Preface to this comment: the work and the people featured here are alluring and interesting. However, the story is so lacking in specificity that its hypothesis is completely arguable. Was work literally turned away by galleries, dealers, museums? Which ones? What were the stated reasons? There's a surfeit of antidote and unattributed comment, but nothing that would prove the lack of advancement was racial.
7
I can relate. My uncle Stanwyck Cromwell is an artist and teacher in the Hartford, CT area. He's been making art for well over 40 years, constantly showing at exhibitions and galleries. At 70 plus years of age he seems to show no sign of slowing of down.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/stancromwell/
2
Once can easily see why they "were forgotten" or never "made it big".
Their output seems to be sophomoric and mediocre at best.
7
No references to Clementine Hunter and how she started this trend?
I travelled to New York twice just to see Kerry James Marshall, Charles White and Jack Whitten and was blown away. These are artists who followed their own path, much like Hockney and Freud, and genuinely mean something. People are looking for meaning and connection to something bigger and these artists provide it. I am so grateful to The Met and MoMA for putting on these stellar shows.
10
I'm sorry, one reason they were also-rans in their day is because their art was middling when put up against their peers. Not bad stuff, but not all that innovative either--. If their new-found attention is because of their race alone, it's sadly misplaced.
6
@Muddlerminnow
Amen
known these artists...
2
Color me confused. I read this article Saturday night and noted, with no small amount of pride, that Mac Binion was a graduate of Cranbrook Academy of Art (in fact, I believe he received a distinguished alumni award recently). But today, the Cranbrook reference was missing. What’s up with that #NYTs?
10
Women traditionally get it in the neck in the art biz, too.
8
These artists were discovered and successful a long time ago. I am very glad that they are getting a much wider audience and broader recognition and that they are receiving high monetary awards for their work, but those don’t equal being discovered and successful. The fact that they are trying all they can to maintain their time in the studio developing their work at this point in their lives speaks volumes about their commitment and success as artists.
13
I agree with your point about the lifelong commitment that these very talented artists represent. It's always interesting to me to see artists of my generation suddenly getting alot of press. I was in NYC at the same time as Howardena Pindell and we had mutual friends. She was one of the more successful artists I knew at the time in terms of recognition and "power". I've always admired her work but she was not an unknown, unrecognized artist in NYC in the 1970s by any means.
5
Yes,it is about time. Not only has the world been deprived of seeing much art by African Americans, the artists have been deprived of acknowledgement, prestige and money. I'm glad to see the art world making amends at this better late than never moment. It's also great to see younger artists of color, getting their due. However the art world still lags behind in representing people of color and women in the big picture.
11
@SLD
But specifically, who deprived them? Where are interviews with whites who were in charge of making decisions regarding sales and shows? Where are the rejection notes?
I am so glad that many of these artists are finally being recognized for the great work that they have created consistently over their long careers. Many of them are the life blood of creativity in this country. IT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED YEARS AGO!
7
@Susan
What should have happened?
2
@Susan
We all know why it didn’t happen before, we are lucky it is happening before they pass on,
1
@Bob
Good question Bob, but my guess is you will not receive an answer.
2
I consider myself lucky to have know these artists since the 1970s. William T. Williams and Jack Whitten in particular.
One of the highlights of my life was to study with Bill at Skowhegan in 1973. To know that success has been (finally) bestowed upon many of these African American artists is a joy for me. The market place is fickle and unpredictable and never guaranteed. Simply put, this attention and success deserves a standing ovation. It's wonderful.
George Negroponte
32
On my way today to view the work of my uncle Arthur Monroe (mentioned by another commenter)- The Beat Generation Exhibition, in Oakland, CA. at Jack London Square, curated by his son Alistair-who like many of the subjects is over 80, has been painting for decades, and whose work is abstract. So deserving, but relatively unknown. Finally the world is catching up.
12
I often wonder why artists of today cannot produce works of art like the great ones of the 1500s. A child could do some of these modern art productions.
