damien Hirst litho print.”

There’s more information on the registration page.

Good luck! I wish I could enter it too!

Many scholars mark Allan Kaprow’s happenings as the beginning of performance art. Others have named Ghandi as the first actual performance artist. Others still have identified the beginning of performance art in the Dada and Futurist movements.
Unfortunately these scholars are all dead wrong. The first performance art piece actually took place during the Renaissance and was commissioned by none other than Pope Clement VIII. The first performance art piece was a true masterpiece that still burns in our memories today. It was a real sacrifice on the part of the performer and the work deserves to be added to RoseLee Goldberg’s next anthology of performance art.

On February 17th, 1600, a crudely erected stage appeared in the middle of a main city square in Rome. A crowd gathered to view a performance they had seen advertised all around the city. General admission was charged for viewing, and the performance began to take shape.

Two assistants were busying themselves on the uneven wooden platform in Rome’s Campo di Fiori as they tried to make last minute adjustments to the performance area. Silence overtook the crowd as they began to realize that the event they were about to witness would never be repeated. Giordano Bruno ascended the stage and solemnly took his place in the center. His two assistants rapidly descended from the stage and left Bruno to begin his performance. Bruno waited calmly as a third assistant quietly lit a torch. The crowd watched in disbelief as the third artist assistant gracefully walked about the stage igniting it in various places. Flames quickly overtook the stage and Giordano Bruno was burned alive.

This might appear to be just a routine Inquisitional burning at first, but let’s examine the facts a little further. The stage name of the artist in question was Giordano Bruno, but his birth name was actually Filippo Bruno. Early in his artistic career, Bruno dabbled in other forms of expression, such as writing, rhetoric, and vagrancy. Unfortunately none of the art forms gave him much pleasure until he discovered the rewarding field of performance art. Once he found he desired path, he had no shortage of supporters, patrons, and disciples. He was later to become the darling of the Inquisition set and was invited to all their high society gatherings. It was in this enlightened environment that he gained the attention of the Pope who agreed to commission Bruno to burn himself alive before an audience.

Records from the era show the Pope’s skepticism regarding the public’s response, but the turnout proved his skepticism to be unfounded. Bruno’s performance piece remains the most lucrative artistic event in history, with gross earnings reaching upwards of 10,000 Florins, a sum that would be unimaginable today.

Created by Jeffrey Andreoni On 04/14/09 At 08:38 AM

(via)

I’m probably one of the last people in the world to own an Apple iPod but it’s better late than never. I bought an Ipod Classic which has 120gb of storage on it. If “gb” doesn’t mean much to you it simply means it has more storage than a lot of personal computers and can store a LOT of songs.

I bought it as I desperately miss my CD collection when I’m not at home. I’m planning an extended road trip around the South East of Australia (Canberra, Melbourne, Tasmania, etc.) and I plan to take my whole music collection with me on my iPod.

In a few days I have put on about 90 albums, 40 audio books, and have just discovered podcasts. I have subscribed to philosophy, zen, science and a couple art podcasts so far, but I would like to find a few more art podcasts so I decided to create a list and ask for recommendations.

Art Podcasts

Art Marketing Action Podcast: Is a weekly art podcast by Alyson Stanfield on being an artist. Read or listen to her at ArtBizBlog.

Tate Podcasts: Many major art museums now have podcasts with art lectures, artist interviews, discussions, and talks on exhibitions. The Tate museum has quite a range of art podcasts at Tate Podcasts.

Art History Podcast: Learn Out Loud’s art history podcast has brief look at masterpieces from the history of art at LearnOutLoud.

The Guardian Culture Podcast: Art interviews, news and exhibition reviews from the Guardian newspaper in the UK at Guardian Podcasts.

Note: Send me your art podcast if you would like it added to this post.

2008 was a wild ride for the world art market with the financial crisis catching up with auction sales. Artprice.com called it a year that started with “speculative euphoria” and ended with a “violent contraction.”

The Art Market Insight by Artprice is an annual publication that looks back at art auction prices for the year. Listed in the report is the top 10 artists, the top 100 auction sales, and a list of the top 500 artists by turnover for the year.

Here’s a list of the top ten artists by total turnover for 2008. I expect that dead masters like Picasso and Monet would sell $100 million+ over 12 months, but what impresses me are the living artists like Hirst, Richter and Koons that are selling similar amounts.

1. PICASSO Pablo (1881-1973) $262,366,349 from 1764 lots sold at auction
2. BACON Francis (1909-1992) $256,208,073 from 100 lots sold
3. WARHOL Andy (1928-1987) $236,749,034 from 1164 lots sold
4. HIRST Damien (1965) $230,887,159 from 445 lots sold
5. MONET Claude (1840-1926) $174,695,716 from 25 lots sold
6. GIACOMETTI Alberto (1901-1966) $132,631,043 from 111 lots sold
7. RICHTER Gerhard (1932) $122,211,095 from 166 lots sold
8. DEGAS Edgar (1834-1917) $111,835,132 from 81 lots sold
9. FONTANA Lucio (1899-1968) $95,589,589 from 227 lots sold
10. KLEIN Yves (1928-1962) $91,868,098 from 59 lots sold

An introduction to the Art Market Trends report can be found here, with the full 37 page Pdf file of the report available to download here.