Most artists are familiar with the axiom that states there is art
created for commerce’s sake and art created for art’s sake, but few are
able to find a happy medium between the two.
by Daniel Grant
Most artists are familiar with the axiom that states there is art
created for commerce’s sake and art created for art’s sake, but few are
able to find a happy medium between the two. Sonoma, California,
painter Keith Wicks was certainly feeling the frustration of being
stuck between commerce and creativity: Galleries weren’t always quick
to pay him after sales (sometimes they didn’t even tell him that his
work had sold), he had collectors but wanted a wider audience and more
exposure, and he wanted to raise his prices so he could focus more
closely on individual works. Most of all, he wanted to spend less time
dealing with the business side of art and more time creating it.
|
Fading Sun Over Notre Dame
by Keith Wicks,
2006, oil, 72
x 96. Private
collection. |
Enter Darius Anderson—the founder and president of Platinum
Advisors, in Sacramento, California, the managing member of Kenwood
Investments, in San Francisco, and a longtime friend of Wicks—who posed
a thought-provoking question to the artist: “If you could paint
anything you wanted, what would it be?” The two discussed Wicks’
thoughts on the matter and conceived a plan that would allow him to
concentrate solely on the art of creating. The concept was that a group
of wealthy people would invest in the artist’s career, providing him a
monthly stipend, paying for all materials, and paying for him to travel
to places where he could paint en plein air or collect images to
inspire studio work. In exchange, these investors would own a share of
the artwork he produced during the time they were subsidizing him,
receiving a return on their investment as his paintings sold.
Anderson brought together a group of eight well-heeled investors to
do just that, and each pitched in $25,000. The money was used to pay
for Wicks’ supplies and travel to New York City, Paris, and San Miguel
de Allende, Mexico; arrange and promote an exhibition of his work; and
provide Wicks a $10,000 monthly stipend for one year while he pursued
his painting. At the end of this relatively stress-free year, Wicks had
produced 100 works (93 paintings and seven charcoal drawings), which
were exhibited at Building One, on Treasure Island, in San Francisco,
from September 16 through September 17, 2006. The result was 37 sales,
amounting to $260,000 in proceeds. The investors made their money back
and then some.
Before the project began, a real-estate investor and the owner of a
government-lobbying firm in Sonoma created a limited-liability
corporation for the plan, called One Year One Show, that included a
prospectus that Wicks and all of the investors signed, clarifying each
person’s rights and responsibilities. The deal was that after the first
$200,000 in sales, all subsequent profit from artwork sales would be
split evenly among the investors and Wicks. If the remaining 63
works—which have been
estimated at $365,000—are sold, each investor stands to gain a 90 percent return on his or her investment.
“This is a more than a monetary investment,” Anderson contends.
“It’s not just about our returns, although our returns are quite good.”
Part of that investment was in the investors’ lifestyles, since they
traveled as a group to the same places Wicks went, visiting art
galleries, museums, and private collections, and shopping and dining.
The largest and most expensive work that Wicks produced that year—Fading Sun Over Notre Dame,
a 72"-x-96" oil painting, valued at $40,000, depicting a view of the
famous Parisian cathedral from the restaurant where Wicks, the
investors, and their family members dined one evening—was purchased by
one of the investors. Reflects Anderson, “That painting evokes the
memory of the whole wonderful experience.”
The remaining 63 works from Wicks’ year of painting will be on view
and on sale in the Miami Art Expo and upcoming exhibitions. Visit Wicks’ website for more information.