George Free wrote:
> >I contend that the most engaging art tends to be created when the
> >artist is working as closely as possible to a subsistance level, that is,
> >with a minimum of "imported" raw material as possible so that the need to
> >"export" (and be controlled by the market) is minimalized.
>
> Wouldn't control by the market be minimized most often when the artist has
> an independent income?
Absolutely, George!!! Been there, done that. I don't ever want to be in a
position again to sell my art at a minus zero hourly wage to pay the rent;
don't want to have to sell others' art at a discount to "collectors" who don't
even deserve to own it on their mawkish terms, yet the artist will go for it
because the artist needs to buy materials; don't want to be overly grateful to
the one dentist I find who will trade for art. Art made when one is worried,
or sick or unable to afford materials is generally NOT engaging. But, art
when one is singing the blues just because it's time to be blue, or raging
against the politicos or slammin' against injustice can be most emotionally
satisfying, to the artist and the viewer. However, if I wake up in the middle
of the night and want to vent via art, I want to have the materials I want to
have, be they procured at garage sales or discount art supply stores, or
wherever, and I want the independence of being able to support myself in art
and other areas of my life.
Best,
PK
>
