contemporary monkey

Finally, a reason to like a film by David Lynch, the American film writer and director.  In all of his films, the strangeness of people and their stories is magnetic, but in the end, the appreciation evaporates into common voyeurism.  Good fun watching mysterious characters do creepy things.  I always thought it was a bit inventive to the point that, the point was to invent odd people, and thus become odd yourself.  Sort of like Paris Hilton being famous for being famous.

David Lynch's new project, The Interview Project

Through a site called new-art.blogspot.com, I’ve learned of Lynch’s new endeavor called The Interview Project, which provides for better storytelling than any of his previous films.  The concept is pretty straight forward: get a camera, turn it on, ask people to sum up their lives so far.  The start line is the statistical hottest place in the USA: Needles, California.  That’s hot as in ambient temperature, not hot as in Michael Jackson popularity (-ness).  I haven’t any idea what the eventual journey is supposed to look like, but given its starting line, and the comments made from average folk, this could be a look back on just how America handled its pot of gold rush to anywhere-but-here on the old Route 66.  America’s elevator pitch, as they say in sales circles.

To Lynch, it appears just any old person will do as a subject, although so far it’s older white males.  Still, the comments could come from anybody with a past.  The writing, because there isn’t any, is better than anything from Hollywood.  The soul-exposing honesty revealed throughout makes for curious entertainment, not to mention a good dose of American tragedy in these days of slow death by General Motors.  Though, maybe it’s a human thing, not peculiar to any country.  America is, and has been the chemistry lab for The Next Big Thing, and travelers from around the world have attempted to make it large in the country’s 230 some odd years of existence.  These stories could be the tragedy of the human being to venture into the wild for understanding and personal purpose.  The scientist’s conclusion to an unsettling experiment.

The length of interviews is easily consumed - about five minutes in length.  Whatever you’re doing throughout the day, you’d have a difficult time finding anything better that delivers a refreshing outlook to life. You think you’ve got it bad, try listening to the stories of the other amoebae in the test tube.

http://interviewproject.davidlynch.com

More outrageousness from “Collecting Contemporary” by Adam Lindemann: a little game that galleries enjoy playing that involves some heavy handedness.  In the game of collecting, there’s usually an unwritten rule (although sometimes it’s actually written into a contract): when it comes time to sell a piece, the collector is obliged to give the gallery from which it was bought the first right of re-purchase before throwing it to the dogs at auction.  Galleries don’t like to see their stable of well-stocked artists find more money from auctions than if they just sold the art to another collector.  The fear is that the artist could just eliminate the gallery as an unnecessary middle man, and go straight to the auction house for a higher price.  Seems that the relationship between artist and gallery is this tenuous.  In fact, the British artist Damien Hirst performed this very act in September 2008 by going directly to auction - Sotheby’s - and surpassed the £62 million high estimate.  He’s only one artist (and the first), but the initial crack in the foundation has been scored.

I'm on me own now

The threat to a collector for not working with the gallery is very real.  If the gallery feels slighted, the collector’s name gets passed along to other galleries as someone who doesn’t deserve further sales.  For a limited supply of art, that’s a big thumping for the fawning collector.  Effectively, they’re black-balled, and it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s also illegal.

The venom of the gallery is understandable, but this is nothing new.  Real businesses operate with “unfaithful” customers all the time.  That’s why brand image is so important…and unique products and services.  Apple Computers know they may be selling to customers that could easily buy a PC - for less money even, but they don’t, because the product and service is deemed valuable than anything Microsoft could create.  The customer never feels a need to be permissive.

Finally, if a collector is obliged to approach the gallery first, doesn’t the gallery then have the responsibility to purchase the piece back if the auction price is lower than the original purchase price?  Why doesn’t it swing both ways?

Having access to artists because you say they’re important is not really a service.  At one point, middlemen do one of two things: they either make themselves a more valuable element in the equation, or they go away.

I’m reading a book called “Collecting Contemporary” at the moment, and it’s a rich source of the goings-on in the art industry.  Interviews with (mostly) collectors and dealers reveal the professional expectations of both, along with advice for new collectors in the contemporary world.  In many respects it’s filled with one-sided justifications of the various players in the market, but I’m finding it makes for great dramatic tension just the same.

After reading a few gallerists and dealers dish out advice for new collectors, I was left wondering if these same individuals are really necessary in the calculation of art appreciation.  If a collector is wealthy enough, and has very little confidence in their own desire for art, the argument could be made that a gallery or dealer would act as a “taste agent”.  Someone at the ready to provide a big dose of confidence.  The assumption, however, assumes that galleries have inside knowledge of what successful art looks like, and who the great artists of tomorrow will be.  If you’re like me, and you talk to your friends, they all say that most contemporary art is rubbish.  Someone in the gallery world is responsible for that large percentage of needless work, so why should galleries be believed?

Anyone who wishes to pursue art, however, can be just as good at it as any gallery, regardless of their art history background, especially given the vast amounts of online resources to any old contemporary monkey  Like you and me.  I reckon the most important trait of a gallery is simply their access to physical property for showing work.  Unless you’re someone with loads of money gone wasting, want to impress your friends at a dinner party in your Chelsea manor, and you really couldn’t be bothered making the whole art selection process,then maybe you need help.  For that reason you should just hire an expensive dealer to create a good collection for you.  Otherwise, just trust your instincts and dive in.