Today's installment of Living with Art focuses on galleries in NYC where you can find work by emerging artists at reasonable prices. It's not meant to be a comprehensive overview by any means - I'll just be talking about places I know about, artists I like, with a bit about my own gallery thrown in for good measure. Please chime in with your own resources in the comments thread.
There are lots of opportunities to buy art at reasonable prices, and I'll cover a variety of them in later installments, but buying the work of emerging artists is the way that's nearest and dearest to my heart.
It's money well spent and it has a direct impact on that artist's ability to continue to make new work, or to work less at their boring day job or even just to get some encouragement that they might be able to make a living doing what they love. It's patronage on a very direct level - when you buy work through a gallery that supports and shows new talent, you're supporting that specific artist and a business which is committed to showcasing emerging talent.
Showing new work has always been a central part of the program at jen bekman. It's an exciting opportunity for me to connect with new artists and new collectors, and I really enjoy both relationships. I've done a number of different types of shows and events to showcase emerging talent: each solo show that I've had at the gallery has been that particular artist's debut solo show in a NYC gallery; Pin Up shows offer work from dozens of artists all priced under a set amount (usually $600 or less), the showcases for winners of the Hey, Hot Shot competition are also priced affordably.
Here are a few other places which feature emerging artists:
Yancey Richardson shows work by many well-established (and pricier) photographers, but she also represents many talented artists who are relatively early on in their careers. Lisa Kereszi had a solo show there not long ago, and her photos are still quite affordable.
Mixed Greens is on a mission to entirely demystify the process of buying art. They have loads of inventory viewable online, interviews with collectors, and you can also search for art by price size or subject.
Foley Gallery is a newish space in Chelsea. Michael Foley, the founder was formerly a Director at Yancey Richardson. He's had a series of terrific shows by emerging artists like Bart Michiels.
Margaret Thatcher Projects represents emerging and mid-career artists in a variety of media. One of my favorites in William Steiger.
Pierogi Gallery in Williamsburg offers an enormous array of work via their Flat Files. From their site: "The Pierogi Flat Files began with the idea of making artwork available to a larger audience. It was first exhibited at Four Walls in Brooklyn, and consisted of 20 artist portfolios. Since that time curators, collectors, critics, dealers, and the general public have seen work from the file which has grown to include the work of over 700 artists."
So, there's a sampling for you. Again, please chime in with your own resources in the comments thread below!
Jen Bekman of Personism.
Mixed Greens is a great and innovative "art retailer" (in a good way), with a great site and true approachability.
Another route is attending annual shows like -scope (occurs in new york, miami, london, the hamptons) and Affordable Art (AAF)
I really believe in supporting your local artist. I've bought work that I've seen displayed in coffee shops and restaurants. I've taken the name of an artist that appeals to me and tracked them down via the web. I've bought from galleries. I've met artists at open studios and markets (this is important for the contemporary santos and indian potters). I find that buying from someone you've met adds to the appreciation of the art.
I've been buying art since I was an undergraduate. I've never regretted buying a piece of art. I've only regretted the pieces I didn't buy because I was being practical.
Bread and roses. Bread and roses.
For a lot of us, we've spent meany years hearing sad tales of the starving artist and every day I see friends scraping by. Please please please support emerging artists because we have families etc. who depend on us as well. It is an amazing honour to see work you've created hanging or living in someone's home. On behalf of all of us EA's, thanks for the support worldwide.
The barter system is also alive and well. We recently traded our old station wagon to an artist friend in exchange for a painting.
I would love to support emerging artists...unfortunately, I live in Los Angeles and don't really know where I can find good quality art pieces. I'm actually looking mainly for pop art...anyone have ideas? Maybe The Brewery?
adam--
Frequent poster, proud contest-worthy bathroom and kitchen owner, and Moroccan crashpadder Enrique is your go-to guy for West Coast art hook-ups.
Enrique.. we know you're out there... help this kind gentleman, please!
but, oy!, jb--
Line drawings/watercolors of unicorns? Isn't that how "starving artists" get a bad rap?
...and/or stay starving?!?
What if you have a child? Wouldn't a line drawing of a unicorn be appropriate?
Adam. Sorry I didn't check this thread until tonight. Just email me. I'd be happy to share some resources with you.
ebrown--
A child's room would be a great application for that piece, yes, and a great way to introduce "real" art ot a little one.
But if acquired through a gallery (and I think that is an Anne Hall piece, through jen bekman), it may be more than you want to spend on a kid's room accessory. To each his/her own, of course, especially when it comes to art...
I just think that specific piece is ripe for criticism since it's subject matter could be perceived as cliche (but since I don't know the intent of the piece/series, I may be way off base in my interpretation of it.)
I just don't think it's the best represenatation of how starving artists may get "unstarved."
I agree with you, Patrick. I think that piece may have been semi-groundbreaking around the time "The Virgin Suicides" came out, but now that whole ironic junior high thing is a little played out. I know that sounds harsh, and I apologize, but couldn't find a nicer way to say it.
(arghhh.. apologies to the grammar police for the errant apostrophe in "its"!)
A few quick things:
Art fairs are a terrific resource, and I'm working on a post about those for next week.
And Patrick, to each his/her own indeed!
The drawing that I posted is part of a series that Anne did where the images and captions were intentionally cliche and I've sold almost every piece in the series. The titles are all based on books that she found in the self-help section of her local bookshop, and the images were meant to be somewhat saccharine/ironic.
Sure, one could say that the whole thing is "over" and it's fine if you think of it that way. On the other hand, a lot of people who come through my gallery really love Anne's work and respond to it.
I have a wide array of work in my inventory, I don't expect everyone to love all of it. That would be boring.
A quote from Tibor Kalman comes to mind:
"By definition, when you make something no one hates. no one loves it... I am interested in imperfections, quirkiness,
insanity, unpredictability. That's what we really pay attention to anyway."
I think "cliche" and "intentionally cliche" is a fine line to walk, especially when introducing art to a newer audience.
But, like I said, without knowing the backstory, it's impossible to judge any work fairly (to a degree... I think some art needs to/can stand alone on the pure visual), and the self-help angle does indeed add the artist's intended irony to some degree.
And since "almost every piece sold" I guess that's all that matters, when you are in the business of being an artist selling art.
For the record, I don't hate it. I just think it runs the risk of preserving art/artist stereotypes, and presents "emerging artist" in a semi-juvenile light, to the untrained eye.
Jen. I really like your art topics and posted on the previous "Living with Art" thread. Something I noticed that a number of L.A. artists are doing is to issue limited-run giclee prints of some of their paintings. Maybe you could explore this topic for people who can't afford original art as a "gateway" for getting into the collecting world?
Patrick-
You actually put the apostrophe correctly in "it's". Where it wouldn't be correct is if it were being possessive, which seems counter-intuitive. It's not the first time that your initial gut instinct, in this case, was correct.
Actually in Patrick's third paragraph he did have an incorrect apostrophe, in exactly the situation you're describing.
joan--
yep, that's the one. (but thanks for the vote of confidence, Curtis!)
And go, Patrick, for being aware!
http://www.fineartadoption.net/