The Art Assembly Line
By STAN SESSER
Alexander Gorlizki is an up-and-coming artist, known for
paintings that superimpose fanciful images over traditional Indian designs. His
work has been displayed at the Victoria & Albert Museum in London, the
Denver Art Museum and Toronto's Royal Ontario Museum, among others, and sells
for up to $10,000.
Mr. Gorlizki lives in New York City. The paintings are done
by seven artists who work for him in Jaipur, India. "I prefer not to be
involved in actually painting," says Mr. Gorlizki, who adds that it would
take him 20 years to develop the skills of his chief Indian painter, Riyaz
Uddin. "It liberates me not being encumbered by the technical
proficiency," he says.
It's a phenomenon that's rarely discussed in the art world:
The new work on a gallery wall wasn't necessarily painted by the artist who
signed it. Some well-known artists, such as Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons, openly
employ small armies of assistants to do their paintings and sculptures. Others
hire help more quietly.
Art-market insiders say soaring prices and demand for
contemporary art is spurring the use of apprentices by more artists. The art
world is divided on the practice: While some collectors and dealers put a
premium on paintings and sculptures executed by an artist's own hand, others
say that assistants are a necessity in the contemporary market.
"An artist has a choice to make," says Mark Moore,
owner of Mark Moore Gallery in Santa Monica, Calif. "They either hire
assistants or they risk not being able to meet their obligations to their
dealers. Then the art market, which is fickle and sensitive, gets the
impression that the artist has disappeared from the art world."
Mr. Koons says he has 150 people on his payroll and that he
himself never wields a paintbrush. "If I had to be doing this myself, I
wouldn't even be able to finish one painting a year," he says. Every year
his studio averages 10 paintings and 10 sculptures. In the last four years, six
of his works offered at auction have sold for prices between $11 million and
$25 million each.
"More and more, [using assistants] is becoming common
practice, partly because artists want to keep up with demand and partly because
it's just more widely accepted now," says Adam Sheffer, a partner at New
York gallery Cheim & Read. He says that five of the 30 artists represented
by his gallery use studio assistants, including conceptual artist Ghada Amer,
known for stitching figures and words across canvases and furniture, and
photographer Jack Pierson, who uses found objects in his work. The fact that
they use assistants is immediately disclosed by the gallery if a collector
asks, Mr. Sheffer says, and "hasn't affected the marketability of their
work one bit."
For some artists, hiring assistants can be a liability.
Earlier this year, Pace, a major New York gallery, turned down several
sculptures by 84-year-old John Chamberlain, because they were made by a Belgian
fabricator under Mr. Chamberlain's supervision, rather than by the sculptor
himself. Mr. Chamberlain, whose metal car parts twisted into abstract bundles
often sell for more than $1 million, switched galleries.
While many sculptors rely on outsiders to fabricate their
works, Mr. Chamberlain had built his career, until age interfered, on twisting
and combining metal pieces with his own hands. Mr. Chamberlain says the
assistant did only as he instructed, so he maintained creative control at all
times. His new gallery, Gagosian, notes that the Belgian fabricators are now
working in his studio as his assistants.
Collectors often expect the use of assistants in fields like
conceptual and video art, where the idea, rather than the execution, is key to
the work's value, Mr. Sheffer says. For painters, it's a trickier proposition.
"All the painters in our gallery paint their works from beginning to
end—Pat Steir, Jonathan Lasker—and I think their collectors like the notion
that every ounce of paint on their works was brushed on by the artists alone.
It matters," he says.
Beth Rudin DeWoody, a major Florida collector of
contemporary art, agrees. "Part of the reason I like to buy drawings is
that they're usually done by the artist alone," she says. "I know
that even younger artists use assistants now. I understand they need help if
the work is complicated, but the truth is I really cherish things more if the
artists made the work by themselves." She says she never asks whether an
artist had assistance when she purchases a work.
For Michael Hort and his wife Susan, who collect
contemporary art in New York, the use of assistants is a deal-breaker. "We
like to see the artist's hand in the work we buy, though we don't always know
for sure that that's what we're getting," he says. Mr. Hort says he values
the tiny imperfections in an artist's brushstrokes, and when he notices that
the work is looking "too perfect," he suspects an assistant is
involved. At that point, the Horts walk away. He recalls one painter who took
Mr. Hort and his wife to lunch while assistants labored away in his studio. The
Horts declined to buy anything from him.
For centuries, the use of assistants and apprentices was
standard in the art world. Michelangelo, Rembrandt and Rubens relied heavily on
the assistants in their studios. With the rise of the Impressionists, however,
the idea of a studio practice, which maximizes incomes by using assistants,
fell into disfavor. Artists were supposed to be pouring out their personal
visions onto the canvas—not instructing employees on how to do it.
By the time Pop art came into fashion in the mid-20th
century and Andy Warhol began cranking out silkscreens and lithographs with the
help of workers at his well-publicized Factory, opinion began to swing back the
other way. "The value of a work of art is not invested in the hand that
made it, but in the intention and the realization," says Robert Storr,
dean of Yale University's School of Art.
Adam Lindemann, who collects works by Mr. Koons and Swiss
installation artist Urs Fischer, doesn't object to the use of assistants at
all. An artist like Mr. Hirst or Mr. Koons is "designing the work not
executing it, in the way an architect designs a building but doesn't
necessarily lay the bricks," he says.
