Ah, Shouting Thomas is at it again. Putting some words in my mouth while misinterpreting other words that I did offer.

I can, and have, engaged in plenty of discussions about some of the inequities in the art world. Although I will admit that those bitch sessions are more likely to be about the way certain collectors will buy up an artist's work cheap, then flip them to fellow collectors, ratcheting the price up without the artist ever getting any of the benefit.

I know a lot of artists and virtually none worthy of the name "want the state to pay them for work that the market will not pay for." This is a tired and boring stereotype based on a very small handful of artists. Even those artists who do devote a fair amount of energy to seeking grant funding for various projects rarely do better than breaking even if they DO get funded. Most artists are hard working and entrepreneurial. Hey, one of my client artists just shelled out in the low five figures to produce a catalog for an important upcoming show because his gallery didn't want to spend the dough. Similar to the way record labels make musicians pay or "front" the money for recordings that have to be paid back before the musicians see any cash flow from their efforts.

The differential between the CEO and the bottom rung in corporations has expanded dramatically over the past three decades. Have a little fun Googling "CEO worker wage differential" and you'll quickly find tidbits like this from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review site.

No less an authority than billionaire investor Warren Buffett, known for his investment mastery through his investment vehicle, Berkshire Hathaway Inc., calls the current high level of executive compensation "ridiculous."

• In 1960, studies found for every $1 the average worker was paid, the average CEO whose company was among the Standard & Poor's 500 garnered $41.

• Last year, the ratio jumped tenfold: For every dollar the average worker made, the average S&P 500 CEO made $411.

Just for yucks, take a look at the Forbes 400 list. Here's an introduction to this year's ranking from the Forbes web site.

One billion dollars is no longer enough. The price of admission to this, the 25th anniversary edition of the Forbes 400, is $1.3 billion, up $300 million from last year. The collective net worth of the nation's mightiest plutocrats rose $290 billion to $1.54 trillion.

Wall Street led the charge, despite this summer's market jitters. Nearly half of the 45 new members made their fortunes in hedge funds and private equity. Money manager John Paulson joins the list after pocketing more than $1 billion short-selling subprime credit this summer.

Now, the closest you'll find to an artist on this list are George Lucas (#86, $3.9 B based largely on his Star Wars franchise) and Steven Spielberg (#117, $3 B based on his movies). There are the owners of the NE Patriots and Dallas Cowboys, no sign of any players though. And there are a few media players like David Geffen and Roy Disney, but I don't think they count as artists either.

Now, we can play dueling anecdotes. ST works for a CEO who is a great guy who pulled him through a tough time because he cares. And ST knows some star musicians who are nasty and exploitive of their employees and backup musicians. As it happens, so do I. I work for an art collector who owns a company and is much revered by his employees for all the right reasons. He cares and makes sure every worker in the company benefits from the good years and is cushioned from the worst of the bad years. And I know musicians and studio assistants who have horror stories about certain well-known musicians and artists as employers. Just as I've known some exploitive pond scum executives and some well-known artists and musicians who are salt of the earth and treat everyone they deal with well. What's the point?

Posted by: Chris White on June 19, 2008 5:46 PM

Chris, you are more in agreement with me than you think. You carry the traditional animus against business of the leftist, and so you've applied a different standard to the businessman.

The CEO of that firm I worked for managed a business that undoubtedly took in revenues at least 1000 times the revenues of the art businesses you know. I'm just estimating, but I'll bet I'm right. My CEO managed a worldwide conglomerate than employed tens of thousands of people.

Your argument was that Dylan deserves what he makes because of the value he creates, if I understood you correctly.

I held your views about businessmen until I met my friend, the CEO. One part of my story that you missed is that he created enormous value within his business. By turning around the attitude of employees who had seen the company as a milk cow, he dramatically increased the revenues and profitability of that company... and preserved jobs.

He earned every penny he made, in my opinion.

I don't know if every CEO performs in this fashion. But I certainly had my mind changed by witnessing close up just how important to the value of a corporation is the performance of the guy at the top. The skills needed to manage a mammoth international conglomerate are far different than those needed to manage almost any other business.

My remarks about artists who want to feed at the public trough were directed to the examples Donald listed in this posting. I am more sympathetic to artists who accept the judgment of the market. In fact, the music business is capitalism at its rawest. I certainly admire those people who can survive in one of the most brutal jungles you can imagine.

My point is that people who are in those raw capitalist zones of the arts tend to project their circumstances onto the world at large. As I said, when I hear musicians bitching about how awful and brutal the world is, I know that they are really talking about the music business. To repeat, I think that if they want to change the world, they might start at home. Or else, as you say, maybe its all just bullshitting.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on June 19, 2008 6:57 PM

Art In America is a strange mixture of PC crap and some really discerning in depth jargon free articles about individual artists.
Just thought I should say something in its defense. I'm not a regular reader but have, on occasion, read some first rate stuff there.

Posted by: ricpic on June 19, 2008 10:50 PM

You are kidding, aren't you, Donald?

No?

We don't need any barbarian invasions. We grow our own.

Posted by: Rick Darby on June 20, 2008 12:59 PM






Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?