There are some that think that if they just had the talent to be a great artist then they would automatically become rich overnight.  Apparently these folks have never heard the term “starving artist” or really taken a good look at the tragic and destitute lives of some of the most posthumously renowned and treasured artists in history.  It is difficult to understand how on earth a financially impoverished artist could even afford materials to create their art.  Artists with wage-earning jobs only creating their work part-time often end up putting what money they receive from sales back into sustaining their ability to continue their art projects.  That is at least a self-sustaining scenario and the art is still being created and enriching the world – if not the artist.  The point I am taking to task here is that financial security does not kick in automatically just from producing art.

The music is first, the busking is secondary. Arte en todas partes by Manuel Orero

As a part-time artist, writer, or musician with a full-time job there is the ability to pursue creative endeavors supported by the additional steady income. However, there is also a hugely negative factor within this arrangement. The time and energy put into earning income from a regular job not only detracts from someone’s creative efforts, it effectively stifles them.  Further damaging their artistic careers by having limited availability makes it difficult to attend a show or to set appointments with prospective clients.  Not having the flexibility of having an open schedule takes away any ability to compete with a full-time creative colleague. 

Many artists do not have time for marketing and promoting their work and may not even have found a particular niche that their work fits in.  This is a classic example of the creative mindset removed from one of business-oriented concepts and practices.  After all, when you have art to do, it is hard find time for other things – especially something as banal as business.  However it is a matter of one thing depending on the other for any creative who is serious about producing on a professional level.  Many do nurture the skills needed to help promote their presence in the community.  It is something that will take a lot of patience, as time and relationship-building are important in addition to learning marketing skills.  When necessary, and if they are able to afford to do so, artists will find agents who can work for them to aid in the business side of things.  These can be event coordinators, gallery or shop owners, webpage designers, SEO builders – the list goes on.  For the most part, if a means of promotion exists then there are those whose services can be hired to do it.  This is the investing in oneself portion, beyond materials and tools, which also highlights the point that making art is not about the money.  

An exhibition promotes an artist, and the artist presenting must invest in their event. Exhibition at The Avenue - London by Ben Heine

The money is a necessary element to keep the artwork producible and to bring it to the masses, but it is not where the art comes from.  In the business frame of mind profit is the ideal result – however ideals are subjective. 

The ultimate goal most people who create art tell me about is this: the feeling of having made something that touched someone.  Whether it made them change their perspective or simply reminds them of something that they care deeply for, being able to see another person have a connection to the painting, book, photo, song, drawing, etc.  -it is what being an artist is about.  If your work can produce such an emotional impression on another person, there is no actual dollar value you can put on that.  It is the appreciation element, that intangible but incredibly rewarding moment when understanding or empathy occurs as a reaction to an artwork. 

In a previous article I wrote about the Value of Art.  In effect, here I am also expanding upon that theme.  I wanted to write more to really emphasize that artists are not at all about what some perceive –greedy or money-driven. Artists make art simply because they CAN.  Some say it is a part of their nature and a compulsion towards creativity will keep them making art even if no one is looking at it, much less if they are making monetary profit.  The rarity and the status of collectible art and the inflated value of popular artists is not the rule.

Independently, being an artist is not all about the money; and even if your work ends up on the high end price range, there is no guarantee it will happen while you are still around to notice.  There are those who feed the notion that being an artist is all big money making and that is what is seen often in Hollywood or in Art Museums.  If you are doing what you love and you get to enjoy doing so, that is the first gift of making art.  The second is having recognition and connection with other people.  When someone pays an artist it is often just barely compensating for what went into the actual creation of the work, yet it is nudging them on and saying “Please continue.”  



© Rebecca H Knight, images are © their respective owners. All rights reserved

The Value of a Dollar, © Jonathan Blaustein, Courtesy: New Mexico Arts

How do you sort out what is the value of any piece of original art and what comparisons should be taken into consideration. The value of art is a matter that has many variables to consider. If art is measured in terms of money only then no price could be low enough for a buyer.  Since it is indeed a commodity item from the artist’s point of view, prices must be determined for reimbursement. 

