[Previous entry: "Sandro Chia in Pietrasanta, Italy"] [Next entry: "Back to Square One"]

08/15/2005: "Do You Have To Be Rich To Collect Art?"

I think that it's high time that I speak out about this.

There is such a strong perception out there that you have to be wealthy to collect art. Of course, being rich certainly helps and poor people who can barely put food on the table probably aren't thinking about their next art purchase.

The connection between wealth and art collecting is so tight that it'll probably never be unraveled. That's such a shame because ultimately the entire "artworld" suffers. The perception creates so many barriers. Living artists suffer because people who aren't rich, but who love art are often too intimidated to even walk into a gallery!

Why look at things that only "rich people" can afford? It's like dangling a carrot stick in front of your own face! Consequently, many people don't even see artists' work, which in turn, doesn't sell. Some struggling galleries often charge high prices (which only the rich can afford) to pay expenses and of course, make money. The perception that only rich people can afford art creates a very small target audience. Everyone has to make money, galleries included.

It's such a sad cycle. What's sadder is that this is happening during a time when contemporary art sales are hot! But guess what? In most cases, it's not the "Average Joe" who is buying art. However, if the "Average Joe" did buy art, even two paintings a year, that would send art sales through the roof! Artists and galleries wouldn't be able to keep up with the demand!

So, how can we get "Joe" to buy? Let's count the ways:
1. I think artists need to get better at promoting their own work. Let's face it folks, we're living in the age of self-promotion. If you don't get out there and promote your own product, who will? Galleries? Yes, but they can't sell everything all at once! Also, when you're showing your work, TRY to be warm and friendly! Dark and moody may work while you're working the canvas, but not when you're working potential buyers.
2. I think artists also need to get better at putting prices on their work and be willing to negotiate just a little. Most people are NOT going to spend even $500.00 on a painting, but perhaps they'll pay $250.00 for something else an artist may have. Artists can simultaneously create "high-end" works and more "affordable" works for people who love art, but aren't rich. Take a cue from designers like Todd Oldham. Again, let's face it, there are too many other things out there competing for "Average Joe's" money. Ipods, cellphones, laptops and flatscreen televisions are mighty tempting!
3. The artworld needs to open up. It can be very insular and snobbish. This keeps MOST potential buyers away. The last thing someone wants is to be snubbed in a gallery after mustering up the courage to visit in the first place! Trust me on this one.
4. People can only buy what they SEE. Visual connection is the key element of desire. I can only want something if I've seen it first! We need to get art on display EVERYWHERE. Galleries, art fairs and websites cannot do it alone. People should be able to see the work of living artists not only in galleries, coffee shops and bookstores, but also in restaurants, hotels, airports, sports arenas, government buildings, hospitals, music halls, public cafeterias, train stations, MALLS ... places where captive audiences gather. Place where REAL people gather. I can only want it if I've seen it first. Then, people would say, "Hey, look at that! I must have it!"

Could this all work? Maybe, maybe not. Isn't it worth a try?

Whenever I tell people that I collect art, I usually get the same response. You must be rich! Or, "How much money do you make?"

We've got to change that, people. There's too much living art to be sold to far too many "Average Joes" who just need a little encouragement. Let's get creative.

MICHAEL CORBIN IS A WRITER AND AVID ART COLLECTOR
I think that it's high time that I speak out about this.

Replies: 14 Comments

on Wednesday, August 24th, Joachim Greiling said

My experience as an owner of a small Art Gallery in a remote area is that: keep it real with the prices, don't try to sell yourself, get your partner to do it, but be around for questions. Just my two cents. If you break the barrier for people to come to your place, they tend to buy as well. Well priced original art is a very good present. i live in a predominantely poor, rural, former coal mining area (north of England) but we have the highest per head ratio of purchasors of original art. go figure.

on Friday, August 19th, Brad Michael Moore said

I'm an artist. I buy art from other artists. I trade my art, and the art of others, to obtain more art. I sell the art I buy to pay off emergency medical bills I sometimes get - being one the 50 million uninsured, or uninsurable people in America. People will more likely buy your own art if you are with it in a venue they visit. The very rich mostly allow "others" to buy their art - at least until they feel confident enough, and smart enough, to venture on their own... When that happens - they still go to the most reputable galleries or best known Art Fairs & Exhibits in the world - like the Venice Biennial etc. Do what you can - don't tear yourself up over it though - life is still our greatest experience while your health is with you - the rest is what you can make of it...

on Wednesday, August 17th, Miguel Angel Avila said

Always a pleasure Mr. Corbin.
By the way, do you have a personal website where I can read all your comments on art?