6
@Aaron Adams Many contemporary artists who paint pay homage to "the great ones". The best could produce works like the work from the 1500's; they simply choose not to.
Claiming " a child could do that", shows that some further education in art history is in order.
25
@Aaron Adams
Many of us are very familiar with the great artists of the Renaissance (1500s), but we do not live in that world. Art always reflects the period of time that it is made in. This is the 21st century and artists are make work that is relevant to the current times.
12
@Aaron Adams Sorry you don't get it.
7
Pleased to hear about artists that I've never heard of getting acclaimed at this point in their lives.
4
Fine reprting on happy if rueful subject.
5
This article has some indelicate references (humans as commodities, auction block) that any sensitive editor should have caught. The main problem is how this article does nothing to dislodge the privileged white center from the art world. What you mean is that white people didn’t know these artists until now. People of color have known their work for decades.
39
Better late than dead.
8
There are some indelicate turns of phrase in this article (commodity, auction block) that the editors should have caught. This article could have done better—it still naturalizes a white center and Black margin.
9
I give you Arthur Monroe, born in Brooklyn and now a local hero in Oakland, Ca. 85 and still painting.
http://rehistoricizing.org/arthur-monroe/
6
America has had a long, complex, exploitative relationship with black people and specifically black artists. Black people— their art, their expression, their fight for equality— have had a huge influence on culture through multiple decades. At times they have been recognized for it, at others they have been erased from history (while the fruits of their creativity have been passed off by white people).
It is notable that there may finally be “high brow” appreciation (in the traditional canonical sense) for black artists in a way that previously was not afforded to them. I found this article enlightening, if a bit sad.
10
The photos of the art works featured here just make me want to see more of all these artists' work. I am so glad they are getting to enjoy some well-earned recognition while they are still alive to do so.
I do think the personal is always political and just because a work of art isn't "overtly political" as the article says does not mean it does not have a political meaning. It is sad to think that people in the art world were so narrow minded in their views that these artists were sidelined for not fitting into boxes others wanted to put them in. Now at least we can all celebrate their success.
11
Reading this, I was confused as to why these artists are now allowed to suceed. Is the art collecting public now more amenable to buying art of different races? Or is it that dealers now feel more confident about promoting black artists because things have loosened up? Or are black artists just in style at the moment? Most of these artists were already know (in the art world atleast) from the 1970's on. I would love to hear other peoples thoughts on this.
9
@Leslie L
Because the article was incomplete. You ask a very good question.
3
This interesting article while focusing mostly on galleries and the art market, misses the role that certain institutions, notably the Studio Museum in Harlem, play in the "discovery" - in itself a word that is to be nuanced - of this older generation of black artists whose work is not only identified by "black identity".
8
It's a mystery to me why people pay six figures for some of these works when there is plenty of great art to buy under $10,000, but if anyone is going to reap those windfalls, it's about time that black artists got their share too, isn't it?
7
Similar to the recent “Seven Black Incentors...” article, this rundown is far far far too short a list, but not too late. R.I.P. those whom were never recognized, tho not for lack of talent or significant expression.
13
@Frank Livingston
Thank you...I believe my father was one of those who died before being recognized outside of his town environs. At least he had his students -and friends who knew. He never seemed bitter about it...just kept making art until the end.
I’m fascinated by my personal, subconscious racial biases. Even as a child I railed against racism, yet clearly I am a racist. Black people are a subset in my mind; I’ve sorted them out and placed them in their own container. But, articles like this help me to understand this incredibly complex phenomenon. I become a little more aware everyday. The container is leaking. Thank you for helping me to understand.
14
This is news!
AFRICOBRA: Nation Time has been selected as an official Collateral Event of Biennale Arte 2019 (May 11th – November 24th 2019), in Venice, Italy.
Presented by bardoLA, originated and supported by the Museum of Contemporary Art (MOCA) North Miami, and curated by Jeffreen M. Hayes, Ph.D., this will be the first major exhibition of AFRICOBRA’s work in Europe.
