Blog Archives

Q: How do you feel about donating your work to auctions?

Studio with work in progress

Studio with work in progress

A:  Generally, it depends on who is doing the asking.  If it’s an organization that has been supportive of my work, I am pleased to help with fundraising.  If the organization and I have never connnected before, their out-of-the-blue request sometimes feels disrespectful.  Artists invest decades, vast amounts of money, and plenty of blood, sweat, and tears to become the skilled creators that we are.  And a New York artist’s overhead is considerable.  I know of no artists who create their hard-fought work only to give it away. 

Under certain conditions, however, I will participate.  Here is my response to a recent donation request.  

Dear…

Thank you for contacting me.  Certainly your organization sounds worthwhile.

However, you may be unaware that artists may deduct ONLY the cost of materials when we give our work to auctions.  I suggest that you ask one of your supporters to buy a pastel painting and donate it next year (there is a one-year waiting period for collectors to take this tax deduction).  Then we have a win-win-win!  I get paid, the collector/donor gets to enjoy owning my beautiful work for a year AND take a tax deduction for the full amount that he/she paid for it.  Plus, your organization gets to sell my painting at next year’s auction.

Don’t you agree this is a better approach for everyone involved?

Sincerely…

 

Comments are welcome!   

  

   

Pearls from artists* # 298

Untitled c-print, 24" x 24" edition of 5

Untitled c-print, 24″ x 24″ edition of 5

*an ongoing series of quotations – mostly from artists, to artists – that offers wisdom, inspiration, and advice for the sometimes lonely road we are on.

Interviewer:  What do you think about the artist being supported by the state?

Parker:  Naturally, when penniless, I think it’s superb.  I think that the art of the country so immeasurably adds to its prestige that if you want to have writers and artists – persons who live precariously in our country – the state must help.  I do not think that any kind of artist thrives under charity, by which I mean one person or organization giving him money, here and there, this and that – that’s no good.  The difference between the state giving and the individual patron is that one is charity and one isn’t.  Charity is murder and you know it.  But I do think that if the government supports its artists, they need have no feeling of gratitude – the meanest and most sniveling attribute in the world – or baskets being brought to them, or apple polishing.  Working for the state, for Christ’s sake, are you grateful to your employers?  Let the state see what its artists are trying to do – like France and the Academie Francaise.  The artists are a part of their country and their country should recognize this, so both it and the artists can take pride in their efforts.  Now I mean that, my dear.      

Dorothy Parker in Women at Work:  Interviews From the Paris Review

Comments are welcome!

Pearls from artists* # 190

Working

Working

* an ongoing series of quotations – mostly from artists, to artists – that offers wisdom, inspiration, and advice for the sometimes lonely road we are on.

For  fifty years, I worked tirelessly, never looking up, interested in nothing but the organization of my own brain.  And the works that came had their significance – which was just as well.  Otherwise, I’d be a completely useless fellow.

Still, that’s not the point.  The point is, I was lucky enough to be able to do fifty years’ work, until I was sixty-five.  What happened was, I had to pay for it.  It comes around for everyone.  I’ve paid my dues!

Chatting with Henri Matisse:  The Lost 1941 Interview, Henri Matisse with Pierre Courthion, edited by Serge Guilbaut, translated by Chris Miller

Comments are welcome!

Pearls from artists* # 71

New York street

New York street

* an ongoing series of quotations – mostly from artists, to artists – that offers wisdom, inspiration, and advice for the sometimes lonely road we are on.

Artists are individuals willing to articulate in the face of flux and transformation.  And the successful artist finds new shapes for our present ambiguities and uncertainties.  The artist becomes the creator of the future through the violent act of articulation. I say violent because articulation is a forceful act.  It demands an aggressiveness and an ability to enter into the fray and translate that experience into expression.  In the articulation begins a new organization of the inherited landscape.

My good friend the writer Charles L. Mee, Jr. helped me to recognize the relationship between art and the way societies are structured.  He suggested that, as societies develop, it is the artists who articulate the necessary myths that embody our experience of life and provide parameters for ethics and values.  Every so often the inherited myths lose their value because they become too small and confined to contain the complexities of the ever-transforming and expanding societies. In that moment new myths are needed to encompass who we are becoming.  These new constructs do not eliminate anything already in the mix; rather, they include fresh influences and engender new formations.  The new mythologies always include ideas, cultures and people formerly excluded from the previous mythologies.  So, deduces Mee, the history of art is the history of inclusion. 

Ann Bogart in A Director Prepares:  Seven Essays on Art and Theater

Comments are welcome!