There is a tradition of auctioning original works of art donated by artists to raise money for charitable causes. There are many good causes that hold such events. No matter how good the causes, though, I have come to the conclusion that artists must stop donating to every single one of them.
Don't ever donate your art to a charity auction again. Half a century of charity art auctions have changed the way collectors buy art. These fundraisers have depressed prices of art across the board and kept artists in a subordinate position that has no career upside or benefits.
Instead of tossing away another great artwork to a good cause, join the good cause of boycotting charity art auctions. When you join this cause ...
•You stop taking revenue out of the art world
•You stop shifting art collector dollars to the bottomless pits of recurring annual Beg-A-Thons
•You don't contextualize your art as being a synonym of pretentious panhandling
•You don't announce that your art is worth low bids
•You don't risk that your work will be publicly seen getting no bids
•You don't empower strangers to devalue your artwork
•Most importantly, you stop publicly proclaiming that you give your art away
The argument against me is simple: Donations of art to charity auctions raise money for good causes and raise the profile of artists who put their art in the public eye. It is a good argument. It has worked well. This seductive sales pitch has pulled in countless millions of dollars over the past few decades.
Problem is, this argument has not lived up to its bargain. Sad news: Your profile got humiliated because the collector got such a bargain on your art. If your art was one of dozens of trinkets on a wall with a hundred other artists, your profile actually disappeared there in the crowd anyway.
I would love to hear the story of the artist whose career rocketed to success because he or she donated a work to a charity auction and this act alone tipped the first domino toward an avalanche of success coming his or her way. This narrative is always implied. I've never seen it happen.
Charity art auctions are the emptiest of promises to artists: you give us your work, you get nothing in return except a party invite to an event where you are a second class citizen. Watch as the price of what you really will let your work go for is nakedly advertised to the select group of people to whom your work is meant to be seen as rare and desirable.
Suppose you want to at least deduct a donation of your art to the charity, guess what? The law only allows an artist to deduct the cost of materials. Meanwhile a collector can buy your work for the minimum bid, have it appraised at its full retail value and donate it to some other good cause for that top dollar amount.
As for the merits of the infinite number of good causes out there, what is the value in giving up a painting that would sell for a thousand dollars retail in order to see it raise 50 Bucks for that cause? Pick one charity, donate generously and keep the collectors assuming that the price you ask at the gallery is the best and only price they are going to get.
Someone has to be the bad guy here, so you can blame me for inspiring you to donate cash to a good cause and to keep your art career safe from the bargain bin. Print this out and send it with your regrets to anyone asking you to devalue your work in the name of glamorizing their efforts on behalf of yet another worthy cause in a world of infinite and endless good causes. Tell them the art stops here.
Follow Mat Gleason on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CoagulaMagazine
Katherine Jentleson: The Top New York Art Auctions of 2010
Art News Blog: Charity Art Auctions
Dealing with Charity Art Auctions - Absolutearts
Art sales: Bono breaks the mould - Telegraph
Shelter launches 52 Weeks charity art auction | Society | guardian ...
Sorry well-meaning charities...what is a good deal for you....is as Mat put it, so much nicer, a screw job for us artists.
I'm not sure if Mat Gleason is aware that arts organizations are closing around this country...so are for-profit galleries. So, if artists support what we do and want to contribute a work, a huge thank you goes out to them. We know the value of their work. And we know that they are asked by dozens or more agencies all the time.
But, let's help non-arts agencies find creative ways to host an auction that does not include artwork.
BE TRUTHFUL, repeat after me..."Hi will you donate to our arts organization so that we can help the careers of artists other than you?"
Events, such as one in LA co-founded 33 years ago by artists which provides medical assistance to over 25,000 people annually, allow the artist to establish the opening bid, share in the payment and gain exposure you inexplicably dismiss. While this may not assuage readers who have embraced your position because of a bad experience, or simply to have a platform to denigrate NY and LA or complain – it may motivate some to look at a charity’s track record and how it treats artists rather than just dismissing it. Expecting “measured and intelligent judgment on truth and quality” from critics is not unreasonable. To do otherwise is a disservice to oneself and their craft.
My counter-argument is that as long as SOME of these auctions continue, the ability for nefarious operations preying on artist's hopes and vulnerabilities exists.
If artists everywhere join in boycotting ALL charity art auctions, strong charities with good administrators will find ways to organize fundraisers based on different models. Artists everywhere would be doing the GOOD charities a favor in working (thru this simple boycott) to end funding mechanisms for sloppy charities.
