When it comes to buying art, the most common questions I get from my friends are always "How do I know whether a work of art is good?" or "I don't know anything about art, how do I know what to buy?" My answer to both questions, while simple, is the philosophy I learned early on when buying art. That is, buy whatever will make you happy, regardless of what anyone else thinks. In other words, whether it's a new rug, a flashy television on your wall, a piece of pottery, or an oil panting, buy something that you will come home to and be happy that you made that purchase.
Recently, a friend confided in me that he struggled to appreciate modern and contemporary art. This is easy to understand. Unlike a classical portrait or a landscape, it's often difficult to understand, much less explain to a house guest, the meaning behind a contemporary work of art. On the other hand, there are plenty of examples of modern art that would evoke a response along the lines of "You call that art? My five year-old could paint that" or "If that's art, then maybe I should become an artist." Here are just a couple of works that could elicit such a response:
The painting on the left is by Pablo Picasso and will likely sell at auction for $16-20 million. On the right is a work by Piet Mondrian worth $3-5 million. The value of works such as these is the subject of unending debates. Is it the artist's ability to see something that the rest of us cannot see and to communicate that vision to us? Is it the ability of the artist to create something new in an age where it has been said that everything that will be invented already has? Is it the ability to create something that is simply visually pleasing? Or is it an arbitratry value created by a group of very wealthy art collectors? Or is it none of the above? Which gets me back to my point -- buy art that you like, be that a landscape painting, a glass screw, or a metal bird's nest.
Masters and Emerging Artists
My (unsolicited and probably meritless) advice as a nascent gallery owner is to try to find something in an emerging artist that is reflective of that artist's unique vision, refined talents, and the ability to communicate that vision through those same talents. These concepts may sound nebulous, so some more practical advice -- find a young artist that exhibits work that calls mind an acknowledged master. As my gallery develops I plan to display emerging artists next to more accomplished ones in hopes of drawing such comparisons. Below is my first attempt at doing so.
Edward Hopper
Edward Hopper (1882-1967) was a prominent American painter, who was recently shown at the National Gallery in Washington, D.C. While most popularly known for his oil paintings, he was equally proficient as a watercolorist. In both his urban and rural scenes, his works reflected his personal vision of modern American life.
Early Sunday Morning
Ashley Lathe
The first artist to be shown at Pantone 278, Ashley Lathe, works mostly in watercolor. Many of his works involve seemingly ordinary buildings that, like Hopper, clearly reflect his view of contemporary life and our developing society. Compare Ash's "Wall 15" to Hopper's "Early Sunday Morning".
Wall 15
Hopper's ordered and geometrical designs stand in marked contrast to Ash's often bleeding watercolor brushstrokes, but the use of light, color, and shade reflect each artist's view of the urban landscape at the time of his rendering. Similarly, both artists seem interested in the American urban scene, its architecture, and our place among those things. While this is certainly no attempt to equate Ash's works with those of Hopper (a thought that would certainly turn Ash a bright shade of red), I think there are similarities worth noting that can give a potential purchaser some insight into the skill, talent, and vision behind Ash's works.
No comments:
Post a Comment