AFRICOBRA was founded on the South Side of Chicago in 1968 by a collective of young Black artists, whose interest in Transnational Black Aesthetics led them to create one of the most distinctive visual voices in 20th Century American art. AFRICOBRA: Nation Time at Biennale Arte 2019 is the first time the work of this vital, definitive, and historic Black Arts collective has been given the opportunity to be celebrated by global audiences on this scale.
8
@ZZ
Right on! South Side!
1
I’m waiting for the art world to stop habitually anointing the Jeff Koons and Damien Hirsts of this world, and fully desegregate modern art.
22
What is a black artist?
What is black art?
" And yet I often marvel at this curious thing that God would make a poet black and yet bid him to sing". Countee Cullen
There is only one race aka human.
There is only one national origin aka Earth.
There are many colors, ethnicities, national origins and faiths. There are many individuals with many histories.
9
@Blackmamba
I remember the birth of AFRICOBRA aka African Commune of Bad Relevant Artists on the almighty black South Side of Chicago.
Along with the rise of AACM aka Association for the Advancement of Creative Musicians on the same almighty black South Side of Chicago.
The Second Bronzeville Renaissance still lives, remains and reverberate in the visual and musical arts.
It's Nation Time! Black Lives Matter!
"Up you mighty race!
" You can accomplish what you will!"
2
I've been watching Howardena Pindell's work since the 70's. I'm so glad she's having much deserved success, finally.
12
Good art survives ... value is a contemporary.
The retail art world is a dreadful place -- it's buyer vanity driven.
6
@GT yes, and black artists are pushed to fringes. Abstracting that, it’s entrails, is...
It’s funny reading the comments of offended readers in regards to the label these artists are being recognized under - “Black artists”. These artists were already labeled by White society as “Black artists” in the 60s/70s, which was the very reason why their talent and work was deprived of support. So yes, we will continue to use the label to now recognize them as talented Black artists, so today’s young Black artists are aware they exist. It’s something my Black-self needed to read this Sunday morning.
29
@Mia: Fake victimization. There is no evidence to show that "White Society" deprived these artist of support. In fact, these particular artists are lucky to be recognized at all; luckier than many other equally talented artists, white, black, Latino or Asian.
4
@Mia. Influenced by the Black Power movement, The Black Arts movement proudly announced and owned and defined Blackness as a vital energy and a distinctive culture with unique challenges and successes.
2
With the notable exception of "Two Blues," these pieces are not worthy of even being seen outside the studio. Who among us cannot cut quotes out of the NYT? And the art world gushes about this silliness. Those who value this kind of thing do so, I believe, because of political correctness. In any case, it is their right to like or love it. On the other hand, there are many talented black, and white, artists who never make it and/or paint for the love of it and because they must.
Reading articles like this remind me of one of my favorite quotes, from Frank Zappa--"talking about art is like dancing about architecture."
4
@rocktumbler
I think the narrowness of your judgment results from a rush to judgment. Spend some time with the artworks and you may find there is a reason the artists pursued them for so long with so little compensation. By the way, that quote and similar quotes about other art disciplines have so many attributions. I'm going to rush to judgment PCStyle and claim Zappa probably stole it from Thelonious Monk.
14
@rocktumbler Maybe what FZ meant that it was worth doing, but exceedingly difficult to do well.
3
The Art World has always been a fickle place. 2 people can look at the same work and give completely opposite opinions on its quality. Van Gogh and Da Vinci were poor but for the patronage of fans or relatives. Andy Warhol was a millionaire but his wealth was less than the price of one of the paintings mentioned in the article. The ascendance of Black Artists is the logical reaction to their time of irrelevance because of their color. Eventually that distinction will melt away. For now, congratulations! This comes at a time when people of paper wealth are looking for tangible, long term investments that can protect their holdings against the fickleness of economic winds. Right now they are at your back. Fly with it!