There were no raised eyebrows last year when the
Albright-Knox Art Gallery, a museum in Buffalo, N.Y., dedicated a 2,200 square
foot "scribble drawing" by Sol LeWitt. The drawing was started last
August, three years after Mr. LeWitt's death. Sixteen artists, including five
from Mr. LeWitt's studio, did the work; the other 11 were artists and art
students recruited by the museum. "It was not about Sol's hand," says
John Hogan, who had been an assistant to Mr. LeWitt and worked on the
Albright-Knox drawing. "It was about the thought processes in creating the
work. He worked closely with us, so we knew what his intentions were."
Mr. LeWitt had designed the drawing
just before his death in 2007. "For all of Sol's wall drawings," says
Mr. Hogan, "there's a blueprint, a diagram of what the drawing is supposed
to be, the same way an architect does a blueprint. He did the original diagram
on paper and then formalized it to scale, since he knew exactly how big the
walls were going to be." (The museum's web site notes that the painting
was done by other people following the artist's detailed instructions.)
Angela de la Cruz suffered a stroke five years ago and can
no longer paint. That didn't keep her from being nominated for the prestigious
Turner Prize last year, for her brightly colored canvases—now painted entirely
by assistants—which are twisted and contorted by their broken wooden frames.
"It's all about trust," says Ms. de la Cruz. "I give them
instructions and they get on with it. It's about them understanding my language
and my practice. The assistants do what I would do myself."
With a Little Help From Their
Friends
The 46-year-old Ms. de la Cruz says
that she first communicates her ideas by email to her assistants—she employs
three or four, depending on the amount of work, plus a studio manager—and then
talks directly to them, "which sometimes can be complicated as I have a
speech impediment."
There's no uniform job description
for an artist's assistant. Some work a day or two a week for several months,
others are employed full-time for years. While pay is rarely high—former
assistants say $20 to $25 an hour is typical—some get medical insurance and
other benefits. A spokeswoman for Mr. Koons's studio says that his assistants
are provided with health insurance, for instance.
Some former assistants, now well established as artists,
decline to have assistants of their own. Ben Weiner, who worked for a year for
Mr. Koons in 2003, says he won't use assistants even though the gallery that
represents him is clamoring for more of his art to satisfy a backlog of
potential buyers. "I don't think there's anyone who could do my painting
as well as I can," he says. "I have ideas of how I want my paintings
to look that I can't put into words. When people see my paintings, I want them
to see marks that I actually made."
Rachel Howard, who spent four years as an assistant to Mr.
Hirst, says she "can't think of anything worse" than having an
assistant herself. She notes that "I only paint for my own needs, not to
fulfill anyone else's." Ms. Howard says she was Mr. Hirst's assistant
starting in 1992, after they met while standing at a bus stop and started talking
about art. "It taught me to know my worth and not be afraid to think
big," she says. Mr. Hirst declined to be interviewed.
John E. Scofield looks back fondly on his three years as an
assistant to the late abstract artist Robert Motherwell, but he says he
wouldn't use an assistant himself for his paintings. "That's so deeply
personal, you can't," he says. Mr. Scofield's hand, along with that of
another assistant named Bob Bigelow, contributed to one of the most famous
paintings in America, Motherwell's "Reconciliation Elegy," a huge
canvas that hangs on permanent display in the National Gallery in Washington,
D.C. The two assistants filled in the large black blotches in the painting that
Mr. Motherwell had outlined. Then Mr. Motherwell "pretty much reworked
every square inch of what we did," Mr. Scofield recounts.
The practice can be a godsend for struggling young artists.
Carl Fudge, who worked nine years for Kiki Smith, the sculptor, print maker and
installation artist, was one such beneficiary. "Leaving graduate school with
an art degree doesn't set you up," he says. "You have to look for
other means to make a living." Ms. Smith says she looks upon her
assistants as family members and mentors them in their own projects: "I
take their lives as seriously as I take mine."
At the other end of the spectrum is Mr. Koons, who runs his
vast, high-ceilinged studio with an efficiency that discourages personal
interactions. Everyone has an assigned task, from painting a section of a
canvas by following elaborate diagrams to mixing dozens of paints to produce
exactly the right color. Large paintings are lifted up a wall by electric
hoists; in one room on a recent afternoon, two painters worked silently on a
canvas at floor level while two others painted the upper part from a scaffold.
There's a hierarchy of supervisors, including a studio manager, a painting
supervisor and several assistant managers. It brings to mind an assembly line,
but the 56-year-old Mr. Koons, who is married to one of his former assistants,
bridles at the analogy of a factory. "People get misconceptions that it's
about production, like a machine," he states. "But I've thought for a
year about almost everything before starting to make it."
Mr. Koons, whose use of assistants is widely known, says he
supervises the work intently: "I'm here Monday through Friday and I try to
travel as little as possible. The paintings are as if I made every mark
myself." Mr. Koons says he doesn't mentor his artist employees, and they
don't bring paintings into the studio to show him. "This is about
production of the work," he says. "I want them to stay focused on the
work here."
Mr. Gorlizki, who employs the artists in India, has a harder
time with supervision. He uses a courier service, shipping paintings back and
forth to New York so that he can make suggestions, and once or twice a year he
visits India. Because this process is so time-onsuming, a painting often takes
two or three years to complete.
But Mr. Gorlizki, who talks openly about his use of
assistants and puts his apprentices' names on the back of his paintings, thinks
he's found the ideal arrangement. His Indian assistants "all get salaries
and they get bonuses," he says. "They earn much more money than they
would from the tourist trade."
In a telephone interview, Mr. Uddin, Mr. Gorlizki's chief
assistant, said that Jaipur has about 3,000 painters, and almost all of them
churn out traditional Indian paintings for the tourist market. Most of them
have little interest in pursuing their own creative artistic careers, he says.
Mr. Gorlizki "is a great artist," Mr. Uddin says. "I'm happy
with the way it is."
No comments:
Post a Comment