A short-sighted response many have is to offer a seasoned artist a price comparable to that of a reproduction piece of similar style and size. Typical to basic economics, a supply-and-demand structure does exist.   Art that is a reproduction naturally has greater supply than an original which is contingent upon the authentic output of the artist.  An actual single person creating art does not have the capacity for duplication on the same level as a factory’s production whether the items are molded dolls, or printed copies of paintings, etc. The idea to underline here is that we cannot expect original art to be classified the same.  

Another line of thought regarding artistic value is to consider if a print or reproduction of an original demeans the worth of the real artwork made by the artist’s hand.  For instance, think for a moment if all the copied images of great art masterpieces have lessened their value.  Can we think less of the Mona Lisa just because many have taken the liberty to print her mysterious smile on postcards, pillows, mugs, t-shirts etc?  The original is still a one-of-a kind.


Here is a simplistic breakdown in terms of typical product manufacturing art or not: there has to be a way to cover costs, time and energy invested, and an appraisal of the level of skill applied. In shopping for art people usually set forth with an idea in mind as to a particular medium and style, possibly also thinking of a size and color as well.  In the decorative sense, art is mainly desired to serve a purpose specific to the space it is destined to adorn, and if it is not overly personal, there is a vast array of pre-made art ready for such shoppers. The intended meaning of the artwork you wish to acquire will greatly determine how much to budget for it. How specific the need for the art is can impact the cost one should expect to pay.

As an artist becomes popular and collectible, the demand factor grows.  Well-renowned artists enjoy the inflation of the value of their artworks based on the fact that people will purchase their pieces as a display of status.  In such cases, the supply provided by these artists becomes more limited. 

Art has to speak to your heart and if that happens then owning the piece has unlimited value.  The person owning it would then benefit through their connection to their piece of art as long as they own it. Passing the artwork from one family member to the next over generations would only increase its monetary value as well as its personal connection to their hearts as sentimental value.  

US$ 10,00 each. by Ivan B. Carmo

© Rebecca Knight

Every once in a while, a very young artist will emerge under an explosion of popularity and a general ‘wow’ factor. We as artists mumble and rub our feet in the dirt, not knowing exactly how to react against a child anomaly in the art world. I believe that we are simply confusing the associations attached to the artist in question. An artist is an artist, no matter their demographic. When artist’s submissions are juried for an exhibit, names are left at the door for the sake of fairness in adjudication. So when deciding the worth of work made by ‘genius child-prodigy’, a very objective stance must be taken in order to detach the associations you as a judge/viewer have with the artist.  Subjectivity is one of the largest foes and friends of art itself, so it is logical to assume that if it is necessary to judge an artist, each artist must be judged subjectively and individually.

Most recently, an artist of four years old is showing at a Tony Chelsea Gallery in NYC. Her name is Aelita Andre and she was first on the news at a tender two years old. She paints hyper-abstraction, some recognizable objects but mostly color swatches and splatters. Despite the rumors that her parents push her to paint in a certain way, it is also said that she is talented, that her art is a recognizable attribute to prove natural endowment.  In the subjectivity of art, can there be such a thing as a ‘natural ability’ to become famous? If this girl would have born to the same family 70 years in the past, would her work leave the refrigerator even if she tried to exhibit? Being a successful artist means being in the right place at the right time around the right people, and it seldom has to do with the art itself.  Artists at an adult age are painting similar pictures to her but selling them for thousands less because they were not in her situation. Does that make them less important to the movement they are contributing to? I would suppose it is up to us viewers to decide their place in history. Malcolm Gladwell said that it takes approximately 10,000 hours to become a master at a skill, which furthers the idea that it is impossible to be talented at art because it is something to be worked on and perfected. Aelita Andre is the currency of the art world, that is to say, her worth is based on the worth given to her and not her intrinsic value.

Aelita Andre and her parents in the studio

This article will cover the basic question about the nature of art, just what is it? Does art record beauty or truth? Does it imitate reality or does it express more than nature itself? Does it create fantasy? Does one need to be skilled to create art? 

Scene at an art gallery, how does this art speak to you?
The intent is to embody seasons with still-life presentation.

French artist Marcel Duchamp's "ready-made" series was neither the first nor the last time that supposed art would cause controversy and stir debate on what constitutes the criteria by which an object can be called "art." As this is but only one modest-length article I can only touch on the definition of art, and hopefully not oversimplify it.  Defining art is a subject that delves into the very heart of creativity, and to do so we will need to look back in history to see how much art has changed.