5
Back in 1979 I managed the Lerner Heller Gallery on Madison Avenue and Howardena Pindell was the last painter who was signed before I left to pursue an acting career. Although that gallery closed ages ago, I just assumed that she was having a highly successful career all this time. What a shock it was for me to read that her breakthrough in the art world didn't happen until 2015. Ms. Pindell has always been very talented and her recognition is way overdue. A heartfelt thank you to the Times for writing this article. My only regret is that I didn't purchase one of her paintings back then, because I now suspect her work is way out of my price range. How ironic!
15
So glad black artists are meeting with much-deserved success at long last, though as someone who is not a fan of abstract art -- my five year old does more intriguing paintings -- I'll never understand why anyone pays hefty sums for this genre.
7
@ChristopherP
With all due respect consider that you may be at least at least a little biased when assessing your 5 year old's artistic abilities and at least a little ignorant about what makes great art. Just saying.
8
@AG, also with all due respect, the claim that one must be suitably educated to appreciate good art seems misguided to me. Good art evokes an emotional response. It succeeds in doing so despite one's background, not because of it (education included). Of course, appreciation can be enhanced by knowledge, but I believe that is secondary. And while I'm delighted that these artists are finally getting more exposure, I'm also glad to read that they are sanguine about it, because fashion in art is often driven by investors and the process is as fickle as the stock market.
2
I'm always so moved by these long time serious artists who've toiled for years without the recognition some of their peers have received. One whose career I've followed for a long time is local (northern Indiana) sculptor Jake Webster, who does such powerful work: https://www.artpostblog.com/jakewebster/category/portfolio
7
I was fortunate enough to have met many of these artists in the 70s, when I was asked to photograph their work for them. The New York art world was a very insular and unforgiving place, and it was difficult to establish yourself in that time.
Tastes are more catholic these days, but back then if you didn’t fit into a certain narrowly defined area, things were tough.
My best wishes to all of these artists.
14
One of the major "undiscovered" artists of the past fifty years is Miguel Conde who doesn't fit inside a box - he of a Catholic Mexican father and a Jewish American mother, Conde has worked out of his studios in Sitges, Madrid and Paris the last forty years. Is he an American or Mexican or Spanish or French painter? We love our labels.
8
Folks should thank heaven for being recognized at 70. Most artists - black, white, whatever -- have to die before they get to enjoy recognition. The price of their work depends upon them dying as a pre-condition.
J
11
That Untitled Pindell piece is gorgeous. Thanks for introducing me to a bunch of artists I’d never heard of!
16
@SM
Look up Leonard Nelson and "color fields" online.
What would we do if we couldn't classify people and groups i.e. old-young, black-white, male-female? Of all places, the art world should be able to dispense with these classifications. Line up any ten abstract works by unknown artists without names or other designations and I defy anyone to put them in categories other than bad, good, or excellent.
24
@romac
It would be helpful to know by what criteria abstract works can be evaluated as "bad, good, or excellent." For the layperson, looking at ten abstract works by unknown artists would present a conundrum. Suggestions?
3
@Asheville Resident Your point is well-taken. What if we substituted the man in the street with established critics. If they knew nothing about the artist and their viewing was a matter of first impression, would any of the categories mentioned above matter or do they also need a context? Just asking?
3
Over 30 years ago I worked at Just Above Midtown (then actually on Franklin Street in Tribeca, the name becoming
ironic). JAM was a gallery representing black artists exclusively, founded by Linda Goode Bryant. Howardina Pindell was one of its leading lights. David Hammons was another. The artists were bursting with energy and ideas and did not, it seemed to me, have time to wring their hands over lack of recognition and marginalization. In the end, the gallery could not afford to keep its lights on because it couldn’t generate mass interest in the work of its highly dedicated artists. Their talent remains what it was. Let’s hope the market that caught up has learned a thing or two.
34
Magnificent work by Frank Bowling, and hoping more exhibitions are in the works. Whether he is from Guyana or Co. Cork, with a pink complexion and green antennas, this is talent in plain sight, and remarkable to this eye.