Thanks,

on Tuesday, August 16th, A Rook said

Screw art! Play Chess!

http://sji.chessclub.com/sji/index.html

on Tuesday, August 16th, jose said

Michael, thanks again for a thought-provoking blog with enough things to agree and disagree with and prompting responses that remain above the waistline [so far] which only comes to prove that the topic touches most of us in an undeniable way.

my experience is that keeping your prices within reason - affordable - and diversifying the venues [as long as you maintain high quality presentation of your work] is a way to broaden your audience and stay in control of your career. As was said in a response below, the internet is important, but it isn't everything and we shouldn't become too dependent on it. it is a tool that should be used in conjunction with many other tools many of us still have to bring ourselves to learn and do ourselves, instead of delegating matters to others. Apart from public spaces where the artist should make attempts to intervene on their own initiative, art galleries will always be needed and the artist must learn to work with them in new ways [and galleries should learn and accept to work with artists in a different way]. If given a chance, people actually like to talk to artists but they shy away from the experience because of certain regrettable attitudes. Many galleries cultivate this ‘sacred-temple’ ambiance simply out of fear – fear of being confronted with undesired public, lest the intruder be present when some socialite sees fit to pop in for a chat. Let us not get carried away, socialites and potential collectors are welcome, but so too is ‘average joe’… he too can help to spread the word, he too might even surprise you one day and acquire one of your works.

All too often the artist believes his work happens and ends in the studio. He could not be bothered with all the mundane complications that go on beyond the studio once he has agreed to let the work go on show. I happen to believe that the most important stage actually happens when the show is on its way and that a key part of my job is to be present every single day that the venue is open to the public… and I don’t care if by parting with 50% of possible profits I have signified to the gallery that it should handle that aspect – I will be there nevertheless to meet every single visitor and show my disposition to communicate if they so feel inclined. It makes a difference (and more than just financialy!)

on Tuesday, August 16th, Paul said

Michael,a good blog,perceptions about art and people,something I have also been thinking about recently,nameley that,although one can say,one doesnt have to be rich to be either into art or to buy art,yes thats true,
but nevertheless art is a rich mans game,its polluted with money,also with the things that money can buy,or the culture of money,
lets face it,'the people'couldnt give a damn for art,dont even care about it,because one has to be of a certain educational level,to appreciate art,and to understand it,
of course one doesnt need to be rich to be like this,but its not long before money hits you smack square in the face,especially if one is an artist,if not the perception is of art = money,at least to buy art ,one must have disposable income,
its all relative I suppose,
many educated people could buy art,but they prefer to buy other things like fridges or holidays,
Although who are all those people who wait in line at museums to see shows?My guess is all middle class for the most part,educated, cultured,art really is a bourgeoisie thing,and artists if they are left wingers are always going to have problems with it.

on Monday, August 15th, Danielle Politi said

P.S. Please keep speaking out like this--- Me Loves it!

on Monday, August 15th, Danielle Politi said

ha ha ha ha I Love ANYONE who is calling the "ARTWORLD" snobbish---cause IT ISssssss and in my world snobish equatessss to boringggggggg ha ha ha wake me when you are done...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

on Monday, August 15th, Andrew said

Hyacinthe, if you mention your connection to Marcel Duchamp one more time, I think I'm going to throw up. Michael, you say that artists have to be seen, and imply that they have to construct an image that is not neccesarily true to themselves.(warm and friendly). As A WRITER AND AVID ART COLLECTOR, being familiar with the way these blogs work, I assume that's something that you add onto your own blog and then make it look like it was written by someone else by using the third person. That is certainly constructing a persona more likely to succeed, and your habit of never responding to comments goes along with that well. So you're telling artists to construct a persona more likely to succeed, as you do. I agree with that. The perception to a buyer is more important than the reality. But...in the Fabulous Baker Brothers, which brother would you rather be? If you spend whole nights sipping whiskey in a soulfull bar laying out your emotions on a keyboard, can you then go out during the day and change personalities so you can sell yourself? I imagine there are people who can do that, but I'm not sure I'd want their work on my wall. There's something about the purity of raw, unadulterated emotion that's attractive to me. ANDREW WIELAWSKI IS A COLLECTOR, TOO.

