1:40 PM 12/30/2003
While this article might contain a couple new ideas, or restate old ideas in a new way, it is basically a recapitulation of the years gone before... primarily 2003... followed by my plan (however much of it may or may not actually come to pass) for 2004.
Numbers never tell the whole story where painting is concerned... but they can tell at least part of the story, so here are some numbers.
Between January 1996 when I began painting, and the end of 1999, I produced 370 pieces... paintings, sculptures, and drawings.
In 2000, I produced 40 pieces... in 2001, I produced 60 pieces... in 2002... 119 pieces, and in 2003... 403 pieces.
So, in 2003, I produced more work, by piece... than I did in my first four years painting, or in the next three years... 40% of my total output over an eight year period... by pieces... was produced in 2003.
What can this mean? Several things, that I am aware of:
In my pre-2000 years, my figures per year averaged around 90 pieces per year... but I counted a lot of pencil and charcoal drawings that weren't much to look at, but which were mighty important practice.
In 2000 -1, I had a high level of skill, but was focusing on doing what is still to this day, my most painstakingly, realistic and accurate work... so it took a lot of time per piece... but the pieces were pretty sharp.
Then, in 2002, I discovered eBay... and that I could actually find buyers for my work, so my production went up a little... but I was still working very slowly, caught in the rut of habit... how I had taught myself to paint. As 2002 progressed, I began to force myself to acquire a faster methods of drawing and painting, and also, reduced the size of my work, so that when my efforts failed, and had to be discarded, not so much time and materials would be lost... and because on eBay, people seem willing to pay around $35.00 for a painting, regardless of either size... or the amount of effort one puts into it. Besides... I was sort of sick of painting and drawing slowly... I felt like a clunk... I wanted to be able to turn out work in a fluid, freehand manner, and I was fed up with being just a little afraid of my brush... especially as I got closer to the end of a piece. Who wants to screw up a piece it took them 5 days to do... in the last 10 minutes? This is especially a problem on watercolours, and other non-erasable media.
The results of these 'wind sprints' were more impressive than I had anticipated... by the end of 2003... December... not only did I finish 67 pieces in a single month... more than I had completed in some entire years... but my painting had become something that I no longer had to worry or even think about, and I was much pleased, with the look and feel of my work. I've never been a juggler, but I suspect that what I had learned to do with a paintbrush or pencil, was the rough equivalent, of what a juggler learns, when moving from juggling two balls, to three... then four... then five... a difference in the way I work, which is not 'more of what I had before'... but a skill that in fact, I had had no mastery of whatsoever, before... or even a real understanding that such a skill existed. I think that the kind of painting that I am doing now, is qualitatively different, than the kind of paintings I was doing a year ago... and in a manner that will permit my future work to progress in ways that would not have been possible, if I had allowed my work to remain trapped under the 'glass ceiling' imposed by the careful, plodding method, that I had formerly employed.
Of course... there is also the small matter of my having crossed a line in terms of facility of production, that will permit me to earn a living selling my work... even on eBay... heh.
How important is this??? Well... you can decide for yourself, but as far as I'm concerned, it is impossible to become a professional painter (let alone an 'artist' despite the dubious meaning the word has in our modern times)... if you cannot eat, and provide yourself with shelter, clothing, and painting supplies.
Pursuing gallery representation seems a big waste of time to me... if there is any other means available, for me to sell my work. I'm not sure what the whole deal is on galleries and dealers, but from what I have experienced firsthand, and what I have read... second or third hand... it seems to me, that it is more difficult to achieve gallery representation to the extent where one can actually live off the proceeds... than it is to simply set up a website, and get down to the business of selling my work on eBay, and through other on-line resources.
Also, there is the matter of free-agency. I'm a little paranoid of having other people insinuate their power and influence into my life, business, finances, etc., any more deeply than absolutely necessary. Galleries, dealers, and the wealthy patrons they service, all represent the potential for abuse. How? I prefer to earn my money in a lot of very small pieces, as opposed to a very few big chunks. If I have a few hundred small clients, who purchase my work via my website and eBay, for something relatively close to what I would earn through a gallery after their 50% commission on sales, and whatever other fees they wind up sticking their artists with, like covering part of their advertising budget... and all of the time and expense I would have to go to, interviewing, preparing slides , etc., and jumping through hoops... then I am safer going the solo route, because the clients are mine, not the galleries, and each one only contributes a small amount to my overall income. If I piss someone off, and lose the income they represent, better for me that they represent less than 1% of my gross, and not 25% or 50% of my gross.