With appreciation to Hilarie M. Sheets for introducing some of us, who are art lovers, to a rich and original view of diverse abstract artists.
15
I imagine this success they are having to be bittersweet. They'll take it! Of course. After all, what serious artist doesn't feel deserving of acclaim and the accompanying financial boon that comes with it? What older artist would not welcome, finally, the recognition that is due them?
But, none of them are gaga; they realize that, worse than being rendered as a commodity by galleries, collectors, museum curators and journalists, which is standard, they are also being branded and ghettoized due to the (temporarily) sexy combo of race and age.
They all sound like they know what would be best for them: to be celebrated as artists, period.
13
Every recognized artist ever that is privileged to live into their 70s and above experiences the requirements of physical accommodation and exhaustion from a busy schedule. Also true for everyone are the annoyances of an industry fickle in it's focus, the benefits of being brought into commercial success by a peer younger or otherwise, and the aggressive willingness of the industry to twist the artist's work or persona to what is perceived as more marketable.
Why the focus on this for African American and Black artist's - as if it's something they can't handle? Yes, their inclusion and acclaim is long overdue but what is the motivation to show that what they always sought might be have a down side? Commercial success usually does for everyone. I get that it would have been easier for them to reach acclaim 40 years ago, but if they were famous 40 years ago they'd probably still be working in their 70s so.....here we are at the same point.
4
To some of the commentators who insist that these artists are only now "Au currant" because racial identity politics are in vogue, you are missing the point.
These artists have toiled in obscurity staying true to their artistic vision and were shut out of markets BECAUSE of their race for these many past decades.
If, suddenly, any young artist who happened to be black was having their work snapped up, I'd say, yes, that smacks of race conscious "trendiness".
But the point is that many of these artists experienced social stigma during their youth for NOT focusing on identity politics and instead focusing purely on their art. At the same time, they were cut out of the mainstream art world BECAUSE of their race.
74
@Kevin Katz,
A point understood, and with "au courant" as a slight correction in these current times, where spring is in the air and we can enjoy currant jam on our toast, while appreciating these masterworks recognized in the now, and not tomorrow when the hour is too late to acknowledge that these artists are providing some food for the soul.
7
@Kevin Katz: there's no evidence that these artists were ignored because of their race. Racial victimization is not warranted.
4
I need more coffee to dissect how disturbing I find this article. Of course, I am elated that there is a segment of artists who are being recognized and compensated for the decades they devoted to their passion and talent. However, to place them in a group as "Old and Black" is deeply offensive. Can you imagine if the NYX wrote about the following catagories of artists: "Rich, Jewish, Middle-Aged", "White, Transgender Millenials" "Fat, German Teenagers". The work from the artists in this article stands on its own merit, and need not be couched in the age or ethnicity of the artist. The context they are placed in is especially insulting because neither race nor age, as far as I can tell, play a part in the work they are producting.
44
I think this article is much more about what it’s like to become successful in the last act of one’s life after having been overlooked for so long. The article posits that the artist’s blackness played a huge part in their not being recognized earlier, which I don’t think is a big leap.
It doesn’t seem to be categorizing their art as old/black art, but as abstract. It seems to be that the rise in price on their new work is connected directly their own younger/abstract art sales at auction as well as younger black artists who have spoken up for their forgotten influencers.
32
There are two paragraphs in the second part of the article, way down, that address the marginalization of black artist in the 60s and 70s whose work was apolitical. This is an interesting take, and should have introduced the article. That is a reason the artists find themselves having to produce at such an advanced age.
11
@Double Helix
Thanks for expressing the anger I felt on reading the article and especially the headline. I found this piece both condescending and racist.
2
Maybe it’s just me, but most of this ‘art’ looks like something a toddler could produce, and the astronomical sums it is bringing, really hammers home the point that many people have more money than brains.
That being said, congratulations to the artists for hitting the lottery.
