Why we should all be painting pictures of dogs

21 November 2008

Why we should all be painting pictures of dogs

Posted by Phil Illingworth on 8 April 2008 at 3:53pm in Discussions

It seems that I've been barking up the wrong tree. I have been chasing my tail trying to create work with a conscience, when all along I should have been painting puppies (no, titter ye not, sex is out).

I have just read an article (written by an "art market analyst, art critic and journalist") presumably aimed at those just starting to dip their toes in the murky waters of the art market. It starts off reasonably enough. He tells us that one of the most important factors we should consider (when investing in art) is the effect that the subject of an artwork can have on its desirability and value. Sound advice for an investor, you'd think.

No, Potential Investor, you may have bad taste - or at least your tastes and preferences may be in the minority. You need to know which subjects are the more and less popular before you make a purchase.

Sexually explicit nudity and graphic violence are out. Bugger, I like my Chapman Brothers stuff, not to mention Koons, Klimt, Warhol, and my Rembrandt etchings. The 'Guernica' will have to go, too, and I can't even think about 'The Martyrdom of St Agatha'.

So no sex or violence then. Another turn off, it seems, is artwork that contains overtly political, cultural or religious statements which may cause offence. I should think that everything I have ever done is going to offend someone, somewhere. I'm going to have to tell the people that collect my work, Banksy gets whitewashed over, the Rubens goes on the bonfire. A further recommendation is to stay away from anything overly obscure or bizarre. Sorry Damien, your work will never sell, mate.

To reinforce his argument, the author goes on to quote a survey by the Fine Art Trade Guild, apparently conducted to determine the best selling primary market subjects for paintings in the UK. He doesn't differentiate between primary and resale markets (surely a fairly fundamental difference for the investor?), nor is there the merest hint of irony:

The Top 10 Best Sellers

1. Traditional landscapes.
2. Local views.
3. Modern or semi-abstract landscapes.
4. Abstracts.
5. Dogs.
6. Figure studies (excluding nudes).
7. Seascapes, harbour, and beach scenes.
8. Wildlife.
9. Impressionistic landscapes.
10. Nudes.

The clear inference is that these are the subjects the investor should be buying and, by implication, what artists should be producing.

The last "particularly important point to keep in mind" is evidently that "most artists are known for producing artwork of a particular subject" so the recommendation is to invest in works that depict the subject that the artist is best known for. Sorry again, Damien - even if you do manage to sell the half-cow, the coloured dots are a no-no.

Surely the most successful investors are astute people who do their research. They study the market, they go to galleries, they go to graduate shows, they look for promising emerging artists. They learn to trust their own judgement and above all they know to take a few risks.

Tags: investor, sellers, art, best, investment

Attachments

cutout&keep.jpg, 362 KB

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by sophi on 9 April 2008 at 1:42am: hmmmmm, but did we ever really care what anyone else thinks we should draw and paint?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robin Portnoff on 9 April 2008 at 1:53am: Thanks for the Top 10 list. My future art career is now sorted.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by sophi on 9 April 2008 at 2:09pm: oh i was replying to Phil, Inga. not to you, so don't be offended. :)

sophi; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Hans van der Kamp on 12 April 2008 at 10:14am: Nice essay. I like the idea of dogs as a main theme. You can photograph them "as they are" without being offensive. :) However, if we all do so, within months we will have a social division between acceptable and not so acceptable dog art. Galleries and museums of course will profit most from the latter through publicity.

My animation of a bulldog (without artistic ambition) has been a smash hit for over a year now.

Find more videos like this on artreview.com
Bulldog Reading Dylan Thomas; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Nick Tong on 12 April 2008 at 11:26am: Fantastic write up and a great animation Hans; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Nexusix on 13 April 2008 at 6:24pm: "Sit Oden, we have to make some art" Awesome write up Phil, thanks.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tori Jones on 13 April 2008 at 9:13pm: Interesting article...it makes so much sense out of why I have been seeing so very many dog portrait painters. It feels like there's been an absolute boom.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tori Jones on 13 April 2008 at 9:14pm: It also reminds me of an article on forgery - it turns out all you need to turn a worthless antique landscape into a hot commodity is to add a kitten somewhere in the foreground.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Sorg on 13 May 2008 at 12:19pm: Hans' dog Dylan T is incredible, but Tori's statement, at fist I wasn't sure, was she–in fact–talking about your Bansky? Isn't it funny about art? Who are we listening to? That's the question.

I have a proposal: Ask 1,000 people if they "like art". I'm betting 98% will say "oh yes, I love art". And they're not lying, I just don't trust their judgment.

Rage against the flees BullDylan!; ▶ Reply to This