All through the centuries art includes human agency. After all keep in mind that the word art is related to artificial, which means produced by humans. From the days of cave-dwelling prehistoric people art has been an integral part of our lives. Though we may need art to enhance the enjoyment and meaning in our lives, we do not use it to survive physically. 


The 11-12th century definition of art according to Oxford English Dictionary is: "Skill at doing anything as a result of knowledge and practice". This means that the painter who embellished the Book of Kells would have the notion that an artist and craftsman were one and the same. It was not until the Age of Enlightenment, 1700-1800, where the attitude about art started to change. Art started to be considered as the use of skills to produce beauty. New standards of taste and elegance were introduced and the status of the artist was thus elevated.

Illustration from the Book of Kells, a 1200 year old book.

By the 19th century people started to embrace the idea that art was not just meant to please but to aspire towards perfection. While this was a clear reaffirmation of the importance of skill in the creation of beautiful works of art, ideals were also being established imbuing artists as prophetic conduits of new cultural concepts. This ideal is known as the Avant Garde movement in which the artist was considered a member of a sublime class with the power to shape the minds of people with their art. This added to the creative powers of artists to allow them their own answer to "What is art?" The artist was now allowed, even expected, to take liberties with established techniques, subjects and ideas of the role art plays. 

With the rise of democracy and the middle class art became accessible to more people and so those that had not much exposure before were learning of art and becoming patrons. Modernism in the later 19th century brought forth such movements as impressionism, expressionism and symbolism. The visual language of Modernism is a product of the industrial revolution. The urge to embrace the new realities and materials of the industrial age was a common urge of the masses and through literature, art and design these feelings were expressed. Much of the modernist movements have been attempts to adjust the mind of society at large to the industrial innovations taking place all around.

In keeping with human nature there is present then and now a resistance to change and a tendency towards nostalgia and tradition. In visual arts there is a taste for classic decorative details, realism in painting, and a general preference for the elaborate. This is a stark contrast with the modernist simplicity and retreat from realism. The emphasis on form also resulted in attention to the materials used, and the visual qualities they offer.

Since then many types of artistic expression previously deemed unconventional have entered into culture. This would explain why things are considered art even though artists' intentions are very different and materials used are without any discernible expectations or limitations. What motivates artists could be any of the following: to beautify, express, illustrate, mediate, persuade, record, re-define reality and redefine art. And still yet there are those that make it just because they feel the urge to make art and the process makes them happy, a sort of self-therapy.

Competing answers are typically given to the inquiry of "What is Art?", indeed, as the title of this article announces forthright it is a subjective matter. There is disunity in the classes of artworks not to mention the differing concepts of Universal versus Western traditions and institutions. Answering the question of what makes art art is always flawed and incomplete due to such factors. 

Still, there are definitive responses which stand on their own as earnest attempts to explain as much as possible and capture what unity that there is to capture. What do you think art is?  Was there something left out here in this article that you feel merits attention?  Please feel free to comment below, because this is a subjective inquiry that is good for us to keep talking about in the art community.

Art is as you choose to see it.

© Rebecca H Knight, images and media used are public domain or © their respective owners. All rights reserved.

Art History Renaissance to 20th Century

Inspiration to create tends to be random and is often all too ephemeral.  Without it there would be nothing new to take note of.  Art as we know it would cease to exist.  And so would originality.  Such rare and wonderful creativity should be celebrated. This is the concept upon which I am basing my blog.  

I have never blogged before; dabbled with an online journal years ago, yet that seemed to be just a long-form message board experience.  I have always had a love for words.  Generally I consider myself an ideas person and writing helps to hash out and share these ideas. There is also this tendency I have of craving insight, so I am always interested in the wonderful results of communication - knowledge, new ideas, and in exceptional cases, understanding. Art is pure expression and it inspires me to create articles to Underline the rare and wonderful creativity that is both product of and cause of Inspiration.  Originality is a must.

Artists of all kinds express so much.  And so I guess it is fair to say they inspire me to create articles celebrating their rare and wonderful creativity. I want to help keep the conversation about art going; while remembering the past also see how history is shaping the present. This is my feeling, and my mission as a writer to support and promote the creative people of today.

R Knight