At the end of this article, I have included some dialogue covering this in greater detail. A lot, if not most of my ideas evolve in e-list discussion groups, which include a lot of diverse opinion... things which I probably never would have thought of, on my own. With the permission of the person on the other side of the dialogue, I figured it might be interesting to include it here... to show the idea-development process in action, instead of just showing the finished product, in a monologue.
Looking forward... to 2004, I expect to finish the job I started 8 years ago. By end of year, I anticipate I will be fully (if very modestly) self-supporting, through my work at the easel. For all practical intents and purposes, this is already a done deal... all I have to do, is more of what I am already doing... which is to push. I know enough about business to know that once a business has proven itself profitable, even at a low level... once you have your foot in the door... or even just a toe... all one has to do is keep pushing, and one slow inch at a time... the door will open.
This isn't magic... this isn't 'getting your big break', this isn't even a matter of being extraordinarily gifted, as a painter, artist, or whatever... this is simply a matter of doing business... acquiring customers one at a time, publishing articles one at a time, saving dollars one at a time, and staying the course, with the stubbornness of a mule, and the persistence of a pit bull.
I have read all the arguments against selling on a venue like eBay, and all the arguments in favour of following the 'traditional' course, of seeking gallery representation.
Heh. The King has no clothes.
Let me wish all my readers, hard work, and well-earned success.
The following excerpts are from two emails posted to the 'All_About_Art' Yahoo Group, hosted by Greg Dempsey, who is also the person I was conversing with. Let me mention once, that Greg's list is the Internet equivalent of a bordello in a lawless town in the Old West... definitely not a typical Fine Art List... and definitely not intended for younger, or more sensitive viewers. You must be over 18 years of age, to join. What makes the list interesting to me... is its craziness. It is the kind of place where the sacred and profane mix... and where no-one is entirely sure, which ingredients were sacred... and which profane. In other words... it is an interesting place. To get there from here.... click here .
Hello Greg,
Thursday, December 18, 2003, 4:59:20 AM, you wrote:
GD> I never approached my role as a gallery owner that way. Consequently
GD> I never once made a mistake that hurt an artist. I identify much more
GD> with artists than buyers.Hence my comment, that if you were the 'exception to the rule', you
were not engaging in the practices that constituted a 'rule', in most
upscale galleries.One thing I forgot to mention, was that there is a big difference
between galleries in places like South Haven Michigan (a smaller,
tourist-oriented town in SW Michigan), and Chicago's Gold coast/ River
North Gallery Districts. The galleries that are not positioned in the
'ArtWorld'... and hence, survive on a much less well-to-do buying
base, appear to me, to be much more 'artist friendly', and not caught
up in either the politics, or the 'tricky financial games', that the
big money players have become notorious for.GD> AS far as all the ArtAnonymous bullshit about galleries marking work
GD> up too much, who pays the gallery overhead, the employees, the
GD> workers comp, the insurance, the alarm systems, the fucking patrol if
GD> necessary? It don't come free, Robert. You had your own brick and
GD> mortar business. You know.Yeah, in fact, I know this well. I started my little
antiques/refinishing business out of a $350.00/ month storefront,
moved to a much more expensive industrial loft, and then purchased a
factory building in an industrial park, and at the time of my stroke,
had 9 people working for me, and all the headaches/bullshit that went
with it. As my overhead increased... my profit margin decreased.This experience is the basis for my current 'go it completely alone'
strategy. Employees were a huge pain in the ass... doing sloppy work,
resenting the 'boss' (me), resenting the clients who were paying the
bills, screwing off when I was not watching them. Also, the fees,
licenses, etc., were nutty... I had to have an inspection certificate
and pay a yearly fee for each of my compressors, my spray booth, my
garage door... some truly ridiculous stuff. Plus, my accountant was working
for himself... not me (same as I mentioned about gallery owners being, in
my last post), and therefore, he was doing my books in a manner that
suited him, and his business first, and me... his customer, second...
which is why I now study accounting, have speed links to the IRS
website, etc., and do everything myself, using MYOB accounting
software, and am 'full audit ready', at any given moment... my books
are so tight they squeak, and updated weekly, and closed as soon as
the bank statement arrives.GD> I was never hard to deal with, as far as artists are concerned.
GD> Competitive galleries and home office dealers, that's a different
GD> story.Yep. See my comments above.
