Wednesday, July 18, 2007

at mocad tonight

Wednesday, July 18 at 6pm
What is it that moves people from the realm of viewer to that of collector? This event will feature discussions with several local collectors to learn how they make decisions on their art, their patterns and perspectives on art collecting. Presenters will include: Burt Aaron, Ruth Carter, George N'Namdi, and Sharon Zimmerman. Moderated by Dick Goody.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where is this?

2:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I ask that question at this blog all the time. I'd actually like to take advantage of their finger-on-the-pulseness, but I never know where the heck things are going on.

3:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it says mocad in the title and has a mocad link in the post.

3:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and then mocad's website says they're closed every wednesday in july.

4:58 PM  
Blogger todd levin said...

AG: Would have liked to hear this one. Best, Todd

5:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you people are incredibly stupid.

the post is called "at mocad tonight"

hahahahaha! morons.

5:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

if i were gong to this i would ask how much of their art collection is purchsaed by local galleries.

8:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and the answer would be zero. they are all talk about "support local galleries and local artists! detroit detroit detroit!" and then they go to new york to buy.

9:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I second that jim!

our "collectors" here buy cranbrook art while it's still hot on the studio walls...aside from that...? sure there are some great small time collectors here that dabble in local collecting but I wouldn't compare that to the ny/la/london level.
I think the "money collectors" here just get off on saying they are from "detroit" and write their checks to the DIA and MOCAD while they talk to their real art connections in ny.

9:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm going to write a letter to my senator demanding that laws be passed that force collectors to buy local art. Us artists try really hard to make good art and people just aren't buying it and it's just not fair!!!

12:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's their money and your art. They have no more responsibility to spend it here than you have to send the work to New York for them to buy it.

As was mentioned at the talk, in Detroit galleries are spread all over the place. It's hard to get to more than two in a day. This is not an ideal situation for the collector to "discover" new artists. On top of that, there are very few galleries that are consistent in the quality of their shows. Also, not terribly good for collectors.

Detroit is a hard to place to collect art in. You have to work a lot harder to find what you like.

Unless you like generic abstract paintings. Most collectors in Detroit (if I can hazard an intelligent assumption) do buy local. They just buy boring.

Are you talking about anyone besides Burt, Jim?

5:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Curtis, you make some great points but I think if Detroit based collectors decided to buy art from local galleries, say, once or twice a year, it would boost the scene tremendously. They could look at it as a gesture of kindness and faith not to mention they might enhance their collection. Things that are supported tend to improve over time. I find it heartbreaking to see these galleries and artists struggle so hard here!

6:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are the collector woes about generating cash on hand or about prestige? Because the cash on hand thing is easy enough if you get over 'yourself' and hustle a little bit.

If it's about the prestige, who the hell cares?? Your fame gland should be excised and sold for snake oil. Famelust secretions are powerful anticeptics (little known fact). Worry about content lovelies.

P.S- Cranbrook painting is fuck-off predictable shite, as the new zealanders might say. Don't worry about what they do or don't sell, there's not one among them that I can think of (for 5+ years)who's really any different from Mary Rousseoux, or however that's spelled.

7:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Curtis is right, alot of artist seem to linger in detroit expecting some rush of success to float their way in stead of pursuing it elsewhere.

But it couldnt hurt to venture to local galleries frequently, there are some good detroit shows, not many, but still.

10:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

curtis- in the talk, was it brought up that it wasn't only art that suffers from the lack of a strong "downtown" in detroit? Because from what I remember (and what I hear) a lot of industries suffer from the unique situation of "sprawl" that Detroit has going on. What do you suppose is the cause (geography, expense? i can't hardly think it's expense), IE why can't the galleries clump and little and form an informal avenue of sorts? And what would be a potential solution? Tax incentives from urban planning commitees? And does it need to be in Detroit proper to count as "Detroit Collecting", or would the suburbs do?

4:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home