A good artist - a successful artist?

[Seriy]

Semen Semenovich, Female Avignon Picasso aroused unanimous assessment - "creative failure" - for our colleagues, and Shchukin wrote "What a loss for French art! So al-most the wrong barometer ..
Please call the genius of the artist, financially unsuccessful in life.
Van Gogh just did not have time for health to become famous and rich.
Michelangelo previously considered poor, is now considered as ascetic multimillionaire. Rebrandt the paintings bought a house in the city center.
Actually, it all felt tolerably well and successfully.
Malevich, again for health reasons. Kandinsky-successful. Repin and other Bryullov-vporyadke. In the 20 th century in general, all in chocolate, if not nevovremya died of an overdose.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Seriy

if not die from an overdose nevovremya.

Soutine not died from an overdose ...

[Seriy]

IMHO, until the 20 th century artist, generally applied profession, was to paint the church, to paint a picture of the battle, portraits and so T e was a good artist, by definition successful. If it is bad, who would give him an order for a portrait? And since the end of the 19 th when the paintings began to be interested as a separate value and began to appear unsuccessful artists, but rarely. Cause-increased the lag time between the creation of the product and its consumption and life cycle of the author's sometimes lag that did not have time to meet.
T e, we all understand that if Malevich and Van Gogh lived a little longer, recognition and success they would also surely caught.

[Людмила Иларт]

Сообщение от Seriy

IMHO, until the 20 th century artist, generally applied profession, was to paint the church, to paint a picture of the battle, portraits, and so T e a good artist, by definition, a successful

What about Rembrandt? At the end of the life of poverty, but what a painting!

[Seriy]

Well, if people do not know how to manage money and manage their own affairs? commercially successful he was in life, but this does not mean that the countless money flowed steady flow - this do not happen ...
Alternatively, Michelangelo, who long believed sirym and miserable until they found a receipt Dad, who paid him a fabulous sum for its perpetuation ... T e sirym and died impoverished in the chests of gold.
Rather, his wealth and luxury was just spit.

And not to be confused, commercially successful and immensely rich. That's a similar theme I wrote about my thoughts on the career of Peter Doig - that before the world the success he was quite successful in a worldly sense, studio, teaching, normal money. Yes, there were 10 million for the canvas-but this is an entirely different level, untold wealth :-) Saatchi bought his things for nothing, for wholesale price! to 13000 pounds for a sheet. God bless all of bestsenkov ...

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от OTROK NIKODIM

The reason is that art has become standardized commodities.

What do you mean?

[Людмила Иларт]

Сообщение от Seriy

Well, if people do not know how to manage money and manage their affairs?

Matisse, too, had more debts than income. Hardly - I can say that he was unable to conduct their affairs. However, the same shop his wife in a long time was their only source of livelihood.

[Terehov]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

Terehov, you have a good address is: Estonia, Saaremaa, Saaremaa Island.

Thank you.
Yes, good. And most importantly, - real!
Be on the island - go ... :-)
Paintings discuss.
By the way, my avatar too-real place on the island - Bishop's Castle 14-th century.
The first Russian pirates in the Baltic Sea were here on the orders of Ivan the Terrible ...
The first victory of the Russian fleet pr Peter 1
The film with Menshikov "Moonzund"
Also on the island exiled followers of Pugachev.
I volunteered :-)

[K-Maler]

Сообщение от Seriy

nother option-Michelangelo, who was long believed sirym and miserable until we found a receipt Dad, who paid him a fabulous sum for its perpetuation ... T e sirym and died impoverished in the chests of gold.
Rather, his wealth and luxury was just spit.

The fact that it is important, ie for mental comfort, to live so that you can do so as a matter of which lies the soul, free from hunger ... It turned out very many artists. Their poor did not. Actually, it was the understanding of what is called "their place" in this world. Artistry was a craft, all sold, made to order. All the artists of past times (before the latest), it was a place in the workshop, had families, they may contain ... Renaissance artists competed with each other and recognition - that's all they needed, they understand themselves as chosen ...

[AlexanderG]

[QUOTE=Seriy;656136]IMHO, until the 20 th century artist, generally applied profession, was to paint the church, to paint a picture of the battle, portraits, and so T e was a good artist, by definition successful. If it is bad, who would give him an order for a portrait? And since the end of the 19 th when the paintings began to be interested as a separate value and began to appear unsuccessful artists, but rarely. Cause-increased the lag time between the creation of the product and its consumption and life cycle of the author's sometimes lag that did not have time to meet.[/QOUTE]

Ogromnoe spasibo za etot otvet. Imenno k etomu vyvodu ia prishiol delaia issledovanie po art rynku. Kak ia uze gde-to pisal, mirovoi art rynok eto ochen 'molodaia organizatsiia. Kogda nechego o tovare skazat ', sozdaiutsia legendy.

Daze istoriia iskusstv byla sozdana i podognana pod rynok.
Eschio raz spasibo.