I Can't Sell Any Art Because I'm not Dead

and the Media Are Idiots

Q: I'm sick and tired of so-called famous artists like Picasso, Warhol, Renoir, de Kooning, and Monet getting all the attention. They're dead. And if there's any attention left over, living artists who have been doing the same thing over and over again for decades get it. They're almost dead.

A gallery showed my art a recent international art fair and and dozens of other galleries showed the art of hundreds of other living talented contemporary artists, and the only art the media covered was by brand name artists like those mentioned above. I'm a talented artist and so are the others whose work was being shown. I sold one small piece and many other artists sold nothing.

So here are my questions. How do we educate the public about all the artists who are young, talented and dedicated to producing all kinds of wonderful art? How do we get the media to start paying attention to us instead of those same few names over and over again? How do we get art buyers to stop thinking about what they collect only in terms of money, investment, and boring brand-name artists? How do we convince more people to by more contemporary art by artists like us?

A: Being an artist is a tough job as you have just pointed out, but at the same time is similar in many ways to most other professions. For example, like famous artists, only top CEO's of major corporations garner media attention on any regular basis, while Bob, the owner of Bob's Triple-A Tool Store, gets little or no such attention. In spite of Bob's lack of media attention, though, he probably makes a decent living, and like Bob, plenty of artists have also figured out how to make decent livings creating art, both in and out of gallery settings, with little or no media attention.

When you use the word "media" in your email, you are most likely referring to mass media publications like major newspapers, magazines, television networks and/or major national and international fine arts publications. The nature of these mass media is that they cover topics that appeal to the masses, and not topics with only limited appeal. In the same way that their art news focuses only on the most famous artists, their sports news talks about the greatest athletes, music news highlights the best musicians, entertainment news is about the most talented actors and actresses, and literary news features the best-known writers. If the mass media reports news that only a few people want to read, then hardly anybody will read it, viewerships will decline, advertising revenues will dry up, and they'll go out of business.

You state that "so-called" famous artists get the lion's share of mass media attention to the detriment of all the talented younger artists out there. First of all, the artists you complain about are genuinely famous, not so-called famous. They started out as unknowns just like every other artist who has ever lived, and gradually became famous over periods of years or decades by producing great works of art. They deserve every ounce of media attention that they get. Never sell accomplished artists short like that whether they're well along in their careers, retired, or no longer alive.

Secondly, plenty of smaller specialized arts publications, online and otherwise, exist that focus more on the types of art and art scenes that you speak of. These publications introduce younger artists on a regular basis and provide content that educates the public on all kinds of levels. The facts of the art game are that if you're an early or mid-career artist, you'll typically appear in small or medium sized arts publications until you begin producing art that catches the attention of a broader audience and major players. In other words, you'll have to work your way up the ladder of success just like all successful artists have had to do before you.

Regarding art and money concerns among collectors, the great majority of people who buy art want to know that they're spending their money wisely. To illustrate this point, supposing an artist just out of art school prices his first completed painting at $100,000. He's never sold a work of art in his life; he has absolutely no resume or sales track record whatsoever, and zero experience in the art world. Obviously, no collector in his or her right mind is going to buy this artist's art. It's way, way, way overpriced.

Rather than complain about collectors being overly concerned about the financial ramifications of their art-buying decisions, which they have every right to be, make sure that your art is priced competitively with art by artists similar in stature and accomplishments to yourself. Should anyone ask, be able to substantiate your prices with tangible evidence that either you regularly sell art at comparable dollar amounts or art similar to yours regularly sells at comparable dollar amounts. That's how you overcome the reluctance of collectors to "invest" in your art and in you as an artist.

With media attention and financial considerations among collectors being what they are in the art world, young and struggling artists must take comfort in the fact that making art is not about making money; it's about making art. If you became an artist in order to make a lot of money and are now upset because you're not making enough of it as fast as you thought you would, then you're in the wrong profession and you'd better get out now. If, however, you became an artist in order to make art and you have the will and determination to continue making it until someone takes notice, then keep up the great work, and perhaps one day resentful artists will complain about your fame, fortune and excessive appearances in the mass media as well.