Some collectors and curators are always on the lookout for "outsider" artists. There is a large genre of art devoted to them. Most of the "discovered" outsiders are genuinely separate from the tradition of high art but some are simply trying to do naive looking stuff. In the best outsider art a particular formal appeal is noteworthy, as are a variety of novel materials and techniques. This sort of art has had a lasting influence on modernist art (which has always looked beyond the mainstream).
The good/bad aspect of outsider art is that most of it is made and sold very cheaply. That means that the materials often require major conservation and the artists are very easily exploited. Of many examples, I think of Joseph Yoakum, a Chicago resident, who was "discovered" in the late 1960s. He sold is work for 50 cents apiece or gave it away. Now one of his better drawings will fetch on average more than $10,000. These drawings were made one per day with ball-point pen on butcher paper and colored with show polish (he was a show-shine man when he began drawing -- as a daily prayer, he said -- at age 75. But these works require major paper conservation to keep them from crumbling. Some people collect outsider art just because it is so cheap at first and then they try to build the artist's career (usually the artist has no understanding of career, museums, shows, and the like) and cash in. The bewildered artist can then become famous and sought after, with the frequent result of being ruined creatively. Some are half-way outsiders, as was Grandma Moses, who became an astute artworld celebrity for her simple, child-like old timey paintings. WC --- On Fri, 10/17/08, Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: National Portrait Gallery > To: [email protected] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Friday, October 17, 2008, 8:51 AM > I've never been to the National Portrait Gallery -- but > I do know someone who > was selected to make a portrait for it - actually, several > of them. > > She had never sold a portrait before and only began making > them after she > qualified for social security. She never had a teacher, and > had no interest in > museums, so she was a complete outsider to anything like an > art tradition. > But she was not an outsider so far as the donor was > concerned - they had been > business associates - and I'm sure he got a very good > price. > > Of course miracles can happen, and it is always possible > that we might > recognize her work as an outstanding achievement. > > But if you have any interest in a concept of art education > or connoisseurship > - you might allow that the chances for that are slim, > and you might have to agree that the National Portrait > Gallery is not > currently cultivating the arts of portraiture. > > > > ********** > > > > > > Have you ever been there? If so, I can't imagine even > you making such a dumb > statement. If not, go, humbly, and wash a few cinders from > your eyes. > WC > > ____________________________________________________________ > Stuck in a dead end job?? Click to start living your dreams > by earning an > online degree. > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijmibpU2Z0m7ApsZ26xFSGMUq > rroY70cGgkLOSzgsSakSqog0/
