Mind boggling proposal
 

The following is an email I recently received. It makes me sick to my stomach to entertain the idea that that this stuff actually goes on. However, I have to believe that since I get these kind of solicitations on a daily basis, there have to be some artists out there who are utilizing these services. I know there is a historic precedence for artists using assistants to do the grunge work, but this proposal still seems totally immoral and unethical to me.

Mind boggling is right. You get emails like that daily?

I feel exactly the way you do and I wonder how many of the artists whose work we think we know are indulging in the use of this sort of service -- hopefully none!

I'm not sure why I don't have this same negative feeling about artists of the past who had studios full of apprentices to execute their ideas, or with modern day glass artist Dale Chihuly who has teams of people doing the actual work and hasn't blown glass himself in decades. Maybe because they're not my competitiors......

Marvin,

That is unbelievable. Is there any indication as to where the email originated from? A university or another country, perhaps? I have seen other portrait artist websites based on a what appears to be a China sweatshop. But there is something so underhanded about this.

There is something about the phasing of the letter that sounds like this would be an act of fraud on the artist's part. They are not students or understudies. You are shipping it to them, they do all the work without any real knowledge of your technique, and then the original artist signs it. To a client who is paying large sums of money for your skill, that is more than just immoral, it sounds illegal. Especially if you were to work with a contract as I assume most people do.

I don't know where I read this but there are Chinese artists soliciting to do just this kind of work. Quite frightening if you ask me.

I have a nephew who worked as an assistant to a landscape artists, he laid out the artist's palette and then painted all the skies for the landscapes. I felt it was immoral what he was doing, but he did learn allot from the artist. Is this wrong? Where do you draw the line?

The above email originated in India. However, the bulk of the solicitations I receive come from China. I get these every single day. For what it's worth, in my contract I state that the painting is done entirely by me.

I think that portrait artists have to decide to what degree their work is to function as a commodity and to what degree it represents their soul. Unfortunately, when I see the bulk of what passes for "fine art" portraiture today, it's obvious that most choose the former. I see very little heart and soul, mostly superficial paint manipulation driven by a money-hungry ethic.

Maybe I'm too much the cynic, but I find a genuine lack of integrity in both the way business is conducted and paintings are made. Obviously this kind of environment creates a perfect breeding ground for all sorts of duplicitous behavior, like the email I originally cited above. It's recently been called to my attention that there is an artist out there using images of my work and claiming them as their own.

I had this sentiment recently echoed by a student in my, just completed, NYC painting workshop. She has been successfully painting for 25 years, has had numerous gallery shows, as well as a master's from Yale. She took my workshop to fill in many blanks. She said she looked at the websites of numerous portrait artists and found the work to be superficial and lacking in substance. She said she chose to study with me because she felt my work had authenticity.

Marvin,
Rubens, and others, employed assistants, but they were controlled by Rubens, not the other way around as I suspect your contacting people have in mind.

You have an ability that they don't have, why give it away?

I am sure that many "artists" out there are willing to sell out the little they have for nothing, so what.

It's easy to paint, but hard to make art.

I agree wholeheartedly with you Marvin. An artist in the truest sense puts her/his whole self into each piece of art. I have been working hard on a portrait of two kids. Their faces are coming along well, but from the get go I began to feel uncomfortable with the background choice and the composition. Finally decided to get out another canvas and begin again. My husband thought I was out of my mind, and truth be told I was very down about starting again.

But I rememberd what you say, Marvin, that one cannot get so attached to a beaufifully painted nose, or mouth, or shirt, that you cannot or will not recognize errors that hurt the overall painting. No ego, set it aside and begin again. Cuz it's not about ego as much as creating something you KNOW is your personal best. Amongst so many lessons I learned from you, this one is a biggie, Marvin! Given this philosophy is does seem sacrilegious to let another touch your canvas with paint unless you want two names on the canvas

Alan,
I think the paintings that Rubens did on his own are far superior to the ones done by his studio and worth far more. Perhaps the only exception were the one's painted by his little known apprentice named Anthony Van Dyke! ;-)

Patty,
I think it all comes down to purpose. For too many, IMO, art is about making money when it should be about making a difference.

I too started a painting over, with similar a reaction from my wife as you had from your husband. In my case, I trashed it after working on it for three months. I was very upset to have to begin anew but I really had no choice. The truth is, I should have started over two months earlier but I wasted all that time trying to convince myself I could "save it." You can see how it came out here: http://www.fineartportrait.com/sylvia_painting.html
In the end I definitely think it was worth it.

Marvin,
It helps a great deal to read that story and I LOVE Sylvia, it is one of my favorite paintings of yours. I have also listened to your sound advice and tell my clients that the portrait will be completed when it is completed. I am always suprised that they accept that so easily, at least so far in my short career!!!

These solicitations speak directly to the notion of paintings as a manufactured commodity that might be mass-produced for a wider market. Since practically all manufacture of consumer items has moved to the Far East, you can't fault those folks for soliciting prospects to keep their "factories" busy, I guess.