GD> What I'm trying to say is I can tell you a lot of things you don't
GD> know about gallery marketing. But if the crossover ArtAnonymous
GD> members here who post anti-gallery vitriol on that list don't want to
GD> be confused with the truth, I won't bother.Tell away... I just love useful information, and in the year you have
known me (yep... it has been just a year, Greg, since you first
appeared on ArtAnonymous, and we ran into each other), you have
probably noticed that I am the kind of person who, if he identifies
something as a good idea that can benefit him, immediately seizes it,
and acts... and then finds out for real, if it will work for him, or
not, through the process of trial and error.GD> It's a big bad world, and brick and mortar sales are on the ascent
GD> percentage wise over internet sales, which are a small fraction of
GD> the art pie. If that fraction is one in which a shrewd self-marketeer
GD> like Robert can niche into and thrive in tough times, it's a
GD> testimony to his prodigious talents as a double threat artist/self-
GD> promoter.Just curious... where did you get this, and does the percentage
represent dollars spent, or pieces sold?The Internet art market does appear to be down, but I think that this
is a seasonal thing... I was selling better just prior to December
5... good enough to earn a living off eBay... when things tanked...
but this happens on eBay every year, in most markets, due to Christmas
shopping, I would guess. I am so familiar with the eBay market, that
last year and this year, I have set aside a nice pile of cash, just
for buying on eBay, beginning on about December 20, right on through
the New Year. Last year, I did so well buying during that period of
time, that I actually earned a profit, selling the same shit back,
over the spring and summer, roughly equal to the amount I would have
made selling my work in December, if the market hadn't tanked.It helps to be flexible, and know how to play zig-zag, when working
the Internet for bucks.GD> Why? Because the internet art market is down, so he's taking market
GD> share from other artists, no mean feat.I don't know about this... I'm not wired to think this way. To me, it
is like this... I'm the only person selling paintings signed
'-wittig', except for possibly a rare piece, going into the secondary
market. Therefore, if you want a '-wittig', you have to buy it from
wittig.If you don't care whose signature is on the painting, then even if you
purchase one of my pieces, I will not consider you to be in my client
base... my 'stable'...heh... if you will.Therefore, the concept of 'market share', is less significant to me,
than to a pure merchandiser. I see my clients... whether they see
themselves in this way or not... as being individuals who, by
purchasing my work, permit me to live, and continue my work in the
fine visual arts... patrons of a sort, but not rich, powerful patrons,
who might attempt to influence my work, with the power that their
money, in large lumps, possesses.I see my client base as wittig's answer to the grants that science
receives, to continue its research projects... but without the strings
that government attaches. My goal is to build and maintain a large
agglomeration of collectors, each buying 'small', with a steady stream
of people both entering and leaving the group, and a gradually
increasing few, who remain, as lifetime buyers. Once such a client
body is developed, and working, it will be extremely stable, because
there will be no single, overwhelmingly influential client, or dealer,
who can wreck the system.To me, this stability spells 'free agency', at the level of both cash
flow, and me being able to choose without undue external influence...
what I will paint next.GD> But everybody isn't Robert, with all due respects. I'm certainly not.
GD> I can understand Robert trashing galleries and gallery owners, but I
GD> would caution the rest to strive for gallery representation with all
GD> their best efforts. There's a shake out going on right now. Over
GD> half of the galleries in the US closed this year. This means the
GD> competition to get into galleries is tougher than ever, because
GD> formerly regionally known artists may have lost their galleries, and
GD> are using their name-brand power to get into the surviving galleries.
GD> This tends to push new artists, or artists not selling fast enough,
GD> out of the galleries.Ok... I will not oppose this statement at all... but as you have
already noticed, I have changed 'Subject' name of this post, and
instead of criticising your suggested methodology, I have laid out the
methodology that I am using (roughly), and say here, to anyone
reading... if you see something in the 'wittig method' you find
useful... steal it.....same as I encourage people visiting my
website to use any of my images or articles as the basis for their own
work, I encourage anyone who sees value they would like to exploit in
my marketing scheme (if that's what it can be called), to grab it and
run with it, and see if it can be adapted to their needs.The only thing I would ask in return (besides 10% of your gross
profits)... is that if you find something that works for you...
pass it along to others.If it doesn't work for you... share that with others, instead.
Knowledge is power.