9
@stan
It is just you and all the other people who may agree with you. Artists throughout time have had similar remarks made about their work by people who don't have the same ideal or vision. It's worth stepping around the glass and seeing things from the other side. that's what art does for you- it gives you the glass.
27
@stan
Please look a bit deeper...the "I know what I like and I don't like that" is not worthy of you or these artist. I have not seen a toddler produce work like this and I bet that you have not either.
8
@stan,
You are not alone, and join a long lineage of art viewers who cast aside the work of Picasso.
'Guerneca' is no toddler's work.
10
Larry Walker -- wonderful artist and gifted teacher -- he should be in this article
9
So much of the art world, the commercial art world, is hyper-dependent on marketing and gallery salespeople. Much of this "art" are abstractions without a cause. The popularity of "modern" art is a case in point. How else can one explain the sales of what is essentially a collage of simple abstract forms, colors, and artifacts if not for the interventions of very skilled middle persons marketing them?
As for the, it's about time, I would say that these artists are lucky beyond any artist wildest dream to be recognized and commercialized in their lifetimes. Most, if not the vast majority, never get to hit the artist worlds version of the lottery, even when their product is of equal or even greater artist expression, meaning, and talent. I see no Vincent van Gogh is these works and one only has to peruse his bio to see how lucky these individuals are.
15
@Veritas Odit Moras
Yes, they and everyone else should feel lucky when others value of our work. An inability to understand a work does not confer a lack of “artistic expression, meaning, and talent.” Many did not see a DaVinci in Van Gogh’s work.
2
@Veritas Odit Moras
So, you believe that you would have recognized the worth of a Van Gogh painting during the artist’s life time?
A little humility please.
3
You can find excellent art in suburban galleries that sells for $3000 because that is what that suburb populace will pay for art even if they are driving a $50K car that has high yearly maintenance. The gallery takes 40% and the artist must travel and get in multiple galleries to make a living or have a spouse with a good job. Some excellent realist artists then do very small works as part of the strategy to pay basic bills. NYC has many of the 1%ers so the story varies there on the connectedness of each gallery to that 1% crowd. And they often are buying for financial appreciation regardless of encounter quality.
22
@william f bannon
So true .... a few places rule -- a few pick. The buyers follow.
1
The expression of aesthetic principles and the subjective criteria that deem them worthy of a gallery should have nothing to do with identity politics. An artists unique character or distinction are what's most important in determining perceived value.
19
As an older abstract artist myself, it is nice to see any pure abstract art get recognition in an art world totally dominated by curatorial friendly conceptual art, or political art with barely a nod at the entire idea of form. Of the artists here, the work of Frank Bowling stands out to me. I find that within the limited abstract niche of painting today, there is a tendency to fall back on the compositionally safe device of a non hierarchical, all-over gridded space.
As an unsuccessful older artist in the terms of this article, I am a bit jealous I admit and wonder why big money is the principal marker of quality and by extension, success. The NYC art market is a lottery, and no doubt in our "woke" age and emphasis on the artist's back story and cultural neglect, minority artists and women artists are getting their tickets punched.
Anyway, the righting of imbalances is overdue, so I don't begrudge any of their late success- they are all strong and accomplished artists.
44
@Will Rothfuss
Shhhhh . . .
It's a casino.
3
Good stuff and talent abounds however, I'd suggest, that any talent that breaks into the $400,000 range is unique, special and important regardless of age or ethnicity. More over, most artist never achieve the $5K mark much less have a painting in lower Manhattan. There is something missing in this story and these successful people are mostly alike others in those unique brackets of talent (and art fame).
4
McArthur Binion! It's been decades. As a fellow Detroiter who lived in the Cass Corridor and was an art student at Wayne State University, it's wonderful to see McArthur giving new meaning to The Golden Years. I remember him as a highly intellectual yet unassuming young artist whom I admired not only for his talent but for his ability to rise above the strife and stress of life in urban Detroit of the 60s and remain focused on his art.
This story has made my day. Thank you, NYT!