It is pretty simple: the good charities do not need art auctions to survive and the bad charities do. By denying all charities, artists allow the best administrative staffs out there to survive.
I didn't understand you last sentence, I don't know what you mean at all by "craft".
But no shoe fell, leaving us with the facile and self-conscious curmudgeonly musings of an art critic forgoing art criticism to criticize charities, charitable artists gullible enough to contribute to charities, and admittedly misconceived tax codes. Reeking of all the inaccuracies and prejudices of your standard knee-jerk reaction, you cavalierly dismiss this form of charity. When you define your target with terms like “cheapskatering,” and denounce their supposed “tradition of lying,” who wouldn’t rally to your cause. Well, perhaps some not seduced by argument by volume, hyperbole and tortured tautology.
to be continued...
I was burned last year by an non-profit environmental group when they carelessly mishandled my piece. After paying for the small damages, I decided it was not worth the battle to approach them for reimbursement. I have avoided giving away my work since then. It was a struggle to get them to provide the basics, like telling me who bought my piece. This is disrespect, big time!!
What do you think of this, Mat? If the artist is able to work out a plan where the charity gives us half of what it sells for, and lets us set the minimum bid, do you think this is fair?
What do you think about museums who have fundraisers? At a recent event, every piece went for a set price. The names of the artists were hidden, until after purchased. They have lots of great artists who donated, and they made a humongous amount of money.
http://artistswhothrive.com/index.php/2010/11/donating-art-to-auctions/
Ann Rea
Artist & CEO | Ann Rea, Inc.
www.annrea.com
Founder | Artists Who THRIVE
www.ArtistsWhoTHRIVE.com
Though I have to wonder...is this true of every charity event? Does anyone have thoughts or experience with the Venice free family clinic charity event? http://theveniceartwalk.org/
I'm wondering if you could share your experience with me. Are referring to the Venice Family Clinic Silent Auction? If so, I'm flabbergasted that this occurred to you and would like to help make sure that never happens to an artist again.
The opening/minimum bid is 50% of the retail value of the piece. They pay up to 40% of the final sales price to the artist - last year the Clinic paid out over $100,000 to the artists.
The Silent Auction began 33 years ago by Venice artists who did not have medical insurance, and were patients of the Clinic. Last year over 24,000 patients were seen - 75% were unemployed, 70% live below the poverty line - approximately 6,000 were kids. Okay, I know I'm on my soapbox, but the Art Walk is one of the main fundraisers for the Clinic. The Clinic looked pretty good to my daughter, who after she graduated from Otis lost her health insurance. In fact, it looked pretty good to most of the other graduates. There are a number of artists who are currently patients of the clinic.
Finally, I would like to pass along the fact that if you, or anyone else reading this, do not have health insurance and can not afford to see a doctor, please call the appointment line at the Clinic. If you fall within the financial criteria, they would be more than happy to help with your healthcare needs.
Even in Canada these things are not beneficial to the artist. I used to donate to one particular good cause but don't anymore, as they repeatedly sold the work under the market value. The inherent point of an auction is to acquire something below its market value. Never have I seen an artist benefiting from a sale at regular price after the auction.
There are many other ways to donate to society -- donate your time, supplies you don't use anymore, a dinner with you (now there is a great concept - have a dinner party and add an artist to the mix - now that would make for a posh experience)...
I think the problem starts even earlier than most people realize. Think about the general life of an artist, most start dabbling in arts & crafts even before they can read or write, for some it's an internal desire, a calling, and most see it as a fun past time till the potential future artist gets a little older then the parents start asking what they "really" want to do with their life bc being an artist is not seen as a real career... *sorry, the entire content of my response is too long, I ended up posting it on my blog: http://yclart.com/2011/06/12/have-you-exploited-an-artist-lately/
Give to charity because you want to. End of. Discriminate about which charities based on how they run the auction or sale. Don't take part in things that will underprice your work. I did a local sale where the charity (to save a local landmark) sold every artwork for £200, lottery style. It was up to the artist what to donate and the charity encouraged items be donated of that retail value. I took part in an art (and only art) charity auction for http://www.torturecare.org.uk/ and they were excellent at running this event! Artists gave reserve prices so nothing was undersold, and they had a great staff with enthusiastic auctioneer with experience with fine art. My piece went for just over the retail value, as an unknown artist. One of my galleries did a small event for a hospital charity selling at gallery price and giving her half to the charity - she paid artists their 50% or let them opt to donate it as well. These types of events were well run and gave artists some control over valuation. I wouldn't boycott these.