Also, I am trashing the current system... not individuals. The system
is in need of an overhaul, as any system gradually becomes, when the
people who operate it, have become too entrenched in their
positions... same as the European 'salon' system was, about 100 years
ago.My current 'gallery strategy' is pretty bare bones, but it does
exist:I will not seek gallery representation, but if approached, I
will consider the proposition offered.At least to begin with, the gallery will have to purchase my work
outright, and then they will own it, and can see how they do selling
it, and if they like the deal, they can come back again, and
re-negotiate a second purchase, etc.This is the 'no-muss, no-fuss, no-bother' approach. If they can get
100 times more for the stuff than they paid me, good for them... I
will benefit in the long run anyway, as my work will then
be selling for a lot more somewhere else, and those sales will
eventually wind up in databases of art sales.At this point, though, the dealer then has a card to play... they can
tell me how well they are doing, and offer me an 'after sale
commission'... sharing the profits I have no entitlement to... and
then I am on the 'hot seat', having to decide whether I now trust the
dealer enough to do things like consign to them, sign some sort of
contract, etc.Of course... if the dealer just pockets the extra money... as is their
right... then I will just go along until eventually some other dealers
or savvy buyers get wind of me through the name '-wittig' on the
paintings, and track me down, and I grab up yet another dealer,
reseller, whatever, playing the margin between what I am selling my
work for, and what it can be sold for somewhere else.I see none of this as 'me being screwed'... because I am the fellow
signing '-wittig' to the work, and eventually... this will all get
back to me, and I will be the one to ultimately benefit, by having my
work well-placed. I don't mind paying the 'entry fee' in this manner,
because it permits things to proceed in what to me, is a more
efficient and sensible manner, than would be the case if I went from
gallery to gallery, seeking representation.Why? Because it is a 'marketing strategy' (just barely) that is
predicated entirely on the proposition that 'the work is worthy'. If
the work is worthy, on a free and wide-open venue like the Internet...
it will eventually rise to it's appropriate level of 'wothiness' (or
worth, in financial terms)... and if the work is not worthy... it will
fail.This is the one big catch, in the Wittig Marketing Plan... if the work
in question sucks, the plan doesn't work.... well... heh... actually
the plan works just fine... it is just that the work doesn't sell.I swiped a lot of this plan from Fonzy, in 'Happy Days'. In one
episode, The Fonz shows Ritchie how to bluff, in a fight situation.
Ritche tries running the bluff, but it doesn't work, and he gets his
ass kicked, so he goes back to The Fonz, and asks what he did wrong,
and Fonzie says something like, 'Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention, in
order for 'The Bluff' to work, the people you are using it on have to
have actually seen, or at least heard, of you kicking someone's ass in
the past.'In other words, if you can't paint well enough to lure buyers away
from other painters, on eBay, don't expect people to bid on your work,
and if you don't have a dedicated 'stable' of collectors, singing your
praises to the art dealers they happen to know, and directing them to
your website... don't hold your breath, waiting for it to happen due
to some random, unexplainable force of nature... like picking the
winning lottery ticket... unless auto-asphyxiation is your 'thing',
and gets you off.GD> But the fact remains: if any artist ever wants to sell a painting for
GD> $5000 or more, they better be in a gallery, or they have no grasp of
GD> the market.Heh! On the day that sell my first painting at or above $5,000.00 on
the Internet... I will email you personally, and let you know.Don't hold your breath, though... it may be a while
------------------------------------------------------------... but I have
no doubt in my mind, that the day will come.Hello Greg,
Thursday, December 18, 2003, 11:46:35 AM, you wrote:
GD> If you say all gallery owners but me are fucked, I won't argue with
GD> you. Let the rest defend their own sordid reputations. I never fucked
GD> anybody.Of course I'm not making such a generalisation... if I were, it would
be Turdem Absurdem.What I'm driving at (I think
)... is that the entire system needs an
overhaul, for two major reasons.First... there is an entrenched power structure, that has a vested
financial and emotional interest, in maintaining the status quo...
plus... yes... a lot of the players are corrupt, as is the case
wherever there is a concentration of power and money.These are 'human nature' issues, more than 'art issues'.
