[NetBehaviour] [spectre] post-doc grant programme (blocked postings)

Joel Weishaus joelweishaus at gmail.com
Sun Sep 7 03:33:02 CEST 2014


Hi Isabel;

I'd rather have been a poor Van Gogh than a wealthy collector who never 
knew what it felt like to paint like that.
But that's me.

-Joel

On 9/6/2014 6:05 PM, isabel brison wrote:
> Oh, I agree it's sad, especially that Van Gogh didn't get to see any 
> of the bucketloads of money people are making off his work nowadays - 
> but he made his choices, and one can only hope he was happy with them.
>
> I wouldn't ask anyone to sacrifice their health and happiness for the 
> sake of making good art; Van Gogh's poverty certainly did nothing to 
> defeat capitalism. If we go on thinking it's somehow noble to work in 
> miserable conditions, the only thing that's going to happen - that 
> already happens - is the big guys at the top of the art food chain get 
> a lot of really cheap labour, and become filthy rich at our expense.
>
> That said, I have a day job to support my art habit, and wouldn't 
> think of giving it up :-)
>
>
> On 7 September 2014 10:22, Joel Weishaus <joelweishaus at gmail.com 
> <mailto:joelweishaus at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Isabel;
>
>     But isn't it sad, in view of the sacrifices past artists were
>     willing to make, at least when they were young, as with Picasso,
>     and many more. Or to risk remaining poor all their life, as with
>     Van Gogh, and many more.
>     I guess I'm still a romantic, having lived through the 60s. But
>     perhaps artists still need to make some sacrifices to save art
>     from the snarling beasts of capitalism. After all, artists are
>     given the divine madness of creativity. I don't expect anyone to
>     live the way I did. But it was a grand time of friendships and
>     bodhisattvas who appeared from nowhere to lend a helping hand. No
>     applications needed!
>
>     -Joel
>
>
>     On 9/6/2014 4:57 PM, isabel brison wrote:
>>     Hi Joel,
>>
>>     It's interesting you give Duchamp as an example, as I think with
>>     him the story could easily be put the other way round: the
>>     recognition he achieved and the ability to ingeniously support
>>     himself through his art - using the Large Glass for rent or
>>     paying his dentist with a hand painted cheque - allowed him to
>>     experiment, fool around at his leisure, and eventually come up
>>     with a body of work that is impossible to ingore in the extent of
>>     its influence over subsequent art practice, whether you love it
>>     or hate it.
>>
>>     On the other hand, I expect there will always be artists, as
>>     there will always be businesspeople everywhere, trying to give
>>     the market what it wants in order to make a profit, but that's
>>     really up to them - and I don't think starving them would make
>>     them better artists; they'd probably just give up and get a
>>     better paying job elsewhere :-)
>>
>>
>>     On 7 September 2014 08:59, Joel Weishaus <joelweishaus at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:joelweishaus at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Isabel;
>>
>>         You're right to call me on this.
>>
>>         What I had in mind is that awards (I mean by this "blue
>>         ribbons") tend to make some artists think that they can get
>>         away with whatever they make as long as they sign it. (Duchamp).
>>         I shouldn't have included grants. However, with rising
>>         prices, only the strongest, or maddest, artists will give the
>>         collectors what they don't want.
>>
>>         I would agree with you that "good artists don't have to eat,"
>>         if you add "so much, especially Americans."
>>
>>         Smiles to you,
>>         Joel
>>
>>
>>         On 9/6/2014 3:25 PM, isabel brison wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         >
>>>         > As for the canon, the best work that enters it is only
>>>         after the artist is dead and the dust has settled. So that
>>>         the artist-at-work isn't tainted by rising prices, grants or
>>>         prizes.
>>>
>>>         Good job artists don't need to eat, or we'd _really_ be in
>>>         trouble.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         N
>>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     NetBehaviour mailing list
>     NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org <mailto:NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
>     http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> http://isabelbrison.com
>
> http://tellthemachines.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20140906/02548552/attachment.htm>


More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list