on Monday, August 15th, gabe Langholtz said

I think one of the current issues we artists are going through is the majority of rich folks probably aren't shopping for art on the Internet. It makes for less of a story when boasting. It's not quite pretentious enough to discuss over martinis. Those who don't have money are most likely not exposed to art culture and the current art scene. They don't know much beyond the old master's works they studied for 20 minutes in school. This is what they recognize art to be, and this is where it ends for most of them. They don't necessarily discuss art or care much about it, as long as it's recognizable and looks good enough tacked to a wall or cheaply framed.

on Monday, August 15th, Barney Davey said

Michael, Your passion is obvious and infectious. As you say, art can't be sold unless it's seen. Likewise the way art is sold can't be changed until there is passionate and intelligent dialog about how to change it. Your blog here is a good start.

The PPFA (Professional Picture Framers Association) commissioned a study a few years ago and found only 7% of the US population had ever ordered a custom made frame. Certainly, the percentage of art buyers has to correlate to that low figure. Move the dial a fraction of a percent and it would lift the entire art industry.

The problem comes in trying to mobilize a fragmented, sometimes divisive, industry that is comprised of individuals (artists) and privately-held companies (galleries) and bureaucracies (museums)that lack means and motivation to figure out common goal or devise a strategy to lift interest in buying art.

Determined efforts by artists and galleries can help. But tipping points happen more often a macro scale. Television and popular culture can cause tidal waves from ripples. Case in point, in the 1980s when the Cosby family visited an art gallery that specialized in African-American art, the result was an explosion of interest for the genre. The vintage poster on the walls of the "Friends" set helped fuel the popularity of Vintage Posters.

You mention competition for art from iPods and other consumer goodies. With the promise of convergence of technology becoming more reality every day, I could imagine art being displayed on cell phones, iPods, home theaters and other places to give it higher recognition.

So, if the public can be made aware that buying art is affordable and thought of as "cool", a trend that could last for years or generations could be established. Anybody have ideas?

on Monday, August 15th, Hyacinthe Baron said

Interesting tack. In the long ago days when art was something everyone wanted for their home and had the money to buy originals it was important to be part of as many outdoor art shows as possible. My god, I met Marcel Duchamp on the sidewalk at the Greenwich Village outdoor show, or shall I say, he discovered and mentored me. I met my first art dealer at that show. He admired my paintings and asked if he could buy all of them! All of them? All three? "Yes, everything you paint, I will buy. And he did and sold them in beautiful expensive frames and they ended up in major expensive furniture stores and department store art galleries (big in those days in the 70's) and sold for very expensive prices and now it is 35 years later and the people who purchased those paintings are contacting me to tell me how much they love my work and their children...and on and on.
Here is the crux...I reached out by putting myself into as many shows as possible both in New York and later in California, even was one of the founders of the Sawdust Festival in Laguna Beach where I also had my own gallery.
NOW IT IS A DIFFERENT world and artists must, I say must, put themselves out there via the internet to reach and dialogue with the people who want to buy art....they will find you if they like what they see...

They will buy if they want to....

You make sure you place yourself on the web and you will be seen and contacted and sell.

on Monday, August 15th, Missy Graham said

Thanks for speaking out Michael. I totally agree ! I have been doing what I can as an artist to change "average joes" attitude about the snobby artworld and get them more involved in artistic processes and excited about collecting art. It will take time, but I am definitely seeing more young collectors spawning and middle income people turning towards investing in art.

on Monday, August 15th, John Powell said

Yes Michael:Spit it out to them,one doesn't have to be RICH to buy Art.Continue to write it,let it known.As an artist, i have the same experience too.

Keep thinking,