AMs work hanging..., by loucastel on Jul 30, 2008 12:23:13 GMT 1,

Jul 30, 2008 7:08:06 GMT 1 jamesreeve5 said:

Jul 29, 2008 20:55:41 GMT 1 loucastel said:

If that is what you believe, I think this is the wrong forum for you guys then, I have been collecting art for more years than I care to remember ,and as I said in an earlier post, not just this genre, but across the board, and when I found this forum it was like a breath of fresh air after all the pompous gallery owners where you need an appointment to view work, and all the even more pompous art critics, low and behold there were normal people on here (well most of them anyway), then we have someone coming along telling us that we don't understand what we buy so therefore need to read about it, but reading books doesn't necessarily make a work better or worse, you guys are talking about cashing in on art, In James post all he did was repeat what I had said earlier about Saatchi, what saatchi does is common sense, (and that is something you definitely dint get out of books) coupled with a lot of money, I am not interested in being the best, the most knowledgeable, I enjoy life and my art for what it is, I dint need to read hidden depths in it, I have had a very successfully career, without the need to prove anything to anybody.
And yet I am a collector of art!!!

Lou, I mentioned Charles Saatchi as a hypothetical model of collecting that would be financially most beneficial to a British person wanting to purchase art. To be more clear, I was emphasizing the fact that he was making his money go further by buying artists primarily outside of the UK because of the strength of the pound in relation to other currencies. I was not reiterating your earlier comments on his bulk purchasing tactics.
And this was on a separate note, in response to the particular question of the "British bubble" that Mose had asked me. It was a hypothetical situation. The financial model is not something I ascribe to personally, nor do Mose or Roscoe I believe.

We are not talking about "cashing in on art"; we are talking about protecting ones-self from the pitfalls of short-term thinking by emotionally and intellectually delving into artists that we spend anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars on.

What Mose is trying to say is that art he enjoys the most is art that he can interact with on a number of different levels. He enjoys finding new things in the work he owns or about the artists themselves. And I understand and agree completely with what he is saying.

But because we want to talk about articles from magazines or books doesn't mean that we are trying to be patronizing, we just want to learn more!

As top said I guess we all have to agree to disagree!

I realise it doesnt seem it but I do agree with a lot you say, but what works for one person leaves another cold, I love reading about art history, yet art and artist analysis is another sphere entirely, no disrespect intended, but it's like standing next to someone who is trying to impress in a gallery, and espousing the virtue of a certain work, with the flowery language, and I often wonder whether they actually know what they are talking about or just reiterating something they have read, please dont get me wrong, I am not against anybody learning, but becoming over analytical in my opinion can detract from the overall impression of a work.
As regards Harveyn's post , I think all art is a commodity, it cannot be seperated into art for investing and art to keep, it is a disposable commodity. When I first came on this forum there was so much talk about "flippers" (still is) I couldnt understand it, over the years I have bought and sold numerous pieces, but as tastes change thats what happens, or you get the speculators, but you get that in any market, it is nothing new, unless as was said earlier you deal in the top end of the market, what a lot of people tend to forget is there is a big world out there which doesnt revolve around this genre and this forum, we are very little fish in a big pond, and one thing I do agree with some of the others, is it is nice to have an apreciation of the other genres to fully realise some of the very poor art available on here.

Jul 30, 2008 7:08:06 GMT 1 jamesreeve5 said:

Jul 29, 2008 20:55:41 GMT 1 loucastel said:

If that is what you believe, I think this is the wrong forum for you guys then, I have been collecting art for more years than I care to remember ,and as I said in an earlier post, not just this genre, but across the board, and when I found this forum it was like a breath of fresh air after all the pompous gallery owners where you need an appointment to view work, and all the even more pompous art critics, low and behold there were normal people on here (well most of them anyway), then we have someone coming along telling us that we don't understand what we buy so therefore need to read about it, but reading books doesn't necessarily make a work better or worse, you guys are talking about cashing in on art, In James post all he did was repeat what I had said earlier about Saatchi, what saatchi does is common sense, (and that is something you definitely dint get out of books) coupled with a lot of money, I am not interested in being the best, the most knowledgeable, I enjoy life and my art for what it is, I dint need to read hidden depths in it, I have had a very successfully career, without the need to prove anything to anybody.
And yet I am a collector of art!!!

Lou, I mentioned Charles Saatchi as a hypothetical model of collecting that would be financially most beneficial to a British person wanting to purchase art. To be more clear, I was emphasizing the fact that he was making his money go further by buying artists primarily outside of the UK because of the strength of the pound in relation to other currencies. I was not reiterating your earlier comments on his bulk purchasing tactics.
And this was on a separate note, in response to the particular question of the "British bubble" that Mose had asked me. It was a hypothetical situation. The financial model is not something I ascribe to personally, nor do Mose or Roscoe I believe.

We are not talking about "cashing in on art"; we are talking about protecting ones-self from the pitfalls of short-term thinking by emotionally and intellectually delving into artists that we spend anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars on.

What Mose is trying to say is that art he enjoys the most is art that he can interact with on a number of different levels. He enjoys finding new things in the work he owns or about the artists themselves. And I understand and agree completely with what he is saying.

But because we want to talk about articles from magazines or books doesn't mean that we are trying to be patronizing, we just want to learn more!

As top said I guess we all have to agree to disagree!

I realise it doesnt seem it but I do agree with a lot you say, but what works for one person leaves another cold, I love reading about art history, yet art and artist analysis is another sphere entirely, no disrespect intended, but it's like standing next to someone who is trying to impress in a gallery, and espousing the virtue of a certain work, with the flowery language, and I often wonder whether they actually know what they are talking about or just reiterating something they have read, please dont get me wrong, I am not against anybody learning, but becoming over analytical in my opinion can detract from the overall impression of a work.
As regards Harveyn's post , I think all art is a commodity, it cannot be seperated into art for investing and art to keep, it is a disposable commodity. When I first came on this forum there was so much talk about "flippers" (still is) I couldnt understand it, over the years I have bought and sold numerous pieces, but as tastes change thats what happens, or you get the speculators, but you get that in any market, it is nothing new, unless as was said earlier you deal in the top end of the market, what a lot of people tend to forget is there is a big world out there which doesnt revolve around this genre and this forum, we are very little fish in a big pond, and one thing I do agree with some of the others, is it is nice to have an apreciation of the other genres to fully realise some of the very poor art available on here.