Naive Art--how a maniac makes a living ?

#1

Lately I’ve been approached to draw my thoughts among such a school of Art, NAive Art. Basically being a CG and Art enthusiast whose recently been redeiscovering his pen and paper i found this argument quiet intresting. How is it that for instance A guy can make millions by sketching out bizarre figures of his imagination while your neighbourhood toddler is found spontanously sketching out similar work however it is undoubtly considered scribbling?

We’ve all seen those paintings? ABsurd characthers, no sign of perspective, no reference to subtle info, not even colour co-ordination? sol for 20grand or much much more, My main argument is are all these respected millionare naive artists really worth there bill? or did they just fall into some marketing genius’s lap and expose the human need for temporary fullfilment for whats in vogue rather then what really matters?

#2

I agree. I think people are enthused by things that are different and interesting, but you need to draw the line between “wow that’s kind of cool” and “wow that’s kind of cool, I think it’s worth $80,000”. I mean, hanging a giant canvas of a solid color looks good in home decor, but should not be worth anymore money than the materials used to create it. Just my opinion.

#3

My son wasn’t quite 3 when he made this in painter. I’m obviously missing out on becoming fabulously weathy by pretending I created it myself as part of my “naive” phase…

D.

#4

Initially i was exposed to renaisance Art, full of subtle ideas that evoke ideas and concepts about society, so my subconcious may immediatley reject that respect that some people seem to have for Naive art.
HOwever one has to recognize what art means to him, is it just creativity? self expression?or a hybrid of both i might say. Still if one where to appreciate its creativity, i still dont beieve that it is worth that much when such absurd amounts of money could be of use in a much more positive manner. I mean how FUBAR does this world has to get till someone notices such waste?!!

#5

I too think its stupid how much money you get now days for art like that. Its like why go to school and deticate your life to learning the concepts of art when you can do abstract art and canvas splatter and be rich?

I guess its the same idea as heavy metal now days is missing the guitar solo the most advanced and technical part of guitar playing(as far as metal is concerned) and they just got rid of it.

#6

i would like to say that guitar solos are lame

#7

you guys frustrate me with your textbook ‘anyone can do modern art’ talk.

#8 
Think about it more carefully though, there is no waste. money that was in some rich business guys account now in a rich artists account. 

yes the guy buying it could have said i won't buy that, its a waste, yes. He could have spent it on vaccines for the 3rd world. 

but equally the artist recieving the money could then put the money to good use. 

explain where the waste part is, no money is being poured down the drain. The money still exists. the person buying the art may be wasting their money, but the money itself isnt being wasted, it still has the potential to be used in a postive manner and in fact the potential is possibly increased due to the fact it isnt in the hands of someone willing to waste $100,000 on a painting.
#9

You guys act like someone makes one crappy painting and then is set for life.

If you really looked into any of the artists that are conisdered part of the “art brut” “outsider” “self educated” or “naive” movements you’ll usually find an artist who has been passionately creating their own art for decades without any money making motives. Critics and collectors take notice of that passion, and prolific body of work, and then start giving them praise and money for it. It doesn’t matter how “well” you paint (or whatever), if you’ve been doing thousands of them for years and years, you just tend to develop a noticeable style.

It frustates me to read such an intolerant view of someone elses creative efforts on a forum of my artistic peers. I can’t stand the idea that there is some sort of “quality standard” to which artists must adhere. It stinks of fascism.

#10

That statement would work if the receiver is the red cross, but the receiver is not. We are talking about an artist here and we are talking about one that has the dishonesty of charging 100,000 for a painting.

#11

I think they are definitely not talking about that kind of artist. I respect that kind of artist and unfortunately that kind of artist are never the ones to receive true recognition or wealth.

#12

Art is neither a car, nor a monkey.

Discuss. :smiley:

#13

It frustates me to read such an intolerant view of someone elses creative efforts on a forum of my artistic peers. I can’t stand the idea that there is some sort of “quality standard” to which artists must adhere. It stinks of fascism.

I understand what your saying but I personally can not see the creative effort in canvas splatter truly cant see that. I mean i can do that what makes this artist different from me. But i understand what your saying i guess i dont know enough about art yet to form an opinion and for that im sorry.

i would like to say that guitar solos are lame

I respect your opinion but mine stays that music now days is much lower quality as far as skill goes.

#14

All art is monkey oriented. Some monkeys are car oriented. Therefore some cars are art.

Ergo, art is cars.

no, wait…

I’m in one of these art colleges and it’s driving me insane.:scream: I see william crozier cr*p being sold for €8,000 and good stuff being sold for next to nothing.

In that game, it’s ALL about who you know. That’s it.

#15

Helicopterr,

Well, perhaps they will eventually make money but, more than likely what drives them is not that, it’s that urge inside them that must be expressed, through art, through music, through any form of creative endeavor through which one can channel that spirit that was once in all of us and which gets lost for so many when the “realities of life” kick in and security, acquisitiveness and cynicism take it’s place.

For those who are “outraged,” keep in mind, Art is a business in which, as any good businessman knows, you sell the marketable commodity for whatever the market will bear.

Behind these “artists” you complain about there normally is some very savvy marketing plan in effect, either theirs or some agent’s.One clue that tells you a lot about them is that the work they are doing is often very much in step with the flavor of the minute.

So, unless you want to emulate them, rather than bitch about them, figure out how you can discover and express the soul of who you are to the best of your ability. You will receive value for your effort which no amount of money can take the place of, no matter what happens in the marketplace.

Having “success” be your first priority leaves very little energy for anything else.

We are talking about the difference between work and a job.

Robert
www.robertellisonimaging.com

#16

you are completely missing the point of what i said.

ill make it more simple.

rich guy has 100,000. he is not going to give it to the red cross

he buys a painting

now the artist has 100,000.

though he may not there is nothing to stop the artist doing good with it. The money isnt wasted, it is transferred.

You are confusing a person wasting their own money with actual wasting of money.

please take a moment to think about it.

#17

I totally agree with both of you about the currently realities but sadly it was not that way before.

#18

I’d never heard of William Cozier so I looked him up. You’re right, those are some damn ugly little paintings. (Though I liked thisone)
Still, I have to give the guy props for doing it for OVER 50 YEARS! Doesn’t that count for anything?

#19

Yes, but…how?

:argh:

#20

i like that painting.