102
@Michael Nunn
In the beginning there was Margaret Burroughs and the South Side Community Arts Center and the DuSable Museum of African American History.
Margaret Burroughs was honored at her alma mater the School of the Art Institute of Chicago in life.
And Northwestern University press has recently published a book on her life and legacy.
7
“Two Blues” by Mr. Bowling is extraordinary.
45
@FromDublin Yes, it is! I don't understand why nothing was written about Mr. Bowling in the article while photo two images where shown. Or did I miss something.....
@FromDublin Agreed. I find his work the strongest of this group.
I suggest a look at Arvie Smith, a master artist in Portland, OR, whose art is stunningly beautiful. He’s a painter, muralist, teacher, and personal contributor to social good through art.
Arvie’s voice on these issues is strong and clear, and he is insufficiently recognized as a master and leader armong artists in general, and African American artists in particular.
19
This piece reminded me that sometimes the less said the better.
When it comes to the very personal nature of art hopefully more buyers will just look, observe, and enjoy.
Part of what they can enjoy is the silence around experiencing the art.
I love the artists who refuses to talk about their art and insist in staying invisible!
31
@Michael Kittle
Doesn’t this silence contribute to their obscurity?
1
@Michael Kittle Politics begins with visibility. You are expecting artists to remain monkeys. Artists have every right refuse to remain silent.
2
The art world and its arbitrary valuations and appraisals reminds one pointedly of the child's tale "The Emperor's New Clothes." At an opening the oohs and aahs, the carefully prepared "candid" remarks intended to be picked up by a reporter and relayed to the press may be heard. And most of what one sees is, well, childish and inchoate. Let black people protest much to the contrary, their stake in this game and their works' cachet are based on their racial affiliation.
13
It's unfortunate that everything other than itself controls art production. These artists are being recognized, not because of the quality of their art or what it may contribute to the expression of human intelligence, but because it is made by black artists. Therefore, their art only has market value and is validated only because identity politics is fashionable and as a way to prove that the art establishment is not racist. Art should be evaluated only for its intellectual contribution to challenge intellectual discoveries, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, or nationality, not for its value for decoration. The increasing bureaucracy of the art world that includes curators, dealers, art historians, museum administrators, and collectors should not dictate the value of art or the production of art. They are not artists. Does money determine what scientists discover? Money should not determine the production of art. Artists need to take back their worth and value instead of being told what to do.
35
@ART
As a physician I feel it's unfair to malign the art world for the role that money plays in what art gets attention and which artists are blessed with sales. Money does, to a very significant degree, determine what scientists discover as well. We call it 'grant funding'.
24
@ART
Sadly, your comments are spot on. But nobody really wants to hear it. And definitely not the artists who have for whatever reason won the lottery.
6
To answer your question about money dictating what scientists discover, I would say yes- bc they need funding.
11
Thank you for this excellent article and wonderful pictures! Great for those of us who can't make it to the museums and galleries ... Inspiring stories of persistence and vision.
57
The simple fact is that art-world reputations are almost always driven by the wrong criteria. Critical fashions come and go. Artists who follow their own paths get ignored. (The NYT has often been part of the problem, along with the various art magazines.) These artists were overlooked for not meeting various expectations, whether aesthetic or social. They deserve recognition because of their work, not because they are African-Americans. But, however unjust the art world and misguided its priorities, these artists are certainly to their belated success.
73
@Wrhackman: Case in point: the ridiculous, undeserved critical exaltation of Pop artists.
2
@Wrhackman
Who is a black artist? What is black art?
Pablo Picasso copying African art motifs and methods?
Classical Greece and Rome copying Egyptian art motifs and methods?
Egypt has always been an African country.
4
@Wrhackman Nicely put, on all points.
2
The bad news first: These artists waited far too long for the recognition (and the prices) their art deserves. The good news: It seems many taught as a way of carrying on with their art. Their students were blessed.
124
@Maria Gagliardi
Oh my goodness. They didn't "wait".
Your comment is shocking
1