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

I find it interesting that a backlog of about 200 works by Damien Hirst can be news. He’s the closest thing we have to a Britney Spears in the art world, with the media looking for any excuse to publish a story on the man (I realize I do it too). All the art world needs now is some art celebrity sex tapes and some police mug shots of artists that have misbehaved. I would probably subscribe to an art gossip magazine if it was cheap.

Anyway, what was I talking about? I have the flu and I’m taking lots of evil tablets from big pharmaceutical companies, so sticking to the point can be challenging.

The Times Online has reported on Hirst’s “mountainous backlog” of more than 200 works by the artist and his production line sitting in the White Cube gallery in London.

“The items include 34 butterfly paintings dating back to 2005; six medicine cabinets with price tags of up to £2.5m and a batch of 25 fly and resin coated skulls. The “Hirst mountain” held by the White Cube gallery, and detailed in next month’s issue of The Art Newspaper, shows the challenges of selling mass-produced art.” Times Online

In a later Bloomberg report, White Cube’s Jay Jopling said that their stock level for Hirst was normal and the gallery is NOT sitting on a “mountain” of Hirst works.

Jopling said “The appetite for Damien’s art is such that we never have enough and I’m always keen to have as much work on consignment as possible. The market for Hirst was strong and suggestions to the contrary were based on redundant documents.”

It’ll be interesting to see how much more we hear of Damien Hirst as his big auction at Sotheby’s draws closer. I’ll be disappointed if it doesn’t make the 6 o’clock news.

Update: There’s an interesting Damien Hirst interview (video) with Tim Marlow on the Sotheby’s website here.
>> Damien Hirst News