Why do artists do not sign their work?

[Amateur]

Why? I do not mean the Middle Ages or icons - where its rules. And the artists of the XX century, those-why? I can understand when a picture or sketch out little weak - so that you do not want to associate them with your name, so eliminate them, because after all, there were many. And the question does not arise. But if "race" and the product did not kill as Taras Bulba, means - recognized, and then give it to him as a father, his name ... And then roam the world thousands of unsigned paintings as abandoned children and the poor collectors are forced to spend effort and money to establish paternity, sorry, on the attribution. But seriously, what is still driven by the artists, when they do not sign their work? Because often it is not for the weak jobs ...

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Amateur

After all, often it is not for the weak jobs ...

Perhaps an element of pride? Type so unique, that skhodu should know. And who is known not sign? Krasnopevtsev sometimes. It seems to be the front Lentulov signature is not set, but who else?

[Allena]

Here, at the forum, the artists are - and just today: p I wonder would their opinions on this subject to know.

[Glasha]

Сообщение от Amateur

And then roam the world thousands of unsigned paintings as abandoned children ....
  Because often it is not for the weak jobs ...

Also grieved when I see such a thing ...

Lyubov Popova did not sign ... female is more typical, in my opinion ,...-
here once already been discussion on this topic

[Allena]

Сообщение от Vladimir

Perhaps an element of pride? Type so unique, that skhodu should know.

Or maybe just lose interest in the finished product, dragged the new one.

[vyadem]

perhaps people are just writing for myself ... something that gave or sold - then sign ... I think many people simply enjoy the process and the final result, the picture - only its logical conclusion ..

[Amateur]

Сообщение от vyadem

, many simply enjoy the process and the final result, the picture - only its logical conclusion ..

Enjoying the process is complete when about razultate this process the author can say: "Ah yes, Pushkin, ah yes son of a bitch!". I will subscribe to the result. And if the only pleasure from the process, but not on the result, it turns ... how to say it mildly ... But in this case, I asked about unsigned Good job, good in the sense it is the result. They, then why not subscribe?

[vyadem]

Сообщение от Amateur

And if the only pleasure from the process, but not from the result, it turns ... how to say it mildly ...

tell it, for example, the Japanese with their tea ceremony .. and in general style of thinking and life

[Allena]

It seems to me that any creative work - is first and foremost it is the pleasure of the process, and the result is secondary: "Not for Sale inspiration, but you can sell a manuscript." And "Ah yes ...", Pushkin seems to me, is not relevant to the result, namely, the creative enthusiasm (not able to write simpler: shy, has gone through the process.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Amateur

what is still driven by the artists, when they do not sign their work?

I asked one about it.
He told me that once back in college a master of his remark made about his sprawling signature, they say, should be modest, young man.
Since then he has to poke into the bottom corner of the picture and zastovlyat to sign and date.
But on the back of all the signs in detail.
And one already mature artist colleague once said: "unsigned painting, an unfinished painting. Made this for him, this phrase seems that once tore all to sign. Even long sold gladly signed and now calls himself a "fool" for unsigned work.