If a fellow opened up a gallery, and worked his ass of for decades,
supporting the artists whose work he loved, and selling it to a
clientele that he convinced into paying a lot of money per piece for
the work, then after, say... 30 years in business, he is going to have
a tough time breaking away from the course he has set, either
financially, or stylistically.Over time... several generations, at least, the connections between
MOMAs, schools that teach art, galleries and institutions/individuals
that sell art, and people who administer art-related grants... have
grown increasingly tighter, and more well established, to the extent
where the system... nicknamed 'ArtWorld'... is no longer an open
system... it operates in a vacuum of sorts, disconnected from the vast
majority of humanity.This does not mean that the rest of humanity stopped requiring 'art'
in its diet, in order to remain healthy, or that it stopped getting
its minimum daily required amount... it just stopped depending on the
'Fine Arts Communities' and 'ArtWorld', to fulfill its need.The same thing is happening in the 'Amerikan Medikal Establishment'...
people need doctors, and medicine, but in increasingly large numbers,
they simply cannot afford to pay what the AME demands, so they are
turning elsewhere... doctors from Mexico, here and practicing w/o a
proper license... Canadian pharmacies... books like Frankl's and
Chopra's, etc.In music, there has been a huge rebellion, in the form of Napster and
other file sharing schemes... plus, now, the greedy bastards at ASCAP
and BMI are running frantically from gin mill to gin mill, trying to
sue local gin mill owners and cover bands into paying up, every time an
old favourite tune is played... or at least so I have recently read
somewhere (can't remember).The computer software field is a little further along in the battle
between 'closed source' and 'open source' software, with Microsoft on
one side, and several million Open Source individuals, on the
other side of the debate.The human animal has certain needs... physical (as in medicine),
intellectual (as in software), and emotional (as in the arts)... and
whenever one of the institutions that humanity created (yeah...
humanity created these institutions... not just a select few
individuals, whether they choose to think so or not) to service one of
its needs fails in its task... humanity, which must carry on,
regardless... simply grows a 'scab' of sorts around the 'infected'
part... like the human body does around a deeply embedded sliver...
and carries on... creating a new means, to accomplish an end that is
basic to its survival.What is happening in the fine visual arts... as far as I can see... is
that once the painters and practitioners who were excluded for various
reasons from participation in 'ArtWorld' reached a 'tipping point' in
terms of numbers, and sheer ability, talent, creativity, energy,
etc... a New Movement emerged... small, dinky-assed storefronts, run
by painters who are ArtWorld rejects... bars and coffee houses,
operating on shoestring budgets, and moving every time an inspector
show up, from the health department, Internet, eBay, etc.The 'Real Game' is up, Greg, as far as I am concerned. This is purely
from a painter's perspective, so I won't faint if you don't see it
this way, but to me, art is an essential human pursuit, as basic to
our survival as heath care, as literature (which *is* art) as science,
as philosophy, and yeah... even (grudgingly)... religion.Galleries can't control it... rich fuckers can't control it... its not
about money, and as soon as it start to become too much about money,
it starts to become less, and less, and less... about art.This is why I disagreed with you... a year ago... when you and I were
engaged in our tiff over list ownership of Art Anonymous, and you said
that we... you and I... were competitors. I was looking at things from
a painter's, or possibly an artist's perspective... and you were
looking at them from a dealer's perspective... and we each had an
almost totally different set of goals and priorities, hence, I saw no
competition... or only very little competition, because you were going
after the apples in the fruit pile... while I, was grabbing for the
oranges.From where I'm standing, ArtWorld is, to the overall human condition,
as a splinter that is deeply imbedded in my hand, and already
isolated by tissue growth is, to the overall state of my body.ArtWorld can have its galleries, and its rich clientele, its glitzy
publications, MOMAs, Schools at the Art Institute, etc., etc., no
problemo. I suppose they service some need, for the small, monied
segment of humanity to which they cater... I'm not exactly sure what
it is though.I'm not interested in limiting the scope of my career to such a narrow
field. I'm a painter aspiring to contribute to the field of
fine visual arts... heh... whatever that means... for the benefit
of... not a few very wealthy patrons... not the great financial
benefit of my self (I need to eat, live and work, but I'm not much
interested in a fat, comfortable life).Even if I can sell some of my paintings for $5,000.00... I'm not going
to get all goofy and taken up with the money, and celebrity... at
least, I hope not. I'm too old, too skeptical, and have lived a
frugal, no-frills lifestyle too long, to be wowed by bucks... I know
that there is no true security in money... the coppers can come and
take it away in an instant.I know that where adulation is concerned, Charlie Chaplain was right
when Albert Einstein asked him... looking at the fans mobbing their
automobile... 'What does this mean?' and Chaplain answered, "Nothing".So it (life, art, painting, take your choice) isn't about money, and
it isn't about fame. It's about making an infinitesimally small,
hopefully positive contribution, to either someone, or the human condition in
general, prior to 'checkout time'....and then leaving as gracefully as humanly possible.