What is Affordable Art Anyway?

Affordable Art...What's that?

What is affordable Art? It depends on what you can afford to pay for the art I suppose.

The term seems to have become popular following the success of the Affordable Art Fairs, which are held twice a year in London and now in numerous other countries including the USA and Australia.

Their definition of Affordable Art for inclusion in the Affordable Art fairs, is Art that is for sale at under £3,000.

Of course around half of that money is taken by the Art Gallery and justifiably so as they must spend £1,000s to rent a stand at the Affordable art fair.

It seems to me that best way to buy real affordable art is to try and buy it directly from the Artist who made it.

Then it becomes truly affordable as you buy the Art for half the usual Gallery Sale price.

There is much discussion these days about the dreaded credit crunch and what is safe to invest in.

I've read articles saying that gold is a safe investment and has seen strong gains in the last two years.

I've also read that art is a good investment and will hold it's value and should increase in value.

These statements or claims are mostly made by Art Gallerists and right they are to say so.

But if you buy affordable art from most galleries and try to sell them back the work a year later it is very unlikely that you'll get your money back.

Keep in mind I'm talking about so called Affordable art for sale.

To buy art that is really Affordable it's best to buy it from the Artist directly when you can. You've the already saved 50% of the artworks cost if you bought from a Gallery and 50% saved is 50% earned.

And their is a much better chance that it will turn out to be a sensible art investment.

However, don't just buy any old art because you think it's affordable.

Do some reseach. Google or Yahoo the artist to see if they have an Internet presence. Find out what their work normally sell for in Galleries. And haggle or make an offer about the price. There are some great affordable art bargains out there if you just do your homework.

www. ArtNova.co.uk is run by artists for artists...so is

www.artrent.co.uk

www.JamesThorn .com

What is Abstract art

The Oxford English Dictionary gives this definition Abstract • adjective /abstrakt/ 1 theoretical rather than physical or concrete. 2 (of art) achieving its effect through colour and shapes rather than attempting to represent recognizable reality.

Often we hear people ask what Modern, Conceptual or Abstract art means. Good art, though it is entirely up to the individual, may move people to feel or think something but like music it doesn’t have to be about anything.
Just as music may not be about anything concrete (and may be one of the original forms of Abstract art). People can still enjoy listening to it without understanding or even caring about its meaning
Though the title of a piece of Abstract art or music may suggest something to the listener it is not important and it’s mostly left up to the imagination of the individual to make an interpretation or just to enjoy in it an emotional way. Abstract Art and music can convey meaning in an emotional or thought provoking manner

Many abstract artists are reluctant to even talk about the meaning of their work and I feel there is justification in this. While other Abstract artists are happy to gush on about what they do and it does help to sell their work. An explanation makes the work more accessible. As it appears that Abstract artist has some philosophy about their work and a reason for doing it that way. This may be a sign of artistic integrity and can make it more believable to the viewer or buyer when it is explained to them. It also becomes more of a conversation piece and justifies the expense of what is a real luxury item.



Sometimes the title gives a lot importance to the work. Damien Hirst for example, though as a vegetarian I find his early work repulsive I was intrigued by his titles. Other Abstract artists Rothko for one gave their paintings a number or some leave them untitled.
Personally I prefer it when an Abstract Artist makes the effort to give the piece a title. As Abstract Expressionist Artist Muge Demir says ' If a picture can say a 1000 words a relevant title is a brief synopsis'
Giving, what the artists perceives as, a relevant title to an Abstract painting does not force the viewer to make a particular interpretation but the artist may want to make a suggestion or to give some clue which might otherwise be missed.
Regarding whether or not Art needs to look nice well obviously not but for the average Art buyer it is quite important. Not many people would want Tracy Emins unmade bed in the middle of their living room or Damien’s mother and child divided. But who knows in 50 years it might be as common as Pollok is today.
Speaking of Jackson I was very disappointed when I went to his exhibition at Tate Britain a few years ago. His paintings seemed very dull and colours muddy. Maybe it's because of the paint he used. I think he used house paint. Can you imagine not painting your woodwork for 50 years? They don’t seem to have aged well.


I felt the same when I went to the Miro show at the Pompidou. His paintings seemed to lack the vibrancy that I was expecting and when I saw the recently found sketches for his work it took away the sense of spontaneity in his Art for me. I could say the same about Kandinsky. Though I’m impressed by his book ‘Concerning the Spiritual in Art’ I feel there was too much planning in his work. When it comes to Abstract art I feel more drawn to the Abstract Expressionists make it up as you go along, spontaneous approach.


copyright JamesThorn.com

What is Abstract art

The Oxford English Dictionary gives this definition Abstract • adjective /abstrakt/ 1 theoretical rather than physical or concrete. 2 (of art) achieving its effect through colour and shapes rather than attempting to represent recognizable reality.

Often we hear people ask what Modern, Conceptual or Abstract art means. Good art, though it is entirely up to the individual, may move people to feel or think something but like music it doesn’t have to be about anything.
Just as music may not be about anything concrete (and may be one of the original forms of Abstract art). People can still enjoy listening to it without understanding or even caring about its meaning
Though the title of a piece of Abstract art or music may suggest something to the listener it is not important and it’s mostly left up to the imagination of the individual to make an interpretation or just to enjoy in it an emotional way. Abstract Art and music can convey meaning in an emotional or thought provoking manner

Many abstract artists are reluctant to even talk about the meaning of their work and I feel there is justification in this. While other Abstract artists are happy to gush on about what they do and it does help to sell their work. An explanation makes the work more accessible. As it appears that Abstract artist has some philosophy about their work and a reason for doing it that way. This may be a sign of artistic integrity and can make it more believable to the viewer or buyer when it is explained to them. It also becomes more of a conversation piece and justifies the expense of what is a real luxury item.



Sometimes the title gives a lot importance to the work. Damien Hirst for example, though as a vegetarian I find his early work repulsive I was intrigued by his titles. Other Abstract artists Rothko for one gave their paintings a number or some leave them untitled.
Personally I prefer it when an Abstract Artist makes the effort to give the piece a title. As Abstract Expressionist Artist Muge Demir says ' If a picture can say a 1000 words a relevant title is a brief synopsis'
Giving, what the artists perceives as, a relevant title to an Abstract painting does not force the viewer to make a particular interpretation but the artist may want to make a suggestion or to give some clue which might otherwise be missed.
Regarding whether or not Art needs to look nice well obviously not but for the average Art buyer it is quite important. Not many people would want Tracy Emins unmade bed in the middle of their living room or Damien’s mother and child divided. But who knows in 50 years it might be as common as Pollok is today.
Speaking of Jackson I was very disappointed when I went to his exhibition at Tate Britain a few years ago. His paintings seemed very dull and colours muddy. Maybe it's because of the paint he used. I think he used house paint. Can you imagine not painting your woodwork for 50 years? They don’t seem to have aged well.


I felt the same when I went to the Miro show at the Pompidou. His paintings seemed to lack the vibrancy that I was expecting and when I saw the recently found sketches for his work it took away the sense of spontaneity in his Art for me. I could say the same about Kandinsky. Though I’m impressed by his book ‘Concerning the Spiritual in Art’ I feel there was too much planning in his work. When it comes to Abstract art I feel more drawn to the Abstract Expressionists make it up as you go along, spontaneous approach.


copyright JamesThorn.com

www.artsitu.co.uk