The problem (and this really is one) is in the perceptions and the lack of knowledge and taste among people of reasonable affluence who should be avid "consumers" of original artwork, but instead buy prints or knockoffs when they buy at all.

I find it very difficult to believe the output of these sweatshops is in actual competition with professional portrait painters any more than a Chevy Geo could compete with a Lamborghini or a Ferrari in that market niche.

No one who wants an original Mattleson would settle for an oriental "ripoff", and your integrity in stating that you do, indeed, do all of your own work should go without saying as part and parcel of your professional reputation - but with these proposals becoming so prevalent, no doubt it's a good idea to say so!

(I think I'll add that line to my contract.)

Marvin, I often receive similar letters, typically from China. I erased one just this morning or I'd go back and refresh my memory regarding exactly what they thought they were offering me. Normally I just read far enough to see what I've gotten and then hit the "bounce" or "delete" button. I imagine that any artist with a website gets these things, and occasionally someone must respond, one supposes, or else why would they send them out at all?

Having an apprentice in your workshop who helped with the cleaning of brushes and the preparation of canvases and eventually, most wonderful of days, the painting of the occasional backdrops during the period when this was common is very different from allowing some foreign entity to paint most of your picture for you off-site. Apprenticeships were once the only way a young and aspiring painter (like Van Dyke!) could learn the craft, so there was some justification for the practice. However, I wonder whether some (but obviously not all) of the great masters would be amused at our discussion, because they tended to view their work as a product which would put food on their table and silks on their backs, rather than as high expressions of art which merited their best efforts and reflected on their integrity. How much do we know of the psychology of those times?

I like the inclusion of that sentence in your contract and will probably add it to my own.

Leslie

Unfortunately I have heard of a gallery in NC that utilizes the China sweatshops for portraits. The difference is that the gallery is up front about it. The price is very low compared to our market.

I have only seen reproductions of their work and have no idea if the customers are satisfied. Its been almost 2 years since I learned of this and can not say if it is still a going commodity.

I theorize that at least it is promoting portraiture, just not fine art. And the market they are reaching is different than ours.

The idea of providing a portrait under the false pretenses is most disturbing and may be considered fraud depending on how the portrait is sold.

Any artist going down this path will lose in the long run. Contracting with a portrait artist, or any artist is a matter of trust.

Hi Marvin,

Great post. Scary that an artist with a reputation to uphold would even consider this sort of deceit. What is there to stop them from black mailing the artist in the future.

It's kind of like when an artist accepts accolades for the drawing in a portrait that has been projected from a photo and traced. Once again, accepting the benefits (monetary or awards) from work not performed.

I have received some pretty dicey emails of this sort in the past too. I just shrugged it off and deleted but maybe I should have thought of posting too. Thank you for sharing this with us and taking a stand that this sort of practice is unacceptable.

Always pleased to read through your posts.

Clayton

[QUOTE=John Reidy]Unfortunately I have heard of a gallery in NC that utilizes the China sweatshops for portraits. The difference is that the gallery is up front about it. The price is very low compared to our market. . . . I theorize that at least it is promoting portraiture, just not fine art./QUOTE]

Frankly I'm horrified to hear that any art gallery, whether or not it is up-front about it, is doing this kind of thing. When I was in my early 20s, portraiture was still considered commercial art. After putting 30+ years into trying to change that perception, it offends me to think that a gallery that sells fine art would want to downgrade it when there are so many artists who can paint a person and, in the process, create a work of art. So what if it costs more money? It's worth it. What if this gallery offered copies of the art they sold for much less money? Even if no one bought it, it would be an insult to the artists they represent.

Clayton I think this is a whole other issue which maybe deserves it's own thread. So basically you are saying that Vermeer and Ingres are frauds?

Alex,

I agree, it is quite disturbing. I only meant to point out that the gallery owner is not committing fraud. He is, though perpetuating poor substitutes for art.

It is our responsibility to educate the public on what makes for a truly good portrait and a piece of fine art.

I wish that every portrait exhibition could include the reasons why the paintings accepted or won. It just doesn't seem to be enough just to award prizes based on some secret that the public is unaware of (and sometimes me too).

I can see where a modern artist could make great use of these kinds of services. He could hire one offshore artist to come up with concepts, and a painting mill to paint the final works, then have the final paintings shipped directly to the gallery and put in a show

The theme of the exhibit would be that he had created a body of work that he himself has never seen, nor has any knowledge of its content. Very cutting edge.

He could make millions!

Note: This is my original idea, and I reserve the right to profit from it in the biggest possible way. If you steal my plan, you owe me money!

Jeff,
are you sure? I believe Jeff Coons already does it?

Jeff Coons comes up with his own ideas and compositions and his staff of artists manifest them. Mark Kostabi (http://www.kostabi.com/ ), on the other hand, hires people to do every aspect of the work from concept to signing the painting and is proud of the fact he has nothing at all to do with its production.

I saw a documentary where two people, who had just bought a painting of Kostabi's for 10s of thousands of dollars, thanked him , at his opening, professing gratitude for the work he created. He in turn told them that he had nothing at all to do with the painting and